Blacklight Power Jan 28th Demo Thread [Updated]


I’m not quite sure what there will be to report here for a while, but I thought I’d open up a thread for discussion of the Blacklight Power demonstration that is scheduled for tomorrow, January 28th. I personally don’t know anyone who is going to be there, but there may be someone who does — and who might be able to get some news to us here.

I have heard that there will be a video of the proceeding posted on the BLP website sometime after the demonstration is completed, so we will be watching for that.

Just as a review, this is what was stated about tomorrow’s demo by Randell Mills:

The energetic plasma will be demonstrated. The energy and power balances will be measured using a commercial calorimeter that will quantify megaWatt power at a density of billions of watts per liter.

I will also go over the system engineering, hydrino product characterization, and talk about applications and commercialization.

If you hear about news, updates, videos, reports, etc., please post them below.

Many thanks!

UPDATE: We have a report of someone who was at BLP, but not in the demo. ‘Commentor’ wrote:

“I stopped by BLP around midday today the 28th. The demo was going on, my contact said it was going well. No press vehicles in parking lot, just lots of high end cars and one law enforcement vehicle. All 35 spots filled for the lab demo. Here’s hoping that this is the first step in Dr Mills success.”




  • NCkhawk

    Dude – pls. be careful. If you light off a full reaction, don’t you have more of a bomb than a heater?

  • psi2u2

    Obvious. in my experience this is typical of Wikipedia’s almost complete inability to deal in a fair and credible manner with topics of emergent knowledge.

  • friendlyprogrammer

    Who said it was a live feed? They are both costly and tricky compared to a youtube video that will likely come about. Rossi never had live feeds. Cern had a live feed, but that was the only LENR subject ever broadcast live to my knowledge.

    However there was an open invite so maybe RSVP next time instead of crying about it to us.

    Mills is a Harvard Educated medical doctor with medical protocals and inventions in his name. He was top 10% of his class.

    If he chose to work as a Doctor he would likely earn more than an average family combined. Research and developement are not cheap, and he has had third party verification’s along every step he takes.

  • Omega Z

    I’m aware of the 3-D Etc… I keep an eye on this.
    I know they already print & grow arteries Bones, Etc…

    Follows is my issues with it.
    They can Print “Organ Tissue”. Not the Organs.
    One report claimed they can grow a functioning Mouse Heart but that it isn’t possible to grow a Human heart at this time.
    They’ve indicated it will likely be 20 years before they can grow a human heart.(Applies to other Organs as well)

    At that point it will “LIKELY” only be used to study the Human Heart.
    WTF- You can see where this is going. Something or someone seems to be holding this technology back. We Need some rogues to step in & bypass the status qua.

    As to 3-D printers in the home. For the time being would be X-mas Novelty Gifts for kids. That does led to more possibilities in the Future. Many of these Kids will excel(Jobs/Gates) at this & actually create more valid reasons for having them eventually.
    But in the short term, I expect this to be a local business customizing shop.

  • Iggy Dalrymple

    “I think he is scamming his investors…”

    Maybe so, but why then are his investors not pissed? His backers include several important ex-military and ex-govt people. How is it that you’re so much smarter than them?

  • stefan

    Care to be more specific? People tend to be both right and wrong, and I know quite a lot of math
    for knowing that Mill’s theory, if mumbo jumbo, is an insane clever mumbo jumbo. For example
    how the heck can he calculate the g factor to such a precision using first principle, where does he
    fool us? I asked the same to skeptic physisict and just got basically silence as an answer. I would say
    that smart people have a clear argument for it’s sake, You just sound like a troll!

  • BroKeeper

    Very impressive Jeff. I wish all the best in achieving your goals.

  • BroKeeper

    With cold fusion still a farce in most peoples’ mind it would have only degraded his integrity and popularity futher. President Obama did mention nature gas as a bridge between fossil fuels and aternative energy. The only alternative energy that would begin to take hydrocarbon’s place is LENR. So I beieve he is quite aware of its potential and its military development. It’s all about timing.

  • Siril

    My congrats to Cherokee. Nice perfomance

  • david55

    George Miley present LENR for the battlefield at military conference

    http://www.tacticalpowersourcessummit.com/Speakers.aspx

    http://www.tacticalpowersourcessummit.com/

  • artefact

    Mills tells:
    “The concept is that information should be freely available to all the
    world, an egalitarian principle. BlackLight will change the world,
    and Wiki’s misinformation campaign has seriously impeded our
    progress. Wiki has become controlled, control is power, and power
    corrupts; Wiki’s controllers are traitors to egalitarian principles.
    It is time for new management.”

    • Fortyniner

      It’s difficult to see how IP developed using investor money could ever be ‘freely available to all the
      world’, but his comments about wikipedia are certainly justified. As he says, the activities of the people who control wikipedia need exposing to the light, but just changing the management will not be sufficient to make it a clean source of information.

      • friendlyprogrammer

        If a corporation spent a Trillion dollars looking for a power source and then discovered rubbing 2 “AA” batteries together created a safe mini wormhole where electricity freely flowed out at rates enough to power a house they would have a hard time copyrighting it because of its simplicity. (My Science Fiction example)

        The BLP device (proposed) and the Rossi ecat both seem to be very simple in design. The ecat is basically a lead box with the right stuff inside. What is to stop billions of people from building these themselves once everyone knows how they work.

        If Rossi revealed his catalyst how many of you would already be working on one?

        The point is… Maybe a company just has to be happy everyone working there will have schools named after them.

        • Omega Z

          This is stated many times. People will build their own.
          If this should happen, it would only be for the novelty of it. Individuals will not build them to sell for multiple reasons.
          Ignoring the obvious liabilities, If someone built you 1, it would cost more then just buying one of which has guarantees. And then it would have to be installed in a useful manor. All requires someone in multiple skilled trades. This person or persons are going to want paid.

          The simplest use of this technology would be heating & that is more complex then many seem to think.
          Beyond that, There is presently no use for it. No products that would readily adapt to it. All will require redesign & engineering to be of any reasonable use.

          Rossi & IH are not concerned with individuals other then their safety. It’s Theft by Corporate Entities that concern them.

      • Omega Z

        IP & Free Flow of Knowledge
        This only appears to be a conflict in terms.
        IP information becomes freely available once it is protected by Patent. Caveat-Unless classified for security concerns.

        You can freely use it(Likely citations/credits required) for your own research & information purposes.

        However, if you use it in a manor of products or financial gains, Fees must be paid unless permission to do otherwise by the holder of the rights.

        Conflict In Terms Resolved.
        Might I Suggest that “What Mills & Others actually refer to is information behind Pay Walls.” Not freely available…

      • jousterusa

        I think it is not an issue of who controls Wikipedia, but who controls a specific Wiki. Some of those people are both .pedantic and fatuous fools who have their own set of standards that violate all laws of reason. Those folks seize control of the various fora and work their will regardless of any objective truth

        • psi2u2

          Unfortunately the problem seems to be endemic to many topics.

    • Andreas Moraitis

      I took a quick look at the English Wikipedia article on Blacklight Power and I didn’t find any statement of the authors that appears to be clearly defamatory. It’s true that they use a lot of citations from hard-line critics such as Robert Park, but they also consider Anthony Marchese, Edmund Storms, K.V. Ramanujachary, and W. Henry Weinberg. One can not deny, however, that the relation between negative and positive citations looks quite unbalanced. But I don’t think that BLP would have a chance if they took legal action against Wikipedia.
      The best thing they could do is to present a reactor that is ready for the market, instead of making forward looking statements.

      • psi2u2

        Saying that the article is not defamatory is setting a pretty low bar. Robert Parks is one of the guys mostly responsible for delaying the development of Cold Fusion for more than twenty years.

        • Andreas Moraitis

          I’ve been talking about the statements of the authors. They use undoubtedly citations that could be called defamatory. But these citations are statements of external persons, not statements of the authors. Please read more carefully.

          • psi2u2

            Please stop looking for a fight where none is intended or necessary.

            • Andreas Moraitis

              No problem.

              • psi2u2

                : )

    • stefan

      The wikipedia article is missinformation and of very low quality, the links it points to is more or less crao and the overall impression of Mills work is that it is of no value.

      There are two main critic sources that I found and read,

      1. A paper by Ratke, that as well have been rebuted by Mills, and is really a joke in quality.
      2. Hydrinos, finding these solutions indicates is taken that Mill’s work is fringe.

      The problem for these criticques is that Mills formulas outperform QM in theoretically modelling the energy levels
      in atoms and if one reads the paper carefully one realizes that Mills does use correct math and that the result is
      impressive. That folks is why he can gather so much capital, Mills has a better model of the atom then QM or at equal
      power with QED (but using QED to do many body problems is just not practical) They now assume that because
      he have such a good model of known physics, he must predict the hydrinos correctly.

      So as you see, ignorant people of Mills theory think that hydrinos are weird, they have not been replicated etc.

      Now what is true? I have not read the theory careful enough, but I do have a scenario for you to chew on.

      Mills uses a boundary condition that are quite exotic, let’s call it Condition-A. He then applies the theory according to
      that a stable solution is found if and only if Condition-A is met. What if all stable solutions satisfy Condition-A but not
      all solutions satisfying Condition-A is stable. It means that sometimes his method is correct and sometimes it is wrong
      and this can explain the whole situation.

      The main problem with hydrinos I have is that I would expect the electron to have relativistic speeds, e.g. should be
      closer to the nucleus than the first hydrino states below the traditional ground state. It can very well be that the first one are not stable, but the higher one is. Mills could have chasen a goast for a very long time, and just reasently started chasing for the lower states, and perhaps started to see some effect, Who knows. Hydrinos? CF?

      Cheers!

      • Andreas Moraitis

        If I understood Mills correctly, he uses made-to-measure catalysts who absorb preferably just the amount of energy that equals to the energy difference between two stable hydrino states. Therefore, it seems logical that only these states are observed. If there were additional states, I guess you would need different catalysts to generate them. But that’s pure speculation.

        • stefan

          Yes these state does not transform between each other via fotons, a catalyst is needed. It’s just
          that the notion that these lower states can sit there without being realized for such a long period
          of time just screams for a really rigid proof. I could not judge the rigidity from Mills book, just that
          the predictions are good when we know that we have a stable state. Also I am surprised especially
          of the first hydrino state, my feeling is that QM is not that out of truth to miss that state.

  • Daniel Maris

    I’ve read the verifications which certainly deserve some respect. The problem I have is that Mr Mills claims to have cracked over-unity energy production a long time ago. There ought to be a proper working device by now.

    • friendlyprogrammer

      Even 5 years ago they were saying at least 5 years. Since even then they have brought cost from 1-2 cents per kWh to .9 cents per kWh. They are also now using water vapor.

  • david55

    Randell Mills respond to Jones Beene bs.

    #Reading on some other sites I read that all the attendees at today’s demonstration
    #at BLP were required to sign non-disclosure agreements. Even including
    #not disclosing that they attended in the first place. Is that true?

    Randell Mills

    No that is a lie. We were absolutely open with unrestricted full
    disclosure of all materials and methods using commercial
    instrumentation. In fact, we intend to make the entire videotaped
    demonstration open to the public.”

    • artefact

      That sounds good.

      • Daniel Maris

        Anyone would think we were living in the 1960s. How long does it take to upload video to a website these days? Sixty seconds?

        • artefact

          I guess they (someone) will have to watch the whole video again to see if it is ok to publish and maybe do some cuttings. Then they will have to sleep (probably after a little after demo party yesterday night)

        • mcloki

          Raw yes. But if they want to do a bit any editing. that would take a day. Then approvals, and then posting. And judging from the other videos they put up. they aren’t getting any professional help.

        • friendlyprogrammer

          From the crybaby who whined all day because it was not a live broadcast. Next time RSVP and get an invite.

    • jousterusa

      Randy, can you point us to any coverage of the press conference/demo that we can read? Or, can you provide a list of the principal mainstream publications and wire services that may have attended, so we can search for their coverage on our own? Also, how long do you think it will take you to develop a magnetohydrodynamic converter for these devices, and will you promptly demonstrate conversion when that’s finished? I think the President’s comment last night about awaiting the “next great American discovery” was a reference to yours!

  • Ryan

    Gonna have to disagree with you vehemently. Like with Rossi public knowledge of BLP is very, very limited. Showing off something that is basically meant only to perhaps convince power players that the technology has promise would only get lots and lots of know nothing commenters that have absolutely no inside knowledge of what is going on declaring that it was bunk or a fraud or whatever to make themselves appear as if they actually knew something about it. Right now, people like us aren’t really in the loop. Now, if he can make a generator of some sort that shows off the effect and can produce power then that would be something he could show off with tangible effects. It would still be torn apart by those claiming they knew what was actually going on, again with no real inside knowledge on the topic, but with a generator that works he could shut them up with time (it took years to convince Kelvin about powered flight). Perhaps, if it is as easy as he says it is to produce an MHD then in a couple months we might actually see something on the scale he’s spoken about. You, and others, making declarations about this is moot. You have no inside knowledge to make any of your claims only baseless assertions and unfocused anger that you didn’t get what you wanted out of a demonstration that almost certainly wasn’t intended for the general public.

  • Morse
    • Fortyniner

      Quite a fair article by Mr Anthony – you can almost feel him preparing for the inevitable deluge of brickbats from the maryyugos, although Alainco and Bachcole seem to have got there first! I think he probably got much of his info from this blog.

  • Stanny Demesmaker

    His validation papers only reports miliwats with a COP of 2, and suddenly he can make an improvemant by a BILLION with a cop of 100!!! I never heard such insane claim in my life!!!

    He just has a LENR reaction like many in the field but can’t scale it up. Now because he created a theory that can chemically explain that LENR reaction, he can convince people that he found something groundbreaking.

    If he really had something, do you think that he had to advertise his groundbreaking discovery ?

    • Chris the 2nd

      On proof of concept i.e producing milliwatts, he may have had his “Chicago Pile” moment which lead to rapid and relatively easy development of megawatt reactor.

      Personally, I won’t be convinced by Randell Mills until i see it powering something though.

  • Gerard McEk

    This blog is too voluminous for me to consume. As far as I can see nobody knows more than two days ago about BLP. I hope that something relevant regarding BLP will arise in a new article.

  • Omega Z

    A Different Perspective.
    Mills didn’t Target US. We brought BLP to ourselves & raised our own expectations. I Imagine BLP’s Demo was aimed at Academics, possible investment groups & Business Partners. Not the Blogs.

    Like Rossi, Randell Mills has had his own experience with Blogs.
    His Own Version of “SHUTDOWN ???.” Not a nice experience.

    It would have been nice to of had a streaming Video, But, Fact is, it would have caused controversy anyway. Hidden wires Etc..So why bother. And contrary to what many may think, Live streaming isn’t cheap.

    It costs, For equipment & manpower Extra Planning, And a potential Investor may question your money managing skills on what they may consider wasteful unnecessary Excess. An Intrusion on their time. And these people are the ones Mill’s needs to satisfy. Not US. He can live without us. He needs them.

    • Fortyniner

      A few of us tried to say that, but I suppose that the vision of megawatts of power from a small box was just too alluring!

      I think that what we can take away from the fiasco here is that Mills can probably demonstrate an excess of power from a single water-fuelled explosion, and has a theory that might explain the energy release, but at this time not much more. This seems to be a reasonable assumption given the ongoing support from investors and his military associations. The PR hype was aimed at getting new investors, and he has no interest in keeping outsiders informed, as might be expected.

      IMHO the proposed complex machine using a hygroscopic salt to capture water vapour, which is led to interdigitating electrodes where controlled release of energy takes place, and then to an MHD generator is all technical fantasy. No such complex device could survive the energy release for more than seconds.

      I think it is much more likely that Mills will have to build a reactor resembling a muzzle-loading cannon that can withstand the pressures and tempertures concerned, and the energy source will simply be pure water, injected into the blind end of the ‘cannon’ and immediately converted to plasma by a massive spark discharge – the cycle repeating as quickly as new sparks can be generated. Energy capture will probably initially be by simple mechanical means, until something more sophisticated (MHD generator) can be developed. At a guess, even a crude device like this may be a year or more away.

      Incidentally, Mills’ technology bears an uncanny resemblance to some of the ‘water car’ claims, in particular one of the devices developed by Stanley Meyer, whose engine conversion involved water being injected through a modified spark plug, and a high power DC electrical discharge system (his ‘other’ system was based on claims of a low-energy means of splitting water with electricity). Meyer was murdered for his efforts – perhaps times have changed (or more likely, military/corporate involvement is the key to a longer life in these areas).

      http://www.aquapulser.com/performance_ignition/research.html

      http://www.icestuff.com/~energy21/stanleymeyer.htm

      • Omega Z

        Maybe they decided it’s time for this technology to be released & they Provided Mills with Meyer’s technology to bring to market.

        I know for many (10′s) of years that this phenomena has been reported by people involved in under water welding. It’s never been well received from the MS Science.

        Anyway, I hope this all comes to fruitation soon.
        By My Calculations of Everyone who’s been following this technology over the years,
        We have invested 372,487,925 man hours into this. :)

        • Fortyniner

          I sometimes feel that I’ve probably spent at least that much time wittering away here, when I should be working.

    • Allan Shura

      He also says he has a product that can be assembled to work in weeks and major utility contracts. The proof then is
      a real product in the market so the controversy would not last for long. Toyota demonstrates their production prototype of
      their hydrogen fuel cell car for the 2015 model year at the Consumer Electronics Show so there is not much reason
      for doubt and the exposure is great. My expectations were deflated when I guessed the demonstration was a plasma
      flash and most of us have known for some time ionized plasma contains a lot of supersonic energy but have not seen it
      in an economical working energy device available on the market.

  • artefact
  • Argon

    Of course we can blame people about wild speculation and disinformation even misbehaviour, but I think BLP left much room for that. This is what happens in such PR catastrophe when you first make waves and then don’t give any information. people gets excited, even opens thread for discussion, and you don’t give anything to discuss about but speculations and opinions not based on facts. If BLP has viable technology in hands they will come out sooner or later, because I see race heating (Rossi, Brillouin, BLP and whatnot). Quite often the first one who can credibly show something, gets big players and politics interested and first comer gets competitive edge.

    I have followed Rossis buzz since 15 Jan 2011 until last summer almost daily, but when so called 3rd party test was so flawed from fraud detection point of view, I decided to wait, patiently until real independent proof comes out. And it will if LENR is real and IH wants it to markets. Same goes with BLP. Even video stream and slides would have been interesting, it would have not _proven anything_ since according released pictures, demo setup was so messy that you could hide whatever energy sources there and get lots of theatrical plasma sparks from normal welding machine.
    Claiming somethin true or false without facts on table is strongly based on emotions and intuition so one can be also wrong (almost) as many cases that you can be right, that’s why I’d rather wait and see the real thing. Of course speculating about theory or possible applications is different thing and fruitful and is something we should merely concentrate on.

    Same goes with some Dave claiming that he was there, if you want to believe him it is based on believe not hard facts, or you could question if he really was on site. Probably it would make more easy to believe him if he could share some pics or real information which would later confirmed in BLP releases. I think he already said there was no NDA bullshit.

    Let’s hope even some of these new technologies are real and gets into peoples homes, without corporations stealing them.

    • Sanjeev

      I can see the chaos below and I don’t understand what people were expecting. From the start it was clear that the party was not for everyone, by invitation only. Dr. Mills clearly wrote that there will be a youtube video and if possible a webcast, which can take a day or two. The presentations slides are already out, so we know what was presented. There was no demo planned to show 10MW, it was only a claim (future projection, if you will). The only thing that was to be shown was a calorimeter, which I don’t think will excite anyone.
      So lets hold our horses and wait for things to come out of the fog.

    • Omega Z

      Industrial Heat Just Now went public with this.
      But, They have been involved with hands on work of Rossi’s tech since at Least April 2013. All of it including the secret catalyst. They’ve brought in their own people & Experts to research this including an outside expert for confirmation. I don’t believe they would have went public if they didn’t have very high confidence in this, They would just have faded away.

  • georgehants

    In my humble opinion, the worst page of comments that have ever been on this site.
    Starting of course after my discussion regarding Global Warming that was still conducted in a fairly good manner.
    Global Warming is taxpayer funded and involves half the scientific establishment, as a taxpayer I consider I have the right to ask for, receive and question any Evidence put forward as proof of that subject.
    Regarding BLP, it is a private company answerable to only it’s financiers and shareholders, how they conduct their business is only their affair, as long as no criminal or fraudulent activities are proven and we as pure onlookers must just wait for any developments as with Mr. Rossi et al.
    One commenter, I think I can safely say, has been acting like a spoiled child, who for some reason believes he has a special right to information that is entirely up to BLP if they wish to divulge publicly.
    Nobody can be judged until all the Evidence is clearly in.

    • georgehants

      Admin will note the negative responses to my perfectly fair and accurate comment.
      It would seem that ECW is under attack from (possibly) members of ECN.
      That would be a shame for all the good moderate posters on this site and could lead to the same unpleasant mess as on that other place.

      • GreenWin

        George, good morning. Agree with your view of comments on this topic. Dr. Mills appears to have flummoxed a small cadre of skeptics who kept Admin busy moderating. One would think unbiased posters would consider the comments of eyewitness Steve M, Commentor, Investor, and earlier Dr McKubre – who reminds us that a Win for One is a Win for All.

    • Bertuswonkel

      I do want to thank you for your skepticism on Climate Change, it forced me to reevaluate the evidence.
      Now i don’t want to start this discussion all over again, just want to point out some interesting results.
      This site covers many of your points: http://www.skepticalscience.com/

      Furthermore, I have looked at some papers to see how the temperature data is constructed.
      As it turns out they use exactly what you demanded, a collection of all the records of all monitoring stations in the World.
      Problem is the data from stations is not very robust before 1900 since there were not that many back then.
      It is therefore hard to construct a global average based on that. Additional data is collected from other sources e.g. tree rings and coral samples to make the data more robust. This will be my last and final post on this topic on this site, that is a promise Frank! Sorry for polluting this section.

      • georgehants

        Bertuswonkel, Thanks, I bet we could go on discussing for a long time, Ha.
        Best wishes.

    • Bernie Koppenhofer

      What do you think about the President saying “Get over it climate change is real”

      • georgehants

        Bernie, I don’t care who is talking, be it the president, chief scientist, the pope etc. I think for myself, as should everybody.
        Only the Truth counts and when people believe what others say, without checking the Evidence themselves from source, then that is how we end up with so many problems.
        For example, UFO’s either exist in the mind or in a reality and everybody who denies that is fooling themselves.
        Those who follow blindly do themselves an injustice.

  • Omega Z

    Great, This picture is upright…

    The others I viewed were upside down.

  • GreenWin

    This certainly puts Jones Beene in the “Disregard the FUD” category. Beene’s word on anything going forward means… Bo Diddly was a great guitarist.

  • GreenWin

    What a difference it is to have an on-site report coming. Thank you Steve. And thank you Frank for following the evidence.

  • Buck

    Steve, I am one who recognizes that when a LENR device hits the market, we all win. I look forward to your sharing your impressions, your take-aways of BPL efforts to come to market, to the degree you can.

  • Christopher Calder

    Well, I want a car that gets “3000 miles per liter of water”. I have no opinion as to whether the claims are true or not. I have a hard time understanding how the solid fuel in his proposed 10 megawatt generator would not either explode or gradually erode away. At the very least there should be cavitation problems.

  • Omega Z

    Some Harsh in some of the postings So I Thought I would point out some things.

    Dr. Andrea Rossi- Workshop Inventor/entrepreneur

    Dr. Randell Mills- Academia

    You can’t Compare the 2, They work from 2 different prospectives. Mills is an Academic directing his efforts to the Academic audience. Crossing T’s, Dotting the I’s & Looking for Validation from them.

    Rossi’s path is to build something that works & let the market do most of the Validation. He will leave it to the Academics to catch up & do the deep investigation of the overall technology.

    Note #1:
    Academics say it “MAY” be possible to Grow or 3-D Print your steak or human Organs in about 20 years.
    Put a Rossi type character to work into the Frey & that would be 10 years.

    Note #2:
    Randell Mills on occasion has mentioned the possibility of Leasing his device to the Consumer for Homes or Transportation purposes.

    I Respect Randell Mills, But this is a Big Negative in my view.

  • ecatworld

    Ok, folks, we’ve had Steve menton come forward to report that he was there, and he says he may post more in time. The purpose of this thread is to find out what went on there, and I hope that Steve will feel comfortable sharing without feeling reluctant to come forward because of ridicule or out-of-hand dismissal. I’m interested in getting an accurate picture of what BLP are doing. I would think we all are.