Cont: Brilliant Light Power Going To Market - Free Energy Generator Part 3

[Mike!]

First day of Summer, 2018, how soon will these long promised Free Energy Generators be shipping?

 

[Dave Rogers]

First day of Summer, 2018, how soon will these long promised Free Energy Generators be shipping?

Since it's summer, the preferred implementation as a space heater won't be needed for another three months at least. Come September it will turn out that the heat exchange technology has proved so successful that a more profitable product will be an air conditioning unit, which will be expected to hit the shops round about next May.

In the southern hemisphere, of course, the laws of physics are different, so they're working on the air conditioner right now.

Dave

 

[Kid Eager]

Since it's summer, the preferred implementation as a space heater won't be needed for another three months at least. Come September it will turn out that the heat exchange technology has proved so successful that a more profitable product will be an air conditioning unit, which will be expected to hit the shops round about next May.

In the southern hemisphere, of course, the laws of physics are different, so they're working on the air conditioner right now.

Dave

Mills has no doubt outsourced the production of a critical component to a third party who has failed to meet schedules. again.

If nothing else, BLP's sourcing strategies are extremely consistent...

 

[jrhowell]

When asked yesterday for an update on testing and publishing results about the material they have collected, Mills replied:

The results are fantastic and all run at independent laboratories. We are working on another exciting spectroscopy. When finished we will host validators.

My best guess at interpreting this is that something was sent to outside laboratories where BLP paid for specific tests to be done and they are in the process of cherry picking results to make them appear mysterious and support their desired conclusion:

"Must be hydrinos! What else could they possibly be?"

That will be followed by an open house fund raiser at BLP.

 

[LTC8K6]

"The results are fantastic and all run at independent laboratories. We are working on another exciting spectroscopy. When finished we will host validators. "

Why would you need validators if you have fantastic results from independent labs?

Aren't the "fantastic results from independent labs" all you need?

 

[Dancing David]

Because the tachyons are interferring with the dilithium dihydrino crystals

 

[Darat]

"The results are fantastic and all run at independent laboratories. We are working on another exciting spectroscopy. When finished we will host validators. "

Why would you need validators if you have fantastic results from independent labs?

Aren't the "fantastic results from independent labs" all you need?

What on earth would be "fantastic results"? Yes we have identified you have sent us a substance....

And "We are working on another exciting spectroscopy" - yep you've put the sample in and pressed the button labeled "start" - what else is there to be "working on"?

 

[Dave Rogers]

What on earth would be "fantastic results"?

Results that only exist in fantasy, obv.

Dave

 

[Mike!]

Since it's summer, the preferred implementation as a space heater won't be needed for another three months at least. Come September it will turn out that the heat exchange technology has proved so successful that a more profitable product will be an air conditioning unit, which will be expected to hit the shops round about next May.

In the southern hemisphere, of course, the laws of physics are different, so they're working on the air conditioner right now.

Dave

I'm eagerly awaiting this game changing device to power my new hyper-efficient steam driven automobile. I figure I can use a Suncell to heat up an industrial grade hotplate with a big pot of water on it, then place the derived steam in some sort of containment vessel and use the pressure to activate a set of pistons attached to the drive wheels by some, as yet, unimagined means of dynamic coupling. I think this will revolutionise the global transportation system as we know it, and curb greenhouse gasses while we're at it.
If only Mills would get off his fat ass and deliver something as promised 20 years ago.

 

[markie]

"The results are fantastic and all run at independent laboratories. We are working on another exciting spectroscopy. When finished we will host validators. "

Why would you need validators if you have fantastic results from independent labs?

Aren't the "fantastic results from independent labs" all you need?

Some of the validators may be from the independent labs and report. Or, validators will observe experiments at BLP which produce results that are congruent to what the other labs measured.

What can a lab do? They will analyze a substance and say the same old thing: It has such and such properties that they have not observed before and they don't know what could be producing this.

Only Mills and this theory have the key to provide the fitting answers.

 

[Kid Eager]

Ah, the fitting answers. We knew that already.

 

[davefoc]

Some of the validators may be from the independent labs and report. Or, validators will observe experiments at BLP which produce results that are congruent to what the other labs measured.

What can a lab do? They will analyze a substance and say the same old thing: It has such and such properties that they have not observed before and they don't know what could be producing this.

Only Mills and this theory have the key to provide the fitting answers.

Hi Markie,
You've been a good sport in this thread. It is difficult to forge ahead when you are a party of one surrounded by people that disagree with you. And you are right, in a sense, that nobody in this thread can know that Mills theories are wrong or that Mills's gadgets don't work.

But the level of technical expertise by some of the people responding to your posts seems to have been quite high and they made a pretty strong case that there is nothing to Mills's claims.

And, of course, just the simple fact that this has gone on year after year with each year bringing on a new round of claims about imminent products or verification certainly suggests something is not right with BLP.

With regard to the mention of validators in your post: This is not how scientific discoveries are usually validated. In the norm there is no equivocation about the independence of the validators. They use there own materials in their own labs and they don't have NDA's in place to prevent them from publishing negative results. People that visit your lab and sign NDA's are not independent validators in any way regardless of what Mills wants to claim.

Throughout the years Mills has made all sorts of claims including claims about super batteries and super paint. If these products were real all Mills has to do is provide them to independent laboratories or laboratories owned by potential licensees and Mills will be flooded with money if his claims make it through this process. Similarly all he needs to do is provide a sample of material that has unique properties because it contains hydrinos to an independent lab and have the unique properties verified and his fame and wealth are assured He hasn't done either and I don't think there is any record of him trying to do anything like that. Everybody else in this thread thinks that is because Mills is full of crap. You, for the moment, seem to think there is some other reason. Do you have a time frame in mind when you might come to the same conclusion as everybody else in this thread if nothing of substance materializes from the current round to Mills's claims? Are you willing to wait through another round of claims?

 

[markie]

Hi Markie,
You've been a good sport in this thread. It is difficult to forge ahead when you are a party of one surrounded by people that disagree with you. And you are right, in a sense, that nobody in this thread can know that Mills theories are wrong or that Mills's gadgets don't work.

But the level of technical expertise by some of the people responding to your posts seems to have been quite high and they made a pretty strong case that there is nothing to Mills's claims.

I have found *no* strong technical case against Mills' claims in the posts here. There is RC and his protests that Mills is not properly honouring quantum theory. There is RBF who has metal oxidation as his mantra.
That said, I do suspect that over the years Mills et al have made the occasional error in things like spectroscopy interpretation. I do seriously consider the objection of specialists in the field when it relates to particulars of the experiments coming out of BLP. But considering the number of experiments and papers BLP has produced, those objections are quite rare. Silence is more the norm.

And, of course, just the simple fact that this has gone on year after year with each year bringing on a new round of claims about imminent products or verification certainly suggests something is not right with BLP.

It may appear as a 'simple' fact, but I doubt it is simple. Through the years Mills has attempted perhaps 5 distinct methods of coaxing hydrogen to drop to a lower energy state in a way that would be continuous and of sufficient power density. No luck so far.

With regard to the mention of validators in your post: This is not how scientific discoveries are usually validated. In the norm there is no equivocation about the independence of the validators. They use there own materials in their own labs and they don't have NDA's in place to prevent them from publishing negative results. People that visit your lab and sign NDA's are not independent validators in any way regardless of what Mills wants to claim.

Do tech companies like Samsung have NDA's for people visiting their labs? Sure. Nothing nefarious about that.

On the flip side of a NDA, when validators *do* 'disclose' their results in a validation report, what then? The results are conveniently ignored by skeptics.

Throughout the years Mills has made all sorts of claims including claims about super batteries and super paint. If these products were real all Mills has to do is provide them to independent laboratories or laboratories owned by potential licensees and Mills will be flooded with money if his claims make it through this process.

Has Mills claimed he has created super paint or batteries? No. But he projects that certain hydrino compounds would be capable of being utilized as such because of the nature of their chemistry, which he predicts with his theory.

Similarly all he needs to do is provide a sample of material that has unique properties because it contains hydrinos to an independent lab and have the unique properties verified and his fame and wealth are assured

This is naive. A lab can analyze a compound, see unusual results, and say "I dunno". It's not "OMG, we haven't seen this before, this is front page news."

He hasn't done either and I don't think there is any record of him trying to do anything like that.

There are records of labs analyzing substances from BLP with unusual properties.
For instance recall this quote from a Village Voice article:

Jacox says his team found in the materials "an anomaly that we could not explain with conventional theory but that we could explain with Randy Mills's theory. That does not necessarily validate the Mills theory, but gosh."

Jacox continued to be frustrated by the proscription against testing Mills cells, "so I left the lab in large measure because of that."

I imagine full records of such lab results are kept at BLP for the perusal of investors doing due diligence.

Everybody else in this thread thinks that is because Mills is full of crap. You, for the moment, seem to think there is some other reason. Do you have a time frame in mind when you might come to the same conclusion as everybody else in this thread if nothing of substance materializes from the current round to Mills's claims? Are you willing to wait through another round of claims?

It will be easier for Mills to produce compounds now. "Hydrino in a bottle" as Mills has put it. This is probably occurring now at BLP, with analysis by other labs forthcoming in a matter of a few months I think.

However the timeline for an energy producing device is lagging, it seems for technical reasons. Sure, I'm prepared to wait. It won't be for another round, but for this round to reach fruition.

 

[WhatRoughBeast]

Through the years Mills has attempted perhaps 5 distinct methods of coaxing hydrogen to drop to a lower energy state in a way that would be continuous and of sufficient power density. No luck so far.

markie, it is sometimes difficult to avoid criticizing you in immoderate terms. Let's just say that the previous statement is one you should be ashamed of.

First, what in the world does power density have to do with anything? Oh sure, for vehicle power it's important, and particularly for aircraft it can be critical. For fixed plants, however, it is largely irrelevant.

Second, Mills has specifically touted his process as having extraordinary power densities. Remember "10 MW in one square foot"? It's been less than a month since I pointed out https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvcCzttXr5k, where Mills states that the power density of his process is "10 million times that of fire".

At that time you stated,

Right you are, my apologies. For a brief while at the very beginning of the Suncell type of reaction Mills did consider MHD to harness the energy of moving ions from the energetic explosion. Then he changed track and went to photovoltaics because with further analysis he realized most of the energy release was photonic, not kinetic. (I talked about this in an earlier post but had a memory lapse.) Now he's going back to MHD, but in a different way.

Is there a mention there of the low power density? Yes? No?

Ah, that's no, then. Instead, less than a month ago you stated that the problem with the early Suncell process was that the energy release was "photonic, not kinetic". There is no hint that the process had insufficient power density.

Or is "10 million times the power density of fire" inadequate for commercial power generation? If so, the conventional oil and coal plants need desperately to be informed of this fact.

Do you need more? From the same interview he states that his process produces power levels of "billions of watts per liter".

Furthermore, the process described at the time (Jan 2014) was clearly understood to be non-continuous, yet this presented no problems to Mills. So your assertion that Mills's processes foundered on the need for continuity and high power density is clearly, shall we say, non-operational.

Reality Check consistently misuses the "l" word. It seems appropriate in this case.

Or would you care to retract or modify your statement?

 

[Horatius]

Or is "10 million times the power density of fire" inadequate for commercial power generation? If so, the conventional oil and coal plants need desperately to be informed of this fact.

*********** fire, what has it ever done for us?!?

 

[davefoc]

NDA's are used all the time. However Mills attempts to use comments by people that are under NDA's that have toured his lab or seen one of his demos as corroboration of his claims. My point is that these kind of comments would be of little probative value with regards to the validity of anyhbody's claims. but with regard to Mills they are completely useless. He has been making false claims for twenty years or more. The only thing that could provide useful evidence is support for his theories by credible sources or actual, unequivocal independent test results. The rest is just noise at this point.

I don't think any of his theories will be tested again or commented on again by credible sources unless he succeeds in producing credibly verified test results. I don't think he'll succeed in getting new funding unless he succeeds in producing credibly verified test results. The situation is a bit like what went on with Tesla at the end of his career. He couldn't produce credibly verified results and people stopped funding him but even today there are people that think that Tesla produced amazing inventions that lie undiscovered because he didn't have the funds to bring them to fruition.

 

[The Man]

I have found *no* strong technical case against Mills' claims in the posts here. There is RC and his protests that Mills is not properly honouring quantum theory. There is RBF who has metal oxidation as his mantra.

No need for you to *find* them as they have found you, time and time again. I've read Reality Check protesting a heck of a lot of Mill claims, none of which being about "properly honouring" anything. Well, other than just the stated limits of measuring equipment capabilities. Red Baron Farms', as well as others, concerns about metal oxidation are entirely valid, given the stated necessity of oxidation in the asserted process.

 

[davefoc]

This is naive. A lab can analyze a compound, see unusual results, and say "I dunno". It's not "OMG, we haven't seen this before, this is front page news."

The claim here is that hydrinos could be part of all sorts of marvelous stuff. including super energy dense batteries, super long lasting paint, and energy from water schemes. Presumably this is because the compounds containing hydrinos have unique, powerful properties not to be easily confused with stuff that doesn't contain hydrinos. You are suggesting that despite these amazing possibilities that substances with hydrinos have, it may be that it isn't possible to determine unambiguously that something has hydrinos in it at all, but those hydrinos are the basis for all these amazing characteristics of hydrino containing materials? mmm.

 

[markie]

markie, it is sometimes difficult to avoid criticizing you in immoderate terms. Let's just say that the previous statement is one you should be ashamed of.

First, what in the world does power density have to do with anything? Oh sure, for vehicle power it's important, and particularly for aircraft it can be critical. For fixed plants, however, it is largely irrelevant.

Second, Mills has specifically touted his process as having extraordinary power densities. Remember "10 MW in one square foot"? It's been less than a month since I pointed out https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvcCzttXr5k, where Mills states that the power density of his process is "10 million times that of fire".

At that time you stated,

Is there a mention there of the low power density? Yes? No?

Ah, that's no, then. Instead, less than a month ago you stated that the problem with the early Suncell process was that the energy release was "photonic, not kinetic". There is no hint that the process had insufficient power density.

Or is "10 million times the power density of fire" inadequate for commercial power generation? If so, the conventional oil and coal plants need desperately to be informed of this fact.

Do you need more? From the same interview he states that his process produces power levels of "billions of watts per liter".

Furthermore, the process described at the time (Jan 2014) was clearly understood to be non-continuous, yet this presented no problems to Mills. So your assertion that Mills's processes foundered on the need for continuity and high power density is clearly, shall we say, non-operational.

Reality Check consistently misuses the "l" word. It seems appropriate in this case.

Or would you care to retract or modify your statement?

When has Mills said the SunCell has attained power that is both continuous and high? The high power is demonstrated and validated. What is not yet demonstrated is the Suncell running continuously at high power and with materials recycled - a closed system.

At least you realize RC misuses the L word.

 

[markie]

NDA's are used all the time. However Mills attempts to use comments by people that are under NDA's that have toured his lab or seen one of his demos as corroboration of his claims. My point is that these kind of comments would be of little probative value with regards to the validity of anyhbody's claims. but with regard to Mills they are completely useless. He has been making false claims for twenty years or more. The only thing that could provide useful evidence is support for his theories by credible sources or actual, unequivocal independent test results. The rest is just noise at this point.

As I said before, skeptics conveniently manage to ignore validation reports.
OMG, a validator signed a NDA, visited the lab and then had the gall to write a validation report!

I don't think any of his theories will be tested again or commented on again by credible sources unless he succeeds in producing credibly verified test results. I don't think he'll succeed in getting new funding unless he succeeds in producing credibly verified test results. The situation is a bit like what went on with Tesla at the end of his career. He couldn't produce credibly verified results and people stopped funding him but even today there are people that think that Tesla produced amazing inventions that lie undiscovered because he didn't have the funds to bring them to fruition.

Well at least I'll agree with you about Tesla.