- from Sydney, Australia
- Member since Mar 4th 2016
- Last Activity:
Bob Greenyer slideshow of recent LENRstory
Axil said "You can reveal it"
Randy Mills in reply to a query about his molten silver level control in the Suncell said he will reveal it sometime.
Query: "Are you using a magnetic flow meter to control the levels of molten silver? As the reservoir fills up one expects the flow of the molten silver to increase. In that case the electromagnetic pump of that reservoir should pump a bit harder in order to get more molten silver in the other reservoir. Vice versa, reduced flow would mean that side should pump a little less."Tuesday, April 25, 2017 at 8:43 AM
Answer:"The flow meters are big, inaccurate, insensitive, killed by electrical noise, won’t work at these temperatures. I’ll reveal how it works eventually."
Suhas avows zero possibility of
LEAD, GOLD, SILVER, PALLADIUM contamination in apparatus
Bob Greenyer asks how huge amts of LEAD formed.
Alan alerted me to Don Hotson's work in another thread.. but it is relevant here in this pluralist thread
After reading Don's third "Dirac" paper which concludes
""I" am not my body, but my information, and this can exist separate from my body, and survive bodily death"
I found that he died of leukemia in 2014.
His third Dirac paper (2009) can be accessed at the THIRD link here:
Hotson's critique of the postBohr physics funk is wonderfully written
Along the way to discussing mortality
Don touches upon
Urutskoev's titanium transmutation(Axil has mentioned this several times) ( relevant to Suhas' anomaly?)
and many more things which Bob Greenyer has not yet mentioned-- epos, quons....
Something to read today during todays Church sermon.
Axil said "You can reveal it..."
Why reveal to the public if the public does not ask.
Especially if some of the public respond with ""La-la land," and "BS,"
Axil asked "What is the solution?"
The actual solution to the problem of automatic control of Ag levels is probably the subject of an imminent patent application
Axil,you could try asking Randy Mills at the Society for Classical Physics
BLP update via yahoo 20th April
[email protected] asked
"In the latest BLP update there was this statement of achieved control of the temperature profile. Does anybody know what that means?"
Randy Mills answered
"The automated control of the molten silver levels of the dual molten silver injectors. The levels were controlled manually using visualization previously.
This (manual control) is not possible in a closed system. The problem was actually challenging. The metal surface level is ill defined like the ocean. The flow is chaotic and random, 6000K plasma present, molten metal everywhere, huge noise and randomization of signal, huge temperature, pressure, RF fields, electrical pulses from ignition, can’t make penetrations; nothing conventional was used, not even X-ray sensing, thermal, back scattered neutrons, electrical parameters, acoustic, radar, ultrasound, laser, etc., etc. The solution works so beautifully."
"What about a modell for the third ionzation energy of Lithium?"
Why not just the ionisation energies for helium?
Actually physicists tried to use the QM approach to mathematically derive the ground state energy level of helium.
The exptal value is -79.01 eV.
Eventually, after three decades, QM approximation methods gave almost perfect agreement with the exptal value,
BUT the approximation method required 1078!!!!! parameters to be inserted (Pekeris,1959)
In contrast Mills calculates the first ionisation energy as -24.5875 eV
(pg 301 Table 9.5 , the excited states of helium, GUTCP, 2016).
Mills' IE value differs by 0.0004% from the exptal value
BUT requires a few fundamental physical constants rather than hundreds of fudge factor parameters.
Mills version is rather easier to calculate too.
"QM is the most accurate theory ever devised"
requires an adjunct claim:
"QM is the most fudged theory ever devised."
Jack Cole affirmed "Yes, that is extrapolation to the Nth degree.
Rhetoric to the 2nd degree? Randy Mills' 1.24 MW calculation was based on 0.7 nanosecond. Longterm input/output measurements require a 24/7 process.
No written reports yet, but videos suggest the duration is now an hour at least. From nanosecond to hour is a tera factor increase in the time duration in 3 years .
Jack Cole said "I don't know about their more recent tests, "
The 2014 report, I referenced is available on the BLP site for perusal or at Elsevier etc if one has access to an academic institution library
Title ="H2O-Based Solid Fuel Power Source Based on the Catalysis of H by HOH Catalyst"
Jack Cole said "Earlier tests .. "
Perhaps one earlier test Jack is referring is the 2012 report
R. Mills, X Yu, Y. Lu, G Chu, J. He, J. Lotoski, “Catalyst induced hydrino transition (CIHT) electrochemical cell,” (2012), Int. J. Energy Res., (2013),
Mills stated that he is getting much higher power densities in the 2014 report.
Jack Cole said "The bomb calorimeter showed an energy gain of ~2 (for a single brief event). "
Table 1 in 2014 report shows energy gains of 7x and 4.5 x for Titanium water samples.Comparison with 21 other samples in Table1 indicated that energy gain is much greater than conventional chemical enthalpic gain.
Jack Cole said "I'm not convinced that they are doing anything beyond burning metal at this point. "
The 2014 report states “Each sample was ignited under argon”
Jack Cole said "A lot of times, it is difficult to know what has been measured and what has been extrapolated. They don't always make that clear, and it doesn't really seem to matter to Mills. "
The 2014 report states
"The power density was confirmed to be about 3 X 1010 W/liter of fuel volume using the measured time of the event and the energy released as measured by bomb calorimetry. The predicted molecular hydrino H2(1/4) was identified as a product by Raman spectroscopy, photoluminescence emission spectroscopy, and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS)."
There is no extrapolation here. The " 1MW from a basketball" idea is not extrapolation in terms of power level , because 1.24 MW has already been obtained in the bomb calorimeter. However it is extrapolation from nanosecond duration to 24/7 .
24/7 operation plus an input/output test is what Mills and his team are working on now.
Hopefully Mills will take less time than the development of the incandescent light bulb
Jack Cole said "He(Mills) takes small (maybe false) experimental result and extrapolates it to the Nth degree.
The most relevant evidence dated January 2015 is a report on a solid fuel cell.
"H2O-based solid fuel power source based on the catalysis of H by HOH catalyst"
I do not think that this is false, having taken the time to read it.
Perhaps Jack you can find something that is patently false in it?
On the question of "extrapolating to the nth degree."
You mentioned 1 MW from a basketball ???
which I interpret as a question about power density.
Mills Jan/15 calorimeter report calculates power to be 1.24 MW per 0.7 ns
Mills says this is typical. The short time interval is necessitated by the calorimetry set up.
Mills' technology needs 'extrapolation'from nanoseconds intervals to 24/7 continuity,
The extrapolation is not in terms of power, but in terms of the time frame.
judging from the BLP site videos Mills has moved on from nanosecond to hourly durations
in the intervening 2-3 yrs since that expt was done.
Video March13/2015 Duration= 21.9 milliseconds
Video Sept 2/2016 Duration > 60 seconds
Video Sept 9/2016 Duration reported as ~ 2hours
Recent April video addresses silver electrode control, appears solved?
The power density is not really an issue - a 1MW basketball?
Just to get a ball park comparison, I'll compare that to my car.
The thermal rating for my Mazda3 engine is probably something like 350Kw =0.35Megawatts
The Mazda engine size is stated as 2.5 litres.
The Mills basket ball is ~7 litres
The power density of Mills basketball compared to my Mazda 3 is
1 megawatt/7litres compared to 0.35megawatt/2.5 litres
which calculates to be 0.142 for Mills baske ball
versus 0.14 for my Mazda 3 engine.
In terms of power density Mills 1MW basketball is not so much different from my Mazda 3 engine.
I guess Mills will report 24/7 operation some time.
Setting up the laboratory to measure / exhaust 1 MW seems feasible in Mazda terms
and might have been achieved already
Check my calculations if you like
We can all make unintentional errors.
Bear in mind these are 'ballpark' figures.
Zeno wrote "I know that QM is the most accurate theory ever devised and has passed every test so far".
I'm not so sure of that.
I downloaded Millsian 2.0 and within about 5 minutes I had this picture of the ethanol molecule
I couldn't do the same for a QM based program like Spartan
but Mills has supplied some total bond energies obtained by Spartan in his 2010 report.
These Spartan QM results are 16.1025, 24.1239, and 25.5053.
The above Millsian result of 33.4056 compares much better with the experimental result of 33.4276 eV
Epimetheus said "not to apply Maxwell's Laws is crazy". I agree with that.
My reading of Mills published papers suggests to me that Randell Mills is not changing any paradigm
- he is just applying physics laws as written by Maxwell and Einstein
Mills challenges the prevailing paradigm of quantum mechanics
by showing that his application of
classical physics laws yields
much better agreement with measured parameters of molecules than does QM.
Reading of GUTCP/ Mills is much easier than reading QM, but its still hard work.
Easier reads, while you wait, courtesy of Ed Wall, are:
The rail gun shot injection system is presumably not for high speed but just for pinpoint timing.
This patent was filed almost 2 years ago.
Mills has moved on since then I guess.. liquid silver may not need a shot injector??
BTW, there is new video showing a steady molten silver stream uploaded on the BLP site just now in time for Easter
It must be pretty hot in that chamber.
Axil said "The video covers the fusion-centric thinking that predominated LENR in the early 1990s."
True dat. Very perceptive . I 'm working myself forwards slowly..I''ll be up with the instantons eventually.
The video mentions a
Gianfranco Cerofolini 1992reference
Can Binuclear Atoms Be Formed in Head-on Atomic Impacts at Moderate Energy?"
about what kind of elements could form binuclear atoms from a ballpark theoretical standpoint.
Gianfranco concluded that only for Z<3, i.e Hydrogen and Helium had the possibility to form metastable states in the kiloelectronvolt range
But Gianfranco used conventional assumptions about electrons and protons
For a hydrogen binuclear atom (i.e one with two protons) if one were to incorporate Mills hydrino thinking with sub-n=1 states
it is conceivable that if n= 1/2,1/3,1/4 electrons were closer to the two protons
than this might stabilise
a diproton hydrogen atom and reduce the energy level of the metastable state. How far below the kEV level.???
Some have postulated that the deuterinos have a high probabilty of fusing ,
e,g Itzhak Shechtman 15 years ago
Mills developed equations ( which took into account the forces due to the electrons' spin) for the hydrogen molecule
which give amazing agreement with experimental parameters.
These were first published in Mills, Phys. Essays 17, 342 2004.
but were summarised in 2010 in
The same approach for molecules made from two hydrinos will likely calculate more stable configurations
of the ( dihydrino) molecule with protons closer together than in the normal hydrogen molecule.
However as far as I am aware Mills is not
focussed on the fusion possibility, as he seems to be comfortable with the more controllable predictable energy release
as the individual hydrino atoms are shrunk smaller and smaller.