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

[Lukraak_Sisser]

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.

Ah, so it's a reactant, not a catalyst. After all, nothing in your descriptions indicates how the water is re-formed, and the very definition of catalyst is that there is no net consumption in the reaction.

But given this, and given that this exact combination occurs near underwater volcanoes, why do we still have oceans? A volcano does not short out, so it should be an unlimited reaction.

Also, with regards to your earlier comment that the explosive nature of the reaction prevents commercialization, I just drove a car.
Which runs on explosions.
Maybe you should hint to Mills that a mechanism to use explosions to create power DOES exist? And has existed for 100+ years?

 

[mgidm86]

You’ll have to ask BLP for answers; no one here has anything that would help.

From what I understand, BLP, and its predecessors, have been promising a concrete answer. ... for 30+ years!

And this thread is still in the Science forum because...?

I'm only asking because I have seen this thread at the top of the Science forum list for years (along with Electric Comet) and it just seems kind of sad.

 

[Kid Eager]

From what I’m reading here, it sounds like Mills’ “demonstrations” involves use of electrical welding units in non-standard ways to create bright arcing and explosions. This is hardly novel nor indicative of hidden physics - I’ve done similar in the past (and got in trouble for it....).

 

[Red Baron Farms]

Also, with regards to your earlier comment that the explosive nature of the reaction prevents commercialization, I just drove a car.
Which runs on explosions.
Maybe you should hint to Mills that a mechanism to use explosions to create power DOES exist? And has existed for 100+ years?

Actually ICE cars do not run on explosives. In fact should this happen, shortly the pistons will burn out. Instead it is a rapid controlled burn which heat gasses that expand and push the piston on the power stroke.

If the gasses improperly explode it causes a "ping" or "knock" sound which is quite destructive to the engine.

The reason this so called explosive "hydrino" reaction cant be commercialized is because it in fact does burn up the metal which cannibalizes the so called "hydrino" reactor. BTW this is also the most likely source of the so called "anomalous" energy that started the whole "hydrino" fiasco.

If there was a way to create energy from the reaction without burning metals then that early attempt would have been commercialized by now. There isn't because there is no such thing as hydrinos, so any attempt to prevent these side effects of burning up the reactor always also turn into no net gain in energy either! Simple conservation of energy, but using the potential energy of refined metals instead of refined petroleum.

 

[jonesdave116]

And this thread is still in the Science forum because...?

I'm only asking because I have seen this thread at the top of the Science forum list for years (along with Electric Comet) and it just seems kind of sad.

Top marks that man. You are right. Neither of them have anything to do with science. If this was Cosmoquest, neither of these two threads would exist. They got sick of people spamming pseudoscience on their site. By all means posit a hypothesis, but if you can't back it up with real science, then you should take a hike.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

Top marks that man. You are right. Neither of them have anything to do with science. If this was Cosmoquest, neither of these two threads would exist. They got sick of people spamming pseudoscience on their site. By all means posit a hypothesis, but if you can't back it up with real science, then you should take a hike.

Cosmoquest is a science board. This is a scepticism board. It's founded on examining things like pseudoscience. That is its purpose.

 

[optiongeek]

Ah, so it's a reactant, not a catalyst. After all, nothing in your descriptions indicates how the water is re-formed, and the very definition of catalyst is that there is no net consumption in the reaction.

Mills provides the complete HOH catalyst reaction in this 2015 paper:

81.6eV + HOH + H -> 2H⁺ + O^- + e^- + H^*[1/4] + 81.6eV​

H^*[1/4] -> H[1/4] + 122.4eV​

2H⁺ + O^- + e^- -> HOH + 81.6eV​

for a net reaction of:

H -> H[1/4] + 204.0eV​

(HOH recovers it's lost electrons)

But given this, and given that this exact combination occurs near underwater volcanoes, why do we still have oceans? A volcano does not short out, so it should be an unlimited reaction.

Is there high current in undersea volcanoes? If not, how does the NDR region form?

Also, with regards to your earlier comment that the explosive nature of the reaction prevents commercialization, I just drove a car.
Which runs on explosions.
Maybe you should hint to Mills that a mechanism to use explosions to create power DOES exist? And has existed for 100+ years?

Per the reaction I provided, each molecule of H converted to H[1/4] releases 204 eV. That's about 200 times the power density of burning gasoline. So I imagine the control engineering is somewhat more challenging.

 

[Red Baron Farms]

Mills provides the complete HOH catalyst reaction in this 2015 paper:

81.6eV + HOH + H -> 2H⁺ + O^- + e^- + H^*[1/4] + 81.6eV​

H^*[1/4] -> H[1/4] + 122.4eV​

2H⁺ + O^- + e^- -> HOH + 81.6eV​

for a net reaction of:

H -> H[1/4] + 204.0eV​

(HOH recovers it's lost electrons)



Is there high current in undersea volcanoes? If not, how does the NDR region form?



Per the reaction I provided, each molecule of H converted to H[1/4] releases 204 eV. That's about 200 times the power density of burning gasoline. So I imagine the control engineering is somewhat more challenging.

That's all misdirection. What really happens is the Ti wire burns and it even catches some of the machine on fire too.
Here is what titanium looks like burning:

Look familiar?

Once again I must emphasize that NEVER has Mills even showed any reason to make up new physics to explain what happens in his so called reactors. ALL of them can easily be explained by ordinary physics and chemistry, misuse of equipment, poorly designed controls etc....

That gobbly gook you started this comment with is pure unicorn poop. Just made up numbers on a page that do not explain reality at all.

 

[jsfisher]

Is there high current in undersea volcanoes? If not, how does the NDR region form?

Is that now necessary? Perhaps Mills has written about this new requirement somewhere. Does this also mean all the previous occasions where Mills has proudly proclaimed the successful generation of hydrinos he was mistaken because he didn't have 10,000 amps flowing through the plasma?

 

[8enotto]

There is a chance Mills is taking a page or two from Thomas Edison. His reactors seem to be an extension of the process of inventing the light bulb.

A filament of metal with electric power making it glow. Different metals and gasses making for different results.

Mills takes it farther with higher voltage or amperage but adds s new twist. He starts his stuff on fire. A different result also as all he really makes is money.

 

[Horatius]

A different result also as all he really makes is money.

That may be the most succinct summation of Mills I've ever heard. My hat is off to you, sir!

 

[optiongeek]

Is that now necessary? Perhaps Mills has written about this new requirement somewhere. Does this also mean all the previous occasions where Mills has proudly proclaimed the successful generation of hydrinos he was mistaken because he didn't have 10,000 amps flowing through the plasma?

Please see this recent post. The reaction kinetics are unfavorable (i.e. rate limited) unless there is a Negative Differential Resistance. When you supply high current, you get NDR and the feedback changes from negative to positive. The hydrino reaction can exist without it, but the reaction rate isn't commercially viable.

 

[Red Baron Farms]

Please see this recent post. The reaction kinetics are unfavorable (i.e. rate limited) unless there is a Negative Differential Resistance. When you supply high current, you get NDR and the feedback changes from negative to positive. The hydrino reaction can exist without it, but the reaction rate isn't commercially viable.

Yeah I saw that when you wrote it the first time. It's yet another misdirection.

This part that you wrote is true though:

Before 2013/2014, none of Mills' designs could be commercialized because they were inherently rate limiting.

Exactly true. Self limiting because there is only so much potential energy available. Release it slow and it lasts a bit longer, and release it fast and it is explosively fast release, even in several versions burning up his equipment, but in every case, the stored potential energy available is significantly less than Mills misdirects... because hydrinos don't exist.

This is the part that MUST happen before EVERYTHING else, account for the potential energy released and rule out any mundane explanations FIRST.

You don't get to just make up a whole new set of physics just to avoid admitting the experimental error in the original experiments. It is ridiculous woo. Only after exhaustive ruling out of EVERY other possible source for this energy, and EVERY other independent lab also similarly cant explain the phenomenon could you even begin to entertain the thought of imagining new physical laws to explain it.

 

[LTC8K6]

optiongeek, can you offer any reason why Mills was unaware that these designs were not commercially viable?

He repeatedly said they were, over decades, and this is very well documented.

 

[jsfisher]

Please see this recent post.

You mean the post where you cited a paper you hadn't read? The paper that didn't mention using TiG welders to deliver 10,000 amps of current? It is also the paper that didn't mention the negative resistance characteristics of plasmas.

So far, I've seen only you mention the negative resistance characteristics of of plasmas at high current. Odd that, especially since hydrogen, helium, neon, mercury vapor, ..., all exhibit negative resistance at very low currents.

So, where has Mills written about this phenomenon you seem to have just made up on the spot?

The reaction kinetics are unfavorable (i.e. rate limited) unless there is a Negative Differential Resistance. When you supply high current, you get NDR and the feedback changes from negative to positive. The hydrino reaction can exist without it, but the reaction rate isn't commercially viable.

Nice dodge. Commercially viability aside, you are side-stepping the question of hydrino creation in nature you so inappropriately dismissed by observing a lack of high current.

 

[optiongeek]

So, where has Mills written about this phenomenon you seem to have just made up on the spot?

This comes from personal communication with Dr. Mills on the now defunct SoCP. The archives have been removed as well so I'm afraid all we have to go on is my memory. My apologies if you find that insufficient.

you are side-stepping the question of hydrino creation in nature you so inappropriately dismissed by observing a lack of high current.

The hydrino reaction may occur naturally in many places. Undersea volcanoes, lightning, gunpower and the solar corona have all been proposed. I'm merely pointing out that in each of these cases except the solar corona, the lack of a continuing source of arc plasma means that the reaction will not be self-sustaining. The universe is full of dark matter, so it doesn't seem inconsistent that it may be created ubiquitously.

 

[jsfisher]

This comes from personal communication with Dr. Mills on the now defunct SoCP. The archives have been removed as well so I'm afraid all we have to go on is my memory. My apologies if you find that insufficient.

I find it very insufficient. You proffered as fact something that you now reveal as faded personal memory. Worse, your account contradicts well established, easily observed physical phenomena.

 

[JeanTate]

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?).

As of today, we have to wait a mere 37 (67) days before the world has concrete, independent, evidence of the existence of a hydrino-powered generator.

Another reason why Mills is almost certainly does not have a working prototype: no public record of testing - let alone certification - of safety, health, and environmental impacts.

This has been covered in many posts, both in this thread and its predecessors. BLP is located in NJ, USA. New Jersey has a long and complicated history with regard to both environmental (etc) regulations and corruption. However, partly as a result of several safety, health, and environmental scandals associated with industrial practices and waste (say), of the US States it's near the top, today, in regulations of these ... and enforcement of those regulations.

Whatever hydrinos are (assuming they actually exist), they are novel chemicals, with unknown safety, health, and environmental impacts. For BLP to have a working prototype of a hydrino-based generator, one that's ready for shipping to independent test facilities, it must have some relevant safety, health, and environmental certificates. And those - at some level - will be public. To the best of my knowledge, no such certificates exist.

 

[Lukraak_Sisser]

Mills provides the complete HOH catalyst reaction in this 2015 paper:

81.6eV + HOH + H -> 2H⁺ + O^- + e^- + H^*[1/4] + 81.6eV​

H^*[1/4] -> H[1/4] + 122.4eV​

2H⁺ + O^- + e^- -> HOH + 81.6eV​

for a net reaction of:

H -> H[1/4] + 204.0eV​

(HOH recovers it's lost electrons)



Is there high current in undersea volcanoes? If not, how does the NDR region form?



Per the reaction I provided, each molecule of H converted to H[1/4] releases 204 eV. That's about 200 times the power density of burning gasoline. So I imagine the control engineering is somewhat more challenging.

Ah, so Mill's is part of the Electric universe crowd where electricity is magic?
Lets see, undersea volcano

Energy in great excess to Mill's back yard setup? Check
Molten metals? Check
His catalyst in near unlimited amount? Check

So, all the parameters needed to fulfill his promises are present. And yet. Nothing.
The same with the lightning storms hitting Jupiter, yet that planet is still there.

Of course, the reason is not that Mills is such a genius that he, and he alone, can create a really easy setup that is utterly irreproducible in nature, but rather that he is a scam artist, using endless delays, fake science and random resets of his goals to keep getting money from idiots wanting to stick it to 'the man'.

 

[Mike!]

This comes from personal communication with Dr. Mills on the now defunct SoCP. The archives have been removed as well so I'm afraid all we have to go on is my memory. My apologies if you find that insufficient.

Have you asked yourself why this valuable information resource has been virtually scrubbed from internet existence?