BLP update

Quote from THHuxleynew

Not if you read the "expert" reports!

Well, I have read each and every one for at least the past 12 years, and many before that. Of course, my background is not yours, so when I read, I look for different things than you. Mainly the validators, observers, or co-author's credentials. All so far have been top notch in that regards, and IMO, if they are willing to risk their hard-earned reputation to put their name on a report, then that means something to me. So, I am fairly comfortable thinking Mills has some legitimate science going on based on that.

The problem as I see it, is that he knows he has something (as just about everyone else in LENR), but it is much more difficult to commercialize then he has been willing to admit. He knew from early on that if he were honest and told potential investors: "this could take 30 years to develop, and then we may still have trouble profiting from of it", there would be no investors, and like many others before him, that would have been the end of the Mills story.

So, out of necessity, he became a businessman with a good sales pitch. And I see much of that in this latest Shareholder Meeting Report.

To recall George Box's aphorism again:

Quote from George Box

All models are wrong, but some are useful.

So are the many pages of theory, put out in support of this venture, wrong? Of course they are, just as all other models are. The question is, are they useful?

If the formulae could be used to design, and predict the performance of, the various devices that have been demonstrated over the years, thus allowing for dependable scaling - then yes, the "model" could be said to be useful. But do we see any evidence of this? Going right back to the 1990s, the devices have been little different to many anomalous energy units that have gone before - and have never really progressed beyond that "me too" stage. This suggests the use of the same trial and error approach taken by everyone else who has claimed that their devices produce more energy than they burn.

To put this another way, it would be like writing a long complex mathematical proof for Pythagoras' theorem, and then holding that up as a reason for why elephants like cream buns.

The model, however, has been useful in a business sense - in that it appears complex enough to stop many "experts" from attacking it on a mathematical and theoretical level - in case it makes the attackers look like idiots. Attacks would also serve to reveal how little we do know about the inner workings of the atom, despite the billions spent on high energy physics. After all, if we already had all the answers, all of those expensive accelerators would be unnecessary, and the 2904 authors of that CERN paper might lose their jobs.

Shane D.

Quote

Well, I have read each and every one for at least the past 12 years, and many before that. Of course, my background is not yours, so when I read, I look for different things than you. Mainly the validators, observers, or co-author's credentials. All so far have been top notch in that regards, and IMO, if they are willing to risk their hard-earned reputation to put their name on a report, then that means something to me. So, I am fairly comfortable thinking Mills has some legitimate science going on based on that.

Well, that’s good! I consider Mills words in a more technical way.

What Mills often says ‘It produces hundreds of kW or a MW’. If you look to the supporting data then he is right and every high level expert will support that. But usually that power is only produced during a very short time and the energy content is far from impressive and would not convince any investor.

Besides that, this PEV dome he wants to use to convert the produced E/UV into electricity is a nice and for investors probably a convincing device, but it only works in a very clean and preferably vacuum environment very efficiently. In the past Mills proudly demoed the produced light and you could see that it is far from clean and that the E/UV is frequently clouded by evaporated metal of his liquid electrodes.

He has produced some verified tests where actually energy (not power) was produced (I’ve seen COP’s of 1.5 to 3 if I remember well), but that was always during minutes, not hours. So Shane D., I think you are right. Mills may have something in hand but to make a commercially viable energy producing device is probably not nearby, difficult to make and still very risky to invest in.

Quote from Paradigmnoia

The EUV tin plasma machine already exists and is commercially used to etch semiconductor chips. If it made more substantial heat more than the known input then it would be known already, because it uses MW of power.

The EUV is used to project an UEV light pattern on an UEV sensitive photoresist on top of the chip.

It is not used to etch the chip.

Quote from LDM

The EUV is used to project an UEV light pattern on an UEV sensitive photoresist on top of the chip.

It is not used to etch the chip.

For how many seconds before the receiver is destroyed?

I will note again the the mirrors of the commercial device absorb most of the EUV it produces before it gets to the target, because basically everything absorbs EUV

Quote from Paradigmnoia

For how many seconds before the receiver is destroyed?

I will note again the the mirrors of the commercial device absorb most of the EUV it produces before it gets to the target, because basically everything absorbs EUV

I don't know what you mean by "the receiver"

Processing silicon wafers is about changing the electrical characteristics of the silicon by doping.

This is done in successive steps.

The first step is applying a thin silicon-oxide layer.

Then photoresist is put on top of the silicon-oxide.

Then a light pattern is projected on the photoresist.

This light can be of different wafelengths, however the shorter wavelengths will allow for smaller dimensions.

Thus EUV will allow for circuits which have the smallest dimensions or the most advanced IC's.

The photoresist will be hardened or stay more liquid between the areas where the light was projected and the areas where no light was projected.

Then the more liquid areas will be chemical removed, this leaves open areas giving access to the silicon oxide.

Then an acid is used to etch away the silicon-oxide.

Thus the etching is not by the EUV but by the acid.

After removing the silicon-oxide layer you now can by diffusion of gases change the electric properties of the underlying silicon.

thank you for your teaching 👍

A complementary question, how you drive the doping concentration ?

Quote from LDM

I don't know what you mean by "the receiver"

Processing silicon wafers is about changing the electrical characteristics of the silicon by doping.

This is done in successive steps.

The first step is applying a thin silicon-oxide layer.

Then photoresist is put on top of the silicon-oxide.

Then a light pattern is projected on the photoresist.

This light can be of different wafelengths, however the shorter wavelengths will allow for smaller dimensions.

Thus EUV will allow for circuits which have the smallest dimensions or the most advanced IC's.

The photoresist will be hardened or stay more liquid between the areas where the light was projected and the areas where no light was projected.

Then the more liquid areas will be chemical removed, this leaves open areas giving access to the silicon oxide.

Then an acid is used to etch away the silicon-oxide.

Thus the etching is not by the EUV but by the acid.

After removing the silicon-oxide layer you now can by diffusion of gases change the electric properties of the underlying silicon.

Display More

The confusion above is amusing but not unexpected. There is a plasma etch process used to micro-machine TiN. That is Titanium Nitride not the element Tin (Sn).

Quote from Cydonia

thank you for your teaching 👍

A complementary question, how you drive the doping concentration ?

You have several parameters which influence the level of doping

Gas flow

This is how much gas pases throught the reactor at a given time.

Yhis is normally regulated by mass flow controllers

Gas pressure

Some doping can be done at atmospheric pressures.

Other systems use lower pressures inside the reactor by adding a pump controlled by a pressure sensor.

Temperature

Since reaction rate is dependent on temperature, by changing the temperature you can influence the reaction rate

Plasma

Creating a plasma inside the reactor will improve the reaction rate.

It also allows processing at much lower temperatures.

This can be important for the latest steps, since each step creates a layer with different mechanical properties which can cause stress at higher temperatures, thereby creating defects.

Therefore on some circuits the latest step of adding a nitride layer is done in a plasma system.

Agree you can induce lattice stress between 2 layers deposited at different parameters.

Quote from LDM

You have several parameters which influence the level of doping

Gas flow

This is how much gas pases throught the reactor at a given time.

Yhis is normally regulated by mass flow controllers

Gas pressure

Some doping can be done at atmospheric pressures.

Other systems use lower pressures inside the reactor by adding a pump controlled by a pressure sensor.

Temperature

Since reaction rate is dependent on temperature, by changing the temperature you can influence the reaction rate

Plasma

Creating a plasma inside the reactor will improve the reaction rate.

It also allows processing at much lower temperatures.

This can be important for the latest steps, since each step creates a layer with different mechanical properties which can cause stress at higher temperatures, thereby creating defects.

Therefore on some circuits the latest step of adding a nitride layer is done in a plasma system.

Display More

Quote from LDM

I don't know what you mean by "the receiver"

Processing silicon wafers is about changing the electrical characteristics of the silicon by doping.

This is done in successive steps.

The first step is applying a thin silicon-oxide layer.

Then photoresist is put on top of the silicon-oxide.

Then a light pattern is projected on the photoresist.

This light can be of different wafelengths, however the shorter wavelengths will allow for smaller dimensions.

Thus EUV will allow for circuits which have the smallest dimensions or the most advanced IC's.

The photoresist will be hardened or stay more liquid between the areas where the light was projected and the areas where no light was projected.

Then the more liquid areas will be chemical removed, this leaves open areas giving access to the silicon oxide.

Then an acid is used to etch away the silicon-oxide.

Thus the etching is not by the EUV but by the acid.

After removing the silicon-oxide layer you now can by diffusion of gases change the electric properties of the underlying silicon.

Display More

The ‘receiver’ is the ‘photovoltaic’ device or whatever it is to convert the EUV to useable energy in such a design. In the chip factory, it is the mirrors and chips to be etched. Whatever it is that is illuminated by the EUV.

Most of the several MW required to run the EUV tin plasma chip etcher machine is consumed by the EUV mirror cooling apparatus.

A kind level of condensed energy ( EUV ) should not be very easy to convert with a great efficiency ?

i expect a lot of losses ?

Quote from Paradigmnoia

The ‘receiver’ is the ‘photovoltaic’ device or whatever it is to convert the EUV to useable energy in such a design. In the chip factory, it is the mirrors and chips to be etched. Whatever it is that is illuminated by the EUV.

Most of the several MW required to run the EUV tin plasma chip etcher machine is consumed by the EUV mirror cooling apparatus.

The Brilliant Light Power Story.

The Brilliant Light Power Story

The Most Disruptive Company In History

open.substack.com

Well, i don't know all refined details from his technology, however he defends the concept of condensed ( smaller) atoms.

Especially hydrogen which is the brick for all the other heavier atoms.

Now to me , i believe strongly that atoms could not have the same size depending of their location in the universe.

it could exist some areas with atoms at a certain std of size and other areas at different sizes.

It sticks well with recent James Webbs discoveries or the controversed concept of black matter , black energy.. etc

These postulate implications are huge regarding current astrophysics postulates.

Even @axil's wikipedia didn't thought that yet.

Quote from sam12

The Brilliant Light Power Story.

https://open.substack.com/pub/…paign=post&utm_medium=web

Quote from Cydonia

Especially hydrogen which is the brick for all the other heavier atoms.

He just measures H*-H* he also calls Di-hydrino but not very loudly as in his children math dream still a single Hydrino lives....

Of course the Di-hydrino does not so well match his model except for tangential perturbation that you easily can cheat a bit.. by moving the center.

But who cares. For the isolation if H*-H* he should get a nobel as this of course invalidates the standard model.

Well, i try to remain constructive, open mind.. Because to me it not exists so many relevant things, Rossi for sure ( the former from 2011) , Clean planet, the NASA lattice, Mills and that's all, Brouillin i remain dubitative.

Quote from Wyttenbach

He just measures H*-H* he also calls Di-hydrino but not very loudly as in his children math dream still a single Hydrino lives....

Of course the Di-hydrino does no so well match his model except for tangential perturbation that you easily can cheat a bit.. by moving the center.

But who cares. For the isolation if H*-H* he should get a nobel as this of course invalidates the standard model.

Quote from Wyttenbach

He just measures H*-H* he also calls Di-hydrino but not very loudly as in his children math dream still a single Hydrino lives....

Of course the Di-hydrino does not so well match his model except for tangential perturbation that you easily can cheat a bit.. by moving the center.

But who cares. For the isolation if H*-H* he should get a nobel as this of course invalidates the standard model.

There are series of states of "hydrogen" defined by the phat equation, E- n²(`13.6). These states are smaller than actual hydrogen. The higher the quantum number n, the smaller the volume of the state. At n=240 the volume of the state would match a neutron. Rather than a hydrino (lower energy state than actual hydrogen), these states decay to actual hydrogen. When they decay, they produce a radiation as described by the phat equation. Phat radiation from these states was identified by Pharis Williams in hydrogen spectra.

An alternative to the theory of BLP is RE: Electrogravity (electron-gravity) as a cause of nuclear reactions.

Quote from Drgenek

The higher the quantum number n, the smaller the volume of the state.

This is why I mention Mills childish math claims! p-p can only make one electro-weak bond that is close (in energy) to the di-hydrino bond. The problem is that this bond only uses one electron where the other just populates the usual orbits but with a lower potential, we already know from Rydberg matter experiments. The volume always is given by the shell electrons not by the nucleus!

In clusters (Holmlid) multiple bonds are possible also for D*-D* as we then have 4 protons.

Hydrino's simply cannot exist physically as there is no minimum function that shows such a reduced orbit. Mills cheating is to invent a fictive charge produces by a "locked in" photon what is mind blowing nonsense.

Quote from Cydonia

Well, i don't know all refined details from his technology, however he defends the concept of condensed ( smaller) atoms.

Especially hydrogen which is the brick for all the other heavier atoms.

Now to me , i believe strongly that atoms could not have the same size depending of their location in the universe.

it could exist some areas with atoms at a certain std of size and other areas at different sizes.

It sticks well with recent James Webbs discoveries or the controversed concept of black matter , black energy.. etc

These postulate implications are huge regarding current astrophysics postulates.

Even @axil's wikipedia didn't thought that yet.

Display More

Radioactive decay could also depend on location in the universe. The 14 billion year half life of thorium is ridiculous on the face of it and could be a function of local conditions. In fact there is a theory for alpha decay that involves tunneling of the alpha particles out of the atom. Well, something as simple as a spark could have increased the decay rate of thorium in Joseph Papp's Noble Gas Engine providing the necessary source of energy.