Report From an Attendee of the Blacklight Power Demonstration

I’d like to thank Steve Menton for writing up the following report after attending yesterday’s demonstration at Blacklight Power. 

The post yesterday by “Investor”is 100% correct. You cannot draw conclusions about BLP from what you read on the Internet. Randy has developed an extremely comprehensive, elegant theory that is utilized to direct his laboratory efforts. After years of pointless arguments on the old hydrino study group, I have zero interest in engaging in any theory debates on the internet. However, in my view, those who don’t spend the time to review the extensive body of work that Mills has developed and put it in context, cannot meaningfully comment  upon the BLPs work.

I am a Blacklight investor and purchased my first shares in 1999 AFTER following Randy’s efforts for about two years and reading all of the derogatory comments from Peter Zimmerman, Steven Chu, Bob Park and a multitude of others. I did my own due diligence and concluded that none of them really understood what Randy was saying and they had not spent any time reviewing the experimental work. That is the common refrain with most of Mills’ critics. Believe me, I fully understand the controversy surrounding the theory. However, as Randy said multiple times yesterday, at the end of the day, experimental results trump theory. He has for a long time been accumulating results that cannot be explained by currently accepted QM. In fact, many of his results directly contravene what current theory says is possible. Under the circumstances, of course it is necessary to be cautious but the results speak for themselves.

You can stick your head in the sand and pretend the results are not possible or reliable, but there are an increasing number of replications by qualified and reputable organizations and this has been going on for a while.  The number of replications has been steadily increasing and many have been done independently and offsite. Some are readily available to those who expend even a minimal amount of effort. I have yet to hear of a negative result from a competent replicator who correctly followed the Blacklight protocols. Indeed, every person that I know who has been to the Blacklight lab and reviewed the results is convinced that the experiments are real, carefully and competently performed and the results are significant. Those who have been following Blacklights work for a while know that there has been steady, albeit at times  frustratingly slow, progress. You have to realize that there are no books or resources for Randy to turn to in pursuing his experiments other than his own theory and brain. While there have been some starts and stops along the way, the recently announced results are the accumulation of years of experimentation driven by theory.

So, about the demo. There were about 65 to 70 people present. There was no opportunity for a meet and greet. I did not know most of the attendees, but there were representatives from chemical and engineering firms present as well as OEMs and major investment banks. I am not sure of the extent of media present.  There were no TV cameras, but there was a video being taken. Many people were taking notes, but I don’t think there was a lot of mainstream media there. I think the presentation was geared more towards developing interest among potential licensees and partners rather than media. Media will come in time.
Randy stated that the SF-CIHT results have been validated by four outside groups, but only one spoke at the meeting. That validator was from Rowan University so I am sure that many of the critics will dismiss his comments out of hand. Whatever. I tend to believe people who actually view the experiments and study the results rather than simply post negative comments on the Internet. The validator unequivocally confirmed the reported results from the newly developed SF-CIHT cell and stated it was a “game changer”. I thought one interesting moment was when the validator was asked whether he believed in hydrinos. His answer was something to the effect that this wasn’t a matter of belief, but about experimental results and that he was confident in the results.

The demonstrations were instantaneous bursts with input and output measured by established commercial devices including waterbath calorimetry. Continuous operation was not demonstrated so skeptics will likely be dismissive of the results. Randy spent some time explaining plans for achieving continuous operation. While there are some engineering issues ahead, the energy outputs are so astounding that there should be multiple ways to make useful devices.
While I have seen some comments that BLP rushed this demo because of recent developments relating to Rossi, such commenters obviously don’t know Randy. Randy is going to do things on his time and nobody else’s. He is not concerned with Rossi and, from second hand reports I have heard, BLP does not view Rossi as competition because they do not think his experiments are professionally done and do not believe that he is accurately measuring energy input and output.
My overall impression is that this demo was put together because, after many years of slow but steady progress, Blacklight has made recent, dramatic improvements in the energy densities. I think Randy believes the results are unassailable and irrefutable. My sense is that yesterday was the first step in what will be an evolving, more visible presence for Blacklight as they continue to advance the technology.

  • mike

    Go to and order a home unit, it is only waiting safety certifications. Mills Will only distribute to licensed power distributors. Which pisses me off, but at least we’ll be on the road to pollutionless energy that obsoletes fossil fuels.

  • ecatworld

    Interesting, can you explain more?

  • disqus_SIB5Bk1RfN

    Most of the debunkers are caught in their misconception of what Free Energy actually is. Even among proponents their is a great misunderstanding of what we mean by “Free Energy”. Essentially, it is the extraction of excess energy where we get more energy out of a given process than we put in. It is not mysterious and is observed even in the burning of gasoline or coal. We do not need to put in all of the energy we get out, nature did that for us and thus we extract FREE ENERGY! The same analogy applies to a Nuclear Power Plant. We do need to first put the “mass” onto the fuel that is converted into usable energy and we extract more energy than we put in, even if all of the mining and refinement input energy is calculated no doubt. Heat pumps extract excess energy from the surrounding environment and so are not mysterious or inexplicable at all and they don’t polarise people into believers and non believers either. The problem as you can see is misconception of what free energy actually means. It does not mean energy invented out of nothing, that is absurd in the physical universe as we understand it. Another excellent example of FREE ENERGY is the slingshot effect experienced by Space Probes as they pass by a large planet such as Jupiter and Saturn. The probes get pulled in by the gravitation of the planet, are not captured, and are thus accelerated significantly. The energy comes from the gravitational field of the planet and is FREE. There is nothing mysterious about the theories or processes published by BLP and there is plenty of peer review and experimental validation that has been done. Appears very sound from I can discern also.

  • Danziger

    I wonder what else one needs to see to get start thinking about the absolute necessity to make major revisions to the already classic ” modern ” physics. As a condensed matter physicist, working for nanoelectronics firms, I saw plenty other effects hardly explainable within the framework of today’ s physics. Therefore, more curiosity and less hubris, please. No doubt, I would help to improve stand of our community !

    R. Mills is perfectly right. I studied his (bulky) books and can only recommend others to do the same.

  • The report seems to say ‘interesting study and apparent effects, now go and replicate under better controls’ exactly what you would expect from a scientist commenting on rudimentary scientific method – skeptical but full of encouragement to do some robust science that we can comment on. There are so many potential variables to control and yet Mills has made no effort to do so for the past decade. If he is not an inscrutable magician he needs to stop behaving like one.

  • tlp

    What’s New1/29/14Demonstration of the High Energy SF CIHT Technology Full length Presentation (uploading soon), (2 hours 15 minutes)

  • Alan DeAngelis

    Piantelli’s claims of seeing energetic partials emanating from his
    activated nickel rods when he places them into a cloud chamber proves a
    nuclear reaction is taking place in H-Ni systems.

  • C. Kirk

    Well Dr. Mills is a much better “Magician” at making money disappear than Dr. Rossi …..

  • Iggy Dalrymple

    Yes, as I understand it, the natural state of hydrogen is H2. HH wants to re-pair. When HH switches back to H2, there’s a large release of energy. That’s how Brown Gas torches are able to cut through thick steel.

    It’s been speculated that HH is a big part of Rossi’s process.

  • Andreas Moraitis

    Thank you for the information. Here are some questions from the “peanut gallery”:

    1. You speak about the possibility that your HHO gas can be combusted with a flame. Does it mean that you adjust the concentration of H2 in a way that explosions are impossible? (Under normal conditions, pVol[H2] should be 77%). Otherwise, I would be somewhat concerned.

    2. Did you consider that the higher temperatures you reach with the catalyst powder – in comparison to the ordinary combustion of the HHO gas – could just be a consequence of a higher reaction rate, or additional chemical reactions (I suppose the answer is Yes)?

  • Alan DeAngelis

    Yeah, maybe it could happen but it would still be a chemical reaction. I don’t think that could account for the energy that’s seen in LENR.

  • Buck

    Well, it’s clear to me that Mills has been reading Popular Science for both his news about Rossi as well as for a deeper understanding of physics. Hopefully, it will help him move his own project forward after 20 years and $80M.

  • Iggy Dalrymple

    If you watch the long 1hr 45 min video, he says that it’s raw HHO applied to a cold, un-electrified catalyst……unless I heard it wrong.

  • Iggy Dalrymple

    The 69 watts is what he claims it took to produce the HHO. There was no further input except to spray the HHO onto the catalyst. No further electric charge, no radio wave, no ultrasonic, no microwave, and no plasma.

    HHO is disassociated hydrogen + O, as opposed to H2O. The hydrogen atoms are not bonded.

  • SammyM

    When someone pointed out this very site and particularly this discussion to Randell Mills he was none too pleased. This is what he said about the E-cat and it’s followers:

    ‘Thanks for the notification. To me e-cat is a cult. What can you say
    to a group that believes in thousands of watts of an unknown nuclear
    reaction that has no trace of radiation, and believes in a reactor where
    no one outside knows the identity of what it is?’

    The link is:

    Reading his other posts there he is not in a good mood.

    • jousterusa

      So he doesn’t believe in Rossi and Rossi doesn’t believe in him. I think they’d both have more credibility if they both believed in each other. The doubts they cast tar both men.

      • friendlyprogrammer

        Rossi seems clueless about what causes his “effect”. Maybe he needs to look at Hydrinos.

    • Alan DeAngelis

      I’m in the E-cat cult. Could it be this?

      H(1)~Ni(n)~H(1) > Cu*~H(1) > Zn* > Ni(n-2) + He(4)

      Ni(64) + 2p > Ni(62) + He(4) 11.8 MeV (no MeV gamma rays)

      • Sanjeev

        Never heard of He being released in case of Ni-H LENR.

        • Alan DeAngelis

          I think they see helium formation in the Brillouin reactor. I think a fusion-fission reaction could explain the lack of MeV gamma rays.
          Or maybe: Ni + p > Co + He

    • Fortyniner

      What can you say to a man who claims millions of watts from an unknown chemical reaction and offers a miraculous reactor that only exists in his own mind?

  • Iggy Dalrymple

    Instant hot reaction when HHO contacts used auto catalytic converter.
    This amateur garage experimenter thinks this may involve LENR. He claims to get around 500° (probably Fahrenheit) interior temp with 69 watt input in producing the HHO via hydrolysis from electrolyte ( water + sodium/potassium hydroxide). Watch the 1st video 1st. If still interested, skip around on the 2nd to avoid falling asleep.

    Here’s his long discussion(1hr 45min) video:

  • Daniel Maris

    Where can we see BLP’s old steam-turbine generator then? Presumably if they had that all sorted they would be proudly displaying it in operation somewhere.