Posts by Epimetheus

    Renewables should be called 'Intermittablels'. We need to add materials needed to manufacture storage or transmission (there is always sunlight somewhere, there is always 5 o'clock somewhere, blah blah) to Zephyr's numbers.

    While the tech itself is feasible as a niche or supplement it only exist now due to massive subsidies and the fact that traditional produce base load.


    Germany had subsidies in the past. Nowadays they are more or less gone and the big energy companies have lobbied a ton, so that coal is still prefered over gas here, our solar industry is destroyed and currently the goverement is also working on destroying the wind power industry. Despite all these political problems for renewables they are still growing. That is because they are cheaper than regular energy even with all the burocratic bullshit you have to deal with here, if you want to install pv on your roof .


    And we are talking about germany with 1600 sunshine hours a year compared to 2500 in many parts of spain. In april we had many days with 50-70% of overall electricity production from renewables. This technology is not a niche anymore - even here in germany with problematic regulation and little sunshine. Renewables + gas power plants + power to gas is the future of energy generation and does not need a single battery storage or other crazy storage technology. If there is enough renewable overproduction (converted into gas) the gas plants will only run from november to february with not much load.


    Edit: Just to make it clear. We have very little hydro (1-2% ?) energy in germany - so I am just talking about wind and pv.

    Nuclear waste is uncomfortable only when you sleep next to it. The hysteria around the waste cost us 20 years delay towards zero carbon.


    I live near Asse in germany. Nuclear waste was stored underground in an old salt mine. Estimation was that there will be no water in this mine for hundred thousands of years. After 30 years they have water in there and now they try to get the nuclear waste out so that our drinking water is not contaminated. Its going to cost a few billion € and it will take 30-40 years.


    No human being is able to oversight timespans of ten thousands of years. So no...I dont agree. Perhaps now nobody is sleeping next to this stuff. But certainly within the next 10000 years someone will.

    In addition to Alan: in the Ruhrgebiet in germany there were many coal mines in the last century and they build the cities above these mines. Currently there live 5 million people in this area. Due to the mining the cities sank up to 14 meters and water would turn the area into a giant lake if we would not pump this water out of the cities.


    How much does it cost to run these pumps forever?


    I am not confusing anything. In my comment I was referring to the change of color of this massive steel bowl. You can see the guy who controls the hydrogen input and you can see every pressure change in the movement of one of the input cables/pipes. He is giving step functions of hydrogen pressure change to the system and by the change of color you can see the time constant of the system respons. The respons is freaking fast. You need massive power for such a fast change. Monitoring input power is stupidly simple in this system and knowing what chemicals are in the bowl is rather simple too. Assuming no fraud: where does the power come from?


    And you are doing cherry picking here: They have a two hour video with heating water. I know this is not a calorimeter but it gives a rough estimate. This video is about controlling the power.


    But I love your last sentence: "Transient results do not prove anything." Do you know the lifetime of the higgs boson? I would call THIS a transient result. And you also cannot prove that explosions release energy because this is such a transient behavior which is not measurable by current human technology.


    You assume that the people at BLP (and me) are stupid, so I think it is fair if I spit a bit sarcasm in your direction :-)

    Wow. This is impressive. Just changing hydrogen input and pressure and having such response of the energy generation. Pretty hard to explain in a chemical enviromente that does not react with hydrogen. 200kw excess with 25kw input starts to become interesting for electricity generation.


    But this sentence "The reactor wall excess heating or localized heating are not commercial impediments since they can be managed with cooling technology. " sounds like a typical premature Mills statement. I start to believe this when I see a demonstration. Without two or three rocket engineers in their team I doubt that they will find a fast and bullet proof solution for their cooling problem.

    Perhaps... because when done properly they do not work?


    The simple explanation is usually the correct one.


    I already told you two times I guess but you seem to ignore the facts: Mills early plasma reactors were replicated by Prof. Conrads and Prof. Kroesen. In the case of Prof. Conrads they made experiments for about a year. Conrads had 40 years + experience with plasma science and build and led the plasma experiement TEXTOR for 20 years.He and his Phd student found unusual plasma behaviour and a "novel chemical power source".


    I am not sure if you understand the implications of what they found:

    "The electric field strength from the filament was about 1 V cm−1, two orders of magnitude lower than the starting voltages measured for gas glow discharges" and "

    The temporal behaviour of the plasma was recorded via hydrogen Balmer alpha line emission when all power into the cell was terminated and an excessive afterglow duration (2 s) was observed" and "

    The plasma was found to be dependent on the chemistry of atomic hydrogen with potassium since no plasma formed with Na2CO3 replacing K2CO3 and the time constant of the emission following the removal of all of the power to the cell matched that of the cooling of the filament and the resulting shift from atomic to molecular hydrogen."

    Prof. Kroesen also found these properties.


    So I would advise you to stop spreading false claims about the replication of Mills work in most of your BLP comments. That you wish that your statements are right doesnt make them right. The next time you repeat these statements I am going to call you a liar. Repeating false claims after being corrected shows that you have unfair intentions. I know that you think you are right because if these findings where true the whole scientific world must have replicated it and found this "new chemical energy source". That you think this way is a consequence on your false assumption that science is neutral and just. But I think over the years this forum showed thousands of examples that science is more politics than the pure and sacred art you have in mind. Fun fact: Although Conrads was one of the most respected plasma scientist in the world and had the Bundesverdienstkreuz he was not allowed to conduct a replication of Mills work at his university in Greifswald and also not in his former university in Jülich. The plasma physics department at Bochum allowed him to conduct this replication. History shows that science and experimental findings that lie outside the established theories dont get a fair treatment. Conrads was emiritus by the time he did this replication so he had nothing to lose. It is obvious that you dont do a replication if you are young and want to pursue a carreer in academics.

    I dont get all these "...after all the time and money spent on this..." comments. How in gods name do you know how long it should take to control this reaction?? You are like my boss: Everything should be done in about a month - hard tasks can take two months. I still dont know why he thinks that two months are enough without knowing the requirements and the necessary tasks involved to complete it.

    • I build two LEGO toys with my boy. One took 10 minutes to complete and one a few days. Seems when we needed a few days we had a "shit and bust" kind of approach. Couldnt have anything to do with the one having a ten page manual and the other 550 pages.
    • Building notre dame took 200 years. What took them so long? Its just putting stone and wood together and smear some paint on the walls...
    • Where is our fusion reactor?? They showed a proof of concept (called Ivy Mike) in 1952. That is freaking 70 years with billions (or trillions by now?) of funding and still no net energy!!!! Seems like they have a "shit and bust" kind of approach.

    Of course there are also cases of mismanagement (see the airport we are building in berlin) and it takes way longer than necessary. But Mills has an intrinsic motivation to get this thing flying. He is hoping for the breakthrough much more than all of us combined. No one on earth has a clue what is needed to build a high power long duration hydrino reactor. No one on earth has a clue what is needed to build a high power long duration LENR reactor. So how do you know that it should be done by now???

    I like this quote from the paper Robert linked:

    ...Prior todiscovery of the Lamb Shift, calculating the mass of an electron produced an infinite, andtherefore meaningless, result. Theorists used the experimentally measured mass of an electron to replace the infinite mass and renormalized the quantum electrodynamics equations...


    Woohaa...the predictive power of QED.


    New video. Pace will be picking up at BLP, as they court new investors.



    The SunCell® was loaded with a heat sink of 50 kg of gallium and submersed in a 760 liter, vigorously stirred water tank that was initially at room temperature. The SunCell® internal temperature remained steady at about 400°C which is a typical operating temperature of a steam turbine power plant. The run duration of two hours was also limited by the thermal tolerance of the water tank, but this larger tank enabled the duration to be doubled compared to the previous run (August 23rd video). The video camera recording failed early in the run due to the water temperature exceeding that of the camera’s operational limit. The theoretical power from conventional chemistry with hydrogen addition is zero. The reaction of atomic hydrogen to hydrino or dark matter form of hydrogen catalyzed by HOH catalyst present in trace is the basis of this extraordinary hydrogen power source.

    This is great news. But putting 50kg of gallium into the reactor as "a heat sink" tells me, that they have problems controlling the reaction. They are artificially increasing the termal time constant of the system - probably because the time constant of their control possibilities is too large for such an "explosive" reaction. They still have much work to do.

    Navid

    I am pretty sure that not many people looked so deep into GUTCP as Wyttenbach. And he gives Mills credit for what he achieved and is building up on many of his results. GUTCP is not very clear on many aspects. This does not mean that MIlls is not correct, but some of his conclusions seem wrong/incomplete from what is written down. This is no surprise, because the topics are highly complex and there are many topics covered in GUTCP.

    Why assume those? If I assume my pigs have a high lift to drag ratio, not to mention practical flapping wings, then for sure, they can fly.


    What's fantastic about it? Where is any indication of input power? output power? calorimetry? I'm not going to sit through the whole thing ... did I miss it? Some nice shots of Labview or even old fashioned panel meters?


    As always: these videos are not for you. These videos are for the people who follow BLP and who assume no fraudulent behavior. They mentioned the input power for older systems - I assume that the input power was tuned down and not up. I assume this because of my knowledge about the process which is very limited. This was 11 months ago:

    You can see great progress from the first closed suncells to the current 350C° steady temperature one hour run. I doubt that getting this suncell stable included ramping the input power up. But that is pure speculation.

    The news is about 2 and a half things:

    - stable temperature

    - long duration run

    - a rough estimate of the energy generated (getting 120 gallons of water from 25C° to 98°C is not calorimetry but gives you a rough estimate)


    Nothing interesting for the sceptics to see. But for me this is the demonstration of the technical breakthrough I was waiting for: with a one hour run and >20kw excess power it is possible to build a scientifically convincing setup that shows excess energy without any doubt. But that is another year down the road...

    10'000 Amps times max 15Volts for 3/1000 of a second times 10/s according old publications. Not a very high COP but enough for his investors. As said maximum 500eV per H*-H* is not much compared to fusion of D*-D* with 23.6MeV


    That gives 4,5kw mean input power. My memory told me "max 6kw" input power => COP > 6.6 with a 40kW signal. Good thing with BLP is that they published their scientific milestones pretty fast in the past. RM is a writing machine. I would love to hear some technical details :-)

    120 gallons boiling in an hour (or did it boil before)? I cant do the math - dont know what a gallon is :-)





    My BLP newsgroup says 80kw for boiling it in 30min (boiling seems to occur in the middle of the video) and half when assuming 60min. Pretty good for this small box.

    I dont think it is pure luck because in my opinion his model that connects space, mass and energy has a high chance to be correct. But I think he got lucky with the exact number. The text at Eq. 32.142 shows the basis of this value. It is the number of galaxies, the mean number of stars per galaxy and the mean mass/energy conversion rate of each star. I have no idea about the error bounds of these values but I guess they are rather high. And I dont know about the sensitivity of the final value in regards to these input values.


    Such an analysis would be interesting.