Posts by Director

    This same technology has been discovered and re-discovered dozens of times over the past hundred years. I hope people realize that.

    He starts talking about the plasma around the 0:59:00 mark.

    So I'm gonna play a video here. I wish I had some sound cause it kinda sounds really cool, but none the less. I'm going to explain. We have here electromagnetic pump on one side and on the other side these are the molten silver reservoirs. We are looking down through the dome, and so we have a view port there. And we have, it's in a vacuum chamber and we have the window that we can look into the cell. So we are looking right down into the cell. And what we are gonna do here is turn the pumping power up and then we are going to gradually turn on the ignition and you will see when these two streams hit they get electrical contact, we will put the ignition on, and nothing should happen. But you will see it will make a bright plasma and through the video at different points we will turn it off and you will see it can persist. By the end, we will turn it off and you can't tell the difference whether it has power into it or not. Because in the auto mode. There's no one whose ever created a plasma that self sustains itself. And you'll see that. And this is at atmospheric pressure which is insane to have a plasma of this type at that high pressure.

    The screen behind him states, "IGNITION OFF" at around 1:07:27 yet the plasma ball is still brilliantly bright. Later, it comes back on and goes back off with the plasma ball remaining.

    I should clarify that the video I'm referencing was another Suncell, not the one they have recently shared data from. I will try to get you the video.

    I would like to put the "self sustain" idea to rest. There is no self sustain with BLP's reaction, at least nothing remotely comparable to what Rossi claims. The high energy photon emitting Suncell plasma exists for (as I recall) something on the order of hundredth or a tenth of a second after the high electric current stops. This is itself very unusual and indicates a high energy reaction is occurring to sustain the plasma after the electric field is turned off. But then another pulse is required very soon, to wipe away charge buildup from the ionized catalyst, which would inhibit further reaction. (As I understand it.)

    Watch Mills presentation when he speaks at a university on YouTube. He announces "this is when we turned off all input power" or words to that effect. However, the giant plasma ball continues to exist for minutes. I think this can happen because when he pushes the reaction hard enough LENR reactions take place. Also, when it comes to the process you are describing, once you create a sufficiently powerful plasma ball in the negative resistance regime, you wouldn't have to pulse the system. The ion acoustic oscillations that are produced in any circuit producing a negative resistance and a plasma ball would do the same thing.

    This is far from being exciting.

    The first SUN-CELL could go into self-sustain mode. May be that (old) one is now somewhere else (military ..) and they have to maintain/draw a picture of doing something real.

    For people understanding the field they simply do confusing stuff. The self-sustain mode just needed adding two more tricks and it would still work in LENR mode...

    Remember, that those older systems had a tendency to destroy themselves in a relatively short time period. Randell Mills talks about this in one of the lectures he gave a university. He showed a video of the molten silver system in self sustain mode (a brilliant plasma ball existing after all the power was cut off) and went on to talk about how it would burn holes in Tungsten plates. Moreover, he went on to say that they have had to throttle down the systems to keep them from destroying themselves.

    I totally agree that they need to give a full report and that not sharing such information only hurts them. However, I'm sure if they were using a pulsed input that they carefully calculated what the average level was during the time period compared to the output power. They have not confused anything.

    The device is far from ready for mass production. I'm sure they can improve on it tremendously. For all we know, even though they are melting down, the water bath calorimetry tests could be producing far higher COPs due to the fact the water will conduct heat away better than atmosphere. I still think they need to abandon the liquid metal approach and utilize a pure plasma discharge.

    Yes, he did. He and Redding told me that in person. I thought it was one of the most stupid business strategies I ever heard. I still think so. You cannot calibrate a presentation or evidence to make it just appealing enough for your target, but not so appealing that it will stir up interest by other people. The incident reminded me of a family story. Back in the 1950s, a grocery store near our house held a contest for "best sales slogan." There were three prizes: a trip to Europe, a television, and a $50 savings bond. We did not have a television. My brother was maybe 8 years old. He was sitting at the table thinking long and hard about what to write. My mother asked, "Are you having trouble coming up with something?" He explained yes, he wanted to come up with a slogan that was pretty good, but not great, because he didn't want to go to Europe. He wanted a television. His entry had to be second-best.

    As I recall, my grandmother heard the story and bought us a television.

    Thank you very much for confirming what you were told. I think there are a lot of inventor's who start thinking illogically and irrationally about their technology. The "Exotic Vacuum Object Energy Industry" is wide open right now with room for many players. The world desperately needs the first to prove that the phenomena (which might include both hydrino like reactions in addition to LENR and zero point energy tapping) and get something on the market to radically change energy generation on this planet. We need a truly powerful technology like this to change every aspect of our civilization.

    The eV per reaction will be figured out by the total energy production over a long period of time vs. the quantity of hydrogen placed in the reactor. My hope is that when looking at the data they realize that they are getting perhaps hundreds of thousands of eV per atom of hydrogen. Then maybe they will realize that LENR reactions are taking place in addition to hydrino formation.

    Wake up people! This is interesting news from BLP! We need to get some discussion started!

    What's I'm also interested in learning is how long the excess heat would continue after they stopped adding additional hydrogen. I think that with many fuel combinations if you complex space charge configuration is optimized by tuning the system into resonance, LENR reactions would produce a large portion of the energy which would make the small quantity of hydrogen keep producing energy for days, weeks, months, or longer. However, if BLP's system stopped producing heat rapidly after the hydrogen was cut off, then it might be more likely they are only producing re-arrangements of ions and electrons or perhaps even "real" hydrinos but are not producing nuclear reactions.

    The primary mechanisms at work within the Suncell, E-Cat SK, the SAFIRE reactor, and several others going back many decades are virtually identical. I think the main difference between all these systems are simply the fuels used and the degree of resonance achieved. Certain fuel combinations are probably more likely to induce LENR or cold fusion reactions - especially when the amplitude of the ion acoustic oscillations are optimized with a resonant circuit. This also would produce the most well defined double layers with the greatest voltage gradients between them. There are so many different combinations of gaseous fuels, electrode materials, and reactor geometries to test that it could keep a team very busy for quite a while. However, I like the idea of keeping things simple and hopefully cheaper for now: cylindrical fused quartz or fused silica tube with required ports for fuel insertion, two nickel electrodes coated with palladium or platinum, a series of gas combinations making sure to utilize a heavier element in addition to hydrogen, and a well designed circuit and control box.

    Also, I prefer the idea of not using two cathodes and a central anode. Instead, I think that producing what's called a "free floating fireball" that would remain between a cathode and an anode is the best idea. A free floating fireball is simply a complex space charge configuration with a high enough degree of self organization that it detaches from the cathode/anode. To produce such a fireball, the circuit will need to be tuned into resonance. The main benefit is that there's no anode to "melt down" if the output soars - although it is still possible the reactor tube could be damaged.

    I'm thankful that they have shared this data, but I still wish that they would have provided an actual report instead of a few numbers. I do applaud BLP for sharing this information, however. I'm hopeful they will publish a full report in the not too distant future.

    Obviously, compared to the massive energy releases that have been produced in the past, these results don't seem that great at all. However, they are more than good enough - if we can get an actual report to study - to prove their device does indeed work. One thing we need to remember is that they have had to throttle back their output because previous versions were instantly destroying themselves. These numbers do NOT represent the best that they can produce. Remember, they have been able to produce previous systems that continued to produce a massive glowing complex space charge configuration or plasma ball after all the input power was cut off. The issue is that they are trying to achieve a balance that will give them some degree of stability.

    My hope is that they will eventually realize that the whole idea of using liquid metal as a conductor isn't an optimum idea. If they went the route of using the negative resistance regime of a plasma discharge (the only metal involved being nano-particles from the electrodes) in a mixed gas environment (hydrogen, deuterium, one or more heavier noble gases) I believe they could have a far simpler system that would have much less of a tendency to meltdown.

    Heard that one before!

    So they have a big PR splurge to raise interest, and then deliberately do not meet expectations ?

    Exactly. They wanted to raise interest but of only certain parties and only to a certain extent. This is similar to Patterson who desired to raise awareness among certain investors but didn't want to provide evidence strong enough to make major competitors start reproducing his technology.

    No. I think because the tech is working well and they don't want to raise interest. If they give out proof this tech works then there will be a hundred companies overnight that will try to copy it. And I believe that Mills knows you can get similar effects without the liquid metal. All you have to do is use the negative resistance regime of a plasma discharge to produce the macro-EVO or complex space charge configuration in an atmosphere of optimized fuel elements and then tune it into resonance.

    I'm very disappointed that the second quarter report has not been posted. What really ticks me off is that they tease us with the information that they performed water bath calorimetry on a Suncell but won't post the results.

    Well, expensive is a relative word and there's not the phrase "not expensive" in my post. I'm convinced that more so than money, what's really lacking in the LENR field are gun-ho individuals with both the skills required and time to attempt replications (or build analogs) of systems like the E-Cat QX/SK and perform long series of experiments. Money, obviously, can solve this labor issue to a certain extent; however, I think such individuals are hard to come by. There aren't a ton of people well versed in the various LENR theories/concepts anyway - much less those who know anything about the long history of devices that likely utilized the EVO phenomena. So even if a group had adequate funding, the labor to perform such testing may simply be unavailable.

    Personally, I still believe that a small group of people with the correct skill sets - at least one being a first class electronics guru - could come together and build a small device utilizing the negative resistance regime to produce excess energy with a modest amount of funding (especially if they already had some of the equipment and lab space). The SAFIRE Project built and tested their monster of a system with a budge of one and a half million dollars. I'm guessing a system that was much, much smaller could cost a hundredth of that. Once the group figured out ideal combinations of gases, the best electrode materials, and the most efficient way to tune it into resonance, I'm guessing that a small prototype of a device that could generate high temperature steam could be produced for under a million dollars. Again, I'm talking about a device that would produce a small volume of steam: just enough to prove the concept. Then the device could be presented to a nation that was in desperate need of clean energy. If such a country would fast track the technology to reduce the red tape involved, I believe the technology could be completely developed into larger prototypes for several million dollars.

    I am frustrated with the extreme delay of the second quarter reports from BLP. I can only hope the delay is because they realize using liquid metal is a complication and they would produce a simpler and more robust system if they used a pure plasma except for the nano-particles sputtered by their electrodes. I think the problem could be that with such a system they could end up producing far more energy than would be predicted by hydrino theory and they'd be pressured into admitting that other reactions were also taking place.