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

[JeanTate]

The claim is that it is. The corona is very hot, and the claim is that that's due to hydrinos, rather than the commonly accepted explanations of soundwaves caused by the photosphere, or the interaction between the magnetic flux and the corona.

Where is that claim made and supported?

I haven’t encountered it outside of the “Hydrinos and the Bible” Creationist book being written. I thought they’d made that up but if Mills made the claim I’d love to direct them to that resource.

A few days' ago, markie, trying to be an astronomer (he really must stop, it's embarrassing), posted this:

Mathematics which you clearly understand and can answer questions on?


Really?

Can you please provide references, for the “anomalous energetic events ... on the sun’s surface ”?

I have in mind the chromosphere, particularly at times of solar flare. The chromosphere is immediately above the photosphere and experiences a huge temperature gradient from (relatively) cool (cooler than the photosphere and where CO can exist) in the lowest layer to very hot in the outer. It is there in the chromosphere where the bright spots (bright in visible to soft xRay) occur just preceding and during solar flares. While it is thought that the main energy driver is magnetic fields and associated accelerated electrons, there are lots of unanswered questions about how this can translate to the distribution of the spectra observed.

The parallels to the SunCell are apparent to me, namely high electron flux and the presence of atomic H.

From Wiki: It is not yet fully understood what phenomenon causes the temperature of the chromosphere to paradoxically increase further from the Sun's interior. However, it seems likely to be explained, partially or totally, by magnetic reconnection.

Sure, it's not Mills making the claim, and isn't - literally - about the corona being very hot (though one never knows with markie), but it's close.

 

[optiongeek]

Wait, I thought that hydrino formation wasn't supposed to take place in plasma because it requires neutral hydrogen atoms. Now plasma isn't necessarily completely ionized, but if plasma which is "beyond white hot" isn't so highly ionized as to prevent hydrino formation, why isn't the surface of the sun also a place where hydrinos would form?

The reason why Mills has taken so long to find a commercially viable design comes down to how electrodynamics of plasma can be designed to support the hydrino reaction. It was only in late 2013 that Mills discovered that a characteristic of arc plasmas called Negative Differential Resistance was an important pre-condition for sustaining the reaction. The hydrino reaction is ionizing, meaning that the HOH catalyst will ordinarily lose its outer electrons. This generates additional current in the plasma. If the plasma has a positive resistance, then increasing the current raises the voltage potential and therefore is unfavorable to the formation of subsequent hydrino reactions. However, if you create a NDR in the plasma (by supplying high current, in the neighborhood of 10k amps), then consider what happens to the voltage as the ionization-generated current is applied. Per Ohm's law, the increased current causes the voltage to drop! Instead of a negative feedback loop, there is now a positive feedback loop supporting the formation of hydrinos. Under an NDR-containing arc plasma, the hydrino reaction becomes explosive. Before 2013/2014, none of Mills' designs could be commercialized because they were inherently rate limiting.

Since 2014, Mills' engineering efforts have been focused on containing and moderating arc plasma-based reactions involving low-voltage, high-current mixed with H2 gas fuel and trace amounts of HOH catalyst.

 

[JeanTate]

The only catalyst of interest for the past few years has been HOH - nascent water (i.e. lacking Hydrogen bonds). At various times, some of the reaction inputs have been considered non public information because they were useful for providing the trace amounts of oxygen required to form the HOH catalyst in the extreme environments in which the reaction have been operating. As the reactor design has evolved from extreme high temps (liquid silver) to moderate temps (liquid gallium), the nature of the input providing the trace oxygen seems to have evolved as well. At the moment, it seems to be some sort of gallium oxide. As someone focused on maintaining IP rights to his process, Mills seems to be strategic about what parts of his process he makes public, while widely disseminating the underlying science.

My hilite.

I got curious. I wondered if an established supplier to scientific labs - like fisher scientific - would have any nascent water in its chemicals catalog. It doesn't.

Wikipedia has an entry of nascent hydrogen, but not nascent water.

I don't have training as a chemist (in the scientific sense), so I can't really check university (preferably grad) level chemistry textbooks, but from the lack of hits I got with DuckDuckGo, I doubt that it's mentioned in many.

Maybe it's mentioned in Mills' BBofBB?

 

[JeanTate]

The reason why Mills has taken so long to find a commercially viable design comes down to how electrodynamics of plasma can be designed to support the hydrino reaction. It was only in late 2013 that Mills discovered that a characteristic of arc plasmas called Negative Differential Resistance was an important pre-condition for sustaining the reaction. The hydrino reaction is ionizing, meaning that the HOH catalyst will ordinarily lose its outer electrons. This generates additional current in the plasma. If the plasma has a positive resistance, then increasing the current raises the voltage potential and therefore is unfavorable to the formation of subsequent hydrino reactions. However, if you create a NDR in the plasma (by supplying high current, in the neighborhood of 10k amps), then consider what happens to the voltage as the ionization-generated current is applied. Per Ohm's law, the increased current causes the voltage to drop! Instead of a negative feedback loop, there is now a positive feedback loop supporting the formation of hydrinos. Under an NDR-containing arc plasma, the hydrino reaction becomes explosive. Before 2013/2014, none of Mills' designs could be commercialized because they were inherently rate limiting.

Since 2014, Mills' engineering efforts have been focused on containing and moderating arc plasma-based reactions involving low-voltage, high-current mixed with H2 gas fuel and trace amounts of HOH catalyst.

My hilite.

All very sciency ... but for the inclusion of unicorns HOH catalyst.

And yet, according to both Mills and markie, the early universe had no difficulty whatsoever in creating vast quantities of hydrinos (what we see today as dark matter)!

"the HOH catalyst will ordinarily lose its outer electrons" - how many "outer electrons" did it have before it was "ionized"?

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

Where is that claim made and supported?

I haven’t encountered it outside of the “Hydrinos and the Bible” Creationist book being written. I thought they’d made that up but if Mills made the claim I’d love to direct them to that resource.

Read entry 7 in Holverstott's summary of Mills' theory

I'm sure one of our resident Mills supporters could provide a page number to the relevant section in Mills' book.

 

[LTC8K6]

Wasn't there some super secret catalyst that you needed to make the whole thing work? Which was secret to make sure nobody could reproduce or steal his 'invention'?

Yes, there was.

My recollection is that Mills published the catalyst formula for the CIHT cell for a short time, but withdrew it.

 

[optiongeek]

My hilite.

I got curious. I wondered if an established supplier to scientific labs - like fisher scientific - would have any nascent water in its chemicals catalog. It doesn't.

Wikipedia has an entry of nascent hydrogen, but not nascent water.

I don't have training as a chemist (in the scientific sense), so I can't really check university (preferably grad) level chemistry textbooks, but from the lack of hits I got with DuckDuckGo, I doubt that it's mentioned in many.

Maybe it's mentioned in Mills' BBofBB?

I'm not a chemist either, but my understanding is that the term nascent water refers to water in a vapor. I found that a more useful term to research is hydrogen bond - particularly as it pertains to water. To get nascent water, the hydrogen bond must be eliminated, which can be done in energetic environments. You wouldn't order nascent water from a supplier, you create it in an arc-plasma.

 

[optiongeek]

"the HOH catalyst will ordinarily lose its outer electrons" - how many "outer electrons" did it have before it was "ionized"?

Non-Chemist answer but in line with Mills' description of the reaction: Oxygen has four electrons in its outer most (2p) shell. Two are shared with the Hydrogen atoms, leaving two available for ionization.

 

[W.D.Clinger]

I'm not a chemist either, but my understanding is that the term nascent water refers to water in a vapor.

Vaporous technology uses vapor.

I got curious. I wondered if an established supplier to scientific labs - like fisher scientific - would have any nascent water in its chemicals catalog. It doesn't.

Wikipedia has an entry of nascent hydrogen, but not nascent water.

From that Wikipedia article:

Nascent hydrogen is a concept that was once invoked to explain dissolving-metal reactions, such as the Clemmensen reduction and the Bouveault–Blanc reduction. Since organic compounds do not react with hydrogen gas, which is the normal form of this element, a special, highly reactive state, of hydrogen was postulated to explain this class of hydrogenation. It is now well understood that such reactions take place at the metal surface via one-electron reduction, and the concept of nascent hydrogen is discounted, even ridiculed.^[1][2]

 

[The Moog]

-deleted-
Forgot my resolution to avoid this slow motion car crash.

 

[JeanTate]

I'm not a chemist either, but my understanding is that the term nascent water refers to water in a vapor. I found that a more useful term to research is hydrogen bond - particularly as it pertains to water. To get nascent water, the hydrogen bond must be eliminated, which can be done in energetic environments. You wouldn't order nascent water from a supplier, you create it in an arc-plasma.

W.D.Clinger and (well, now deleted) have addressed this, um, dog's breakfast.

If you mean water vapor (or water in the gaseous state), why not simply say so? What's the point of using made-up words when perfectly good, ordinary (and technical) words exist? To sound more mysterious and sciency? If so, who do you think you're fooling? ISF members?!?

 

[JeanTate]

Non-Chemist answer but in line with Mills' description of the reaction: Oxygen has four electrons in its outer most (2p) shell. Two are shared with the Hydrogen atoms, leaving two available for ionization.

Do you really, honestly believe this sort of thing?

If you add energy to water molecules - in their gaseous state, i.e. vapor - by heating them, say, they will first dissociate (i.e. the O-H bonds will be broken), not ionize.

Yet another example of Mills', um, shaky grasp of well-understood phenomena?

 

[JeanTate]

Read entry 7 in Holverstott's summary of Mills' theory

I'm sure one of our resident Mills supporters could provide a page number to the relevant section in Mills' book.

OMG!

Assuming what Holverstott writes is for real (i.e. not something he made up entirely by himself), that page is so replete with nonsense it would surely win the Ignobel awards many times over.

Thanks for the source; I will likely use it/quote from it quite a bit over the next 38 (68) days ...

 

[JeanTate]

As of today, we have to wait a mere 39 (69) days before the world has concrete, independent, evidence of the existence of a hydrino-powered generator.

In these daily countdown posts, I'll take the opportunity to reflect on the last 30 years of promises, and on why Mills is almost certainly not right, from many perspectives.

Today: if Mills were right, China would not have to import such vast amounts of oil (and the DPRK - North Korea - would not need to spend so much effort on getting around sanctions, to import oil). For at least the last decade.

Why?

Because - according to markie et al. - Mills' publications (the BBofBB, the many papers, etc) hide nothing. China has an extraordinarily strong incentive to find sources of energy other than oil and coal (likewise North Korea). They also have a very large number of well-qualified scientists, engineers, etc, and have had so for at least a decade. Did none of them ever read any of Mills' works? Did none of them ever wonder if there was at least some grain of reality there? And so on. The situation in North Korea is different, for example, the incentive to find alternative sources of energy is likely far stronger. However, the result is pretty much the same: if there were some reality to Mills' fantasies, either China or North Korea (or both) would not, today, need so much in the way of oil imports.

As of today, we have to wait a mere 38 (68) days before the world has concrete, independent, evidence of the existence of a hydrino-powered generator.

Another reason why Mills is almost certainly not right: no one with appropriate scientific training takes his claims seriously.

Initially, there was some interest in his reported findings, attempts to reproduce the experimental results (no such independent, verifiable replication has been reported), and critical examination of his reported theory (to put it kindly, it was found to be nonsense). No doubt some who looked into this also seriously considered how the nonsense could be turned into at least interesting, if not fully robust, alternatives; as I read the literature, some of these excursions have been published (thanks to optiongeek, markie, and UncertainH for your cites). Yet nothing has come of this.

Mills' fans sometimes gnash their teeth and wail that it's all a giant conspiracy by Establishment Science, to suppress the truth or to not threaten jobs, grants, etc. For some individual scientists, this may have some veracity; for Science as a whole it's so woefully ignorant that one wonders if any such fans even know any scientist, let alone have scientific training. For an anecdote, one of my faves is Stephen Jay Gould ... he accepted as a student someone who was an avowed creationist (or am I mis-remembering?).

 

[jsfisher]

The reason why Mills has taken so long to find a commercially viable design comes down to how electrodynamics of plasma can be designed to support the hydrino reaction. It was only in late 2013 that Mills discovered that a characteristic of arc plasmas called Negative Differential Resistance was an important pre-condition for sustaining the reaction. The hydrino reaction is ionizing, meaning that the HOH catalyst will ordinarily lose its outer electrons. This generates additional current in the plasma. If the plasma has a positive resistance, then increasing the current raises the voltage potential and therefore is unfavorable to the formation of subsequent hydrino reactions. However, if you create a NDR in the plasma (by supplying high current, in the neighborhood of 10k amps), then consider what happens to the voltage as the ionization-generated current is applied. Per Ohm's law, the increased current causes the voltage to drop! Instead of a negative feedback loop, there is now a positive feedback loop supporting the formation of hydrinos. Under an NDR-containing arc plasma, the hydrino reaction becomes explosive. Before 2013/2014, none of Mills' designs could be commercialized because they were inherently rate limiting.

Since 2014, Mills' engineering efforts have been focused on containing and moderating arc plasma-based reactions involving low-voltage, high-current mixed with H2 gas fuel and trace amounts of HOH catalyst.

What gauge wire do you recommend for delivering 10,000 amperes? I would have thought the supply lines for that much current would have been visible in the videos.

Also, why does hydrogen plasma exhibit negative resistance at so much lower currents for everyone except Mills?

 

[optiongeek]

What gauge wire do you recommend for delivering 10,000 amperes? I would have thought the supply lines for that much current would have been visible in the videos.

Also, why does hydrogen plasma exhibit negative resistance at so much lower currents for everyone except Mills?

There are a variety of ways to create that much amperage. In Mills' most recent paper (free PDF here), Mills describes the experimental setup as a "Tungsten Inert Gas" (TIG) welder exploding silver shots impregnated with regular water. In his current prototypes, I believe he is shooting counter-posed electrified liquid Gallium electrodes at each other to create the ignition point within reactor.

I don't know why Mills finds 10kA region efficient for his purposes. I seem to recall mention of other setups using somewhat lower or higher amperage.

 

[LTC8K6]

There are a variety of ways to create that much amperage. In Mills' most recent paper (free PDF here), Mills describes the experimental setup as a "Tungsten Inert Gas" (TIG) welder exploding silver shots impregnated with regular water. In his current prototypes, I believe he is shooting counter-posed electrified liquid Gallium electrodes at each other to create the ignition point within reactor.

I don't know why Mills finds 10kA region efficient for his purposes. I seem to recall mention of other setups using somewhat lower or higher amperage.

There's a TiG welder that can deliver 10,000 amps?

 

[jsfisher]

There are a variety of ways to create that much amperage.

I didn't ask about creating it. I asked about wire gauge needed to deliver it to the alleged NDR plasmas in the most recent set of videos.

...
In his current prototypes, I believe he is shooting counter-posed electrified liquid Gallium electrodes at each other to create the ignition point within reactor.

Yeah, ok. If you say so. No industrial spot welder appears in the videos, though. So where are the 10,000 A current-carrying cables?

I don't know why Mills finds 10kA region efficient for his purposes. I seem to recall mention of other setups using somewhat lower or higher amperage.

The reason why is easy. Mills is a liar, and the more dramatic, the more explosive the demonstration the easier it is to convince the gullible it was something different from it really was.

 

[jsfisher]

There's a TiG welder that can deliver 10,000 amps?

optiongeek didn't actually read the paper. The TiG welder was used in creating the silver "shots". It operated at 30A at 12V. An industrial spot welder supposedly did the heavy-duty shot blasting at anything up to 22,000A.

 

[optiongeek]

optiongeek didn't actually read the paper. The TiG welder was used in creating the silver "shots". It operated at 30A at 12V. An industrial spot welder supposedly did the heavy-duty shot blasting at anything up to 22,000A.

My apologies. Thanks for catching that oversight.