Blacklight Power Explosively Detonating H2O (Video)

This post (edited) was submitted by JD Sweeney.

The following video takes a bit of explanation to understand why it’s significant.

What’s shown, according to Blacklight Power’s CEO Randell Mills, is the SF-CIHT fuel going through the detonation process for a *second* time, after undergoing nothing but re-hydration. Thus, Mills is showing that the active element in his energetic process is water. We are left with the impression that Mills has found a way to explosively detonate H2O.

Haters still gotta hate, but if Rossi’s camp is providing blow-by-blow video coverage of their development process I must have missed it.

BLP’s description of the video from YouTube is as follows:

A very small quantity of highly conductive H2O-based solid fuel powder was loaded in to a hopper and gravity fed into the auger overhead of the rollers that were electrified with about 5V, 15,000A. The high current flow ignited the gravity fed fuel to produce 0.5 ms pulses of brilliant light having power and power densities of one million watts and 100 billion watts per liter, respectively. White light shows that the plasma is the same temperature as the Sun. The optical power can be converted to electricity using commercially available solar cells. See other posted electricity producing demonstration videos.

  • Hope4dbest

    The “highly conductive H2O-based solid fuel powder”, could that be freeze-dried H2O?

  • Stefan Israelsson Tampe

    It is wise to wait for better confirmation of the reality of Mills work with hydrinos, don’t put to much effort on it. My problem with hydrinos are that by know we should have clear evidences they exist and the cheer fact that it is taking so long is a warning signal. It is also strange that Mills claims that cold fusion is nonphysical, an indication that he might wrong is the following argument. My take on cold fusion is this. Hydrinos is a mathematical solution you typically find in equations containing the wave operator such as Mill’s theory and QED. QED is a very accurate description of the hydrogen and we see clear problems with those hydrino solutions like having an infinite probability weight. On the other hand if you disturb systems in a n-particle interaction it is not unlikely that these states becomes real, at least temporarily and the electron get’s really close to the proton and forms something that behaves very much like a neutron, also there is quite a lot of energy let lose and this combined may force the nuclei to tunnel each other and fuse in a fusion reaction. This is a hypothesis. Can we throw it down from the pedestal?

    But we have not seen it before in experiments

    – Well it is only under rare conditions it can happen, it may be under the radar most of the time

    But we have not found any theoretical evidences?

    – Mills is ignored, and normal physics needs QED, and it is unclear if QED is working in a n body setup according to Mills, who’s theory is also incomplete e.g. it’s a sort of steady state mathematics.

    – QED is bloody difficult to simulate and is typically never used. Shrödinger is a joke when you need relativistic quantum mechanics and is a good tool when you have allready tune it and are in areas where you know that your approximations are ok.

    All physicists tell me that this can’t work,

    – When it comes to knowledge that changes the fundamentals of science you will be by your own and work against the mass, it ha always been like that. Just make sure that researchers have an option to follow their hunch and you will find gold for your society. The current state is awful with a majority vote mechanism. A young Keppler of today would fail misserably and his ideas would be buried for a very long time or kept alive within secret sects on the intertube, laughed at by people in general and in those in charge of the tools of science. Mills is correct in a good part of his theory, it produces very accurate, more accurate than normal physics can accomplish, with well described mathematics using laughingly few assumptions. It mostly works, it is correct mathematics, it is better than what we can produce by QM, but his theory has not gotten into mainstream in >20 years, thats more years then it took Kepler to get his ideas out into the mainstream researches, that speaks tons about how awful the science works today, there is no freedom, just a tv show that broadcast that it is so.

    A popular view is that all cold fusion ideas are flawed and demands mysterical concentrations of energy.

    – The proposed mechansim is an intelligent speculation, but does not have this flaw.

  • BroKeeper

    This demonstration resurfaces memories of my childhood when I had a full blown Hopalong Cassidy Cowboy Outfit with roll cap guns. I could continuously shoot a string of caps
    with random duds. I later discovered I could get a bigger bang for the buck if I slammed a rock on a whole roll. What if Mills did the same? Would he get a bigger bang? Just turn up the water and amperage. BANG!! 🙂

  • optiongeek

    Some commenters have asked for quantitative performance data. Dr. Mills has promised that a detailed paper is in the works. However, he recently commented that the ignition energy for the powdered fuel is about 500J, or about 1% of the reaction output, or COP ~= 100. He contrasted this with the ignition requirements of the fuel pans (i.e. non-powdered fuel) from earlier demos. These required destructive melting of the pan to obtain ignition and were therefore much less efficient – about 50% of the output. It seems the focus of the engineering is on reclamation and regeneration of the powdered fuel after ignition. This mostly involves “scraping” the powder off the wall of the reaction chamber, augering it to a steam vaporization chamber for rehydration, and feeding the recharged fuel back into the gears for another reaction.

  • Andreas Moraitis

    Water is split by the applied electricity and/or the high temperatures into hydrogen and oxygen. Outside the electric arc, hydrogen and oxygen recombine explosively to water. That would be a simple explanation.

    • Andreas Moraitis

      This reminds me of an experiment that I made when I was a kid. I took two wires which were connected to the mains (Dear kids, do NOT imitate that – it’s very dangerous!) and touched with them the surface of an aqueous solution. As I had expected, electrolysis started, and since I used an AC source, at each electrode both hydrogen and oxygen were produced. The gas mixtures ignited immediately, so that I got impressive sparks on the tops of both electrodes. (My parents did not know what I was doing. Unfortunately, this pleasant situation changed when I – in the course of another experiment – had burnt a big hole into my sofa…)

  • Dan Woodward

    So where is the electricity?

    • optiongeek

      See for additional videos showing the photovoltaic conversion process. Also, Mills recently announced on a discussion board that multiple engineering projects are underway with several 3rd party firms to deliver prototype units at various output levels.

  • Fortyniner

    current flow heats hydroxide, hydroxide decomposes releasing steam, more current flows through conductive steam, steam turns to plasma, even more current flows through an arc – lots of light. Probably some of the ‘carrier’ is also consumed in the plasma arc. None of this would happen with a ‘dry’ (non decomposing) substrate.

    • optiongeek

      Perhaps – and I thank you for your always thoughtful responses. However, would “conductive steam” really provide a more conductive path than the powdered metal (Cu & CuO, or whatever metal he is using) in the fuel? Not sure how steam, regardless of how hot it got, could carry charge with less resistance than powdered metal already in contact with both electrodes. But I grant you it is a consideration.

      • Fortyniner

        Obviously a lot of guesswork involved, but from the info available the ‘fuel’ is a hydroxide (a number of metal oxides form the hydroxide on exposure to water or steam). Powdered metal hydroxide (most probably zinc hydroxide in this case, for reasons mentioned elsewhere) would conduct power enough to heat up and partially decompose almost instantly. The steam and water vapour released would greatly increase the conductivity of the mixture, possibly enough to initiate an arc which would cascade the process.

        • optiongeek

          Have you seen any of the multiple independent studies verifying overunity for the process? Folks with some impressive credentials have looked at that as well as the ‘smoking gun’ EUV emissions that could only come from hydrino transitions. There’s quite a bit of material available.

          • Fortyniner

            No, I haven’t seen these independent studies, only Mills’ papers relating to EUV emissions from pinch discharges in H2 and a couple of validation studies on anomalous chemical reactions that Mills believes support his hydrino theory.

            Do you have any links handy, please?

  • Fortyniner

    Most probably a metal oxide that converts to the hydroxide on contact with water but rapidly decomposes and releases the water when heated. There are many light metal candidates to choose from, but I seem to recall that on some occasion Mills specified a transition metal, so zinc is probably favourite (right chemistry, relatively non-toxic, inexpensive, white light emission spectrum).

  • Ophelia Rump

    No but there is a direct correlation to the presence of whiskey for mine!

  • Julian Becker

    Not sure if it has been mentioned, but Tom Darden also visited this gentlemen Mr Rui.

    He is the Chairman of the China Electronics Corporation a state-owned conglomerate under direct leadership of the central government and China’s biggest IT company.

    Direct link to the party and the central government. Seems pretty important person to talk to if you want to do big things in China….

    • Julian Becker

      I realized the article is a bit old….Jan 2012…

      But how about this one. One of the people mentioned in the Icebank article is Dr. Zhao Gang. Could it be him?

      • Omega Z

        Can’t tell what year, just January, However Google translate seems to indicate something to do with electronic transfer funds. So this may be about the difficulties in transfer money internationally.

        Note if it is 2012, The would be pre Rossi/E-cat/IH

  • Private Citizen

    ECN-level rampant skepticism about Mills is fine, but equal skepticism about Rossi gets folks banned around here. Just pointing that out.

    Of course, when faced with a contradiction, introduce a distinction. Someone will find one 🙂

    • Andreas Moraitis

      I think that the criticism here concerns the presentation of the videos, not Randell Mills as a scientist or as a person. For my part, I find Mills’ theory intriguing. I would really be pleased if it would turn out to be true. But BLP should provide at least some data when they release these clips. For instance, statements about the brightness of the sparks could be backed by measurements of the spectrum, and so on. You can hardly evaluate the relevant parameters on the basis of a video clip, if you know what I mean.

    • bachcole

      I pounded “Rossi says” as hot air for months in this forum. Mills gets pounded by me because he called us a cult but his demos would embarrass a middle school teacher. I don’t pound Rossi because he made his case with Levi et. al. 2013. I will stop pounding Mills when his demos stop being a joke. The bias around here is based upon evidence and the arrogance of the people making claims.

      • kdk

        The thing is, Mill’s work is probably more related to alien tech than Rossi’s. It may indeed be ‘better’, but somehow I doubt it would have come out more quickly w/o Rossi to pressure them forward… so, Rossi ftw. If you want my other guess, it’s that there is, or was, tension between the U.S. Navy and Air Force over the alien issue. That guy who claimed to be inspired by aliens, Tesla, might have something to do with Mill’s work too. IMO, Mill’s work is no joke, and may already be in use in other forms.

  • Andreas Moraitis

    I did not talk about Mills’ experimental studies, friendlyprogrammer. Maybe they support his theory to a certain extent. The problem is that these video clips are so meaningless. BLP would be better advised to go without them, IMO.

  • GreenWin

    Is it a metaphor?

  • Omega Z

    “ionic wind flying cars”
    Only I would appreciate it if unhackable computer controlled.
    People have trouble enough observing 360 horizontal transportation. Let alone 360×360. Shoot, They can’t even walk & text without stumbling into water fountains. 🙂

    I Agree this may just be another form of LENR.

  • jonnyb

    15,000 amps at 5V equals a big bright spark anyway without anything else happening. If it was as bright as they are saying would it not burn out the camera? I hope they have what they say but I am not convinced.

    • Omega Z

      I agree, the video does not impress. A brain exercise.

      I blow up a large building with a truckload of Dynamite. Interesting.
      I blow up a large building with something the size of a grain of Rice. Now Your Impressed.

      We have no way to compare what we are seeing. Is this the grain of Rice or a truckload on Dynamite.

    • Freethinker

      Being a bit of a fence-sitter on this my self, I too am not very impressed by the video.

      And I don’t like their analogy to describe the plasma. Statements like “like the Sun”, what does it mean really, is it the photosphere, like we perceive it with our eyes, or is he meaning something else? The Sun has an efficient temperature of about 5,800 K, and is Yellow in color. White stars (eg A1 main sequence stars like Sirius A) have and effective temperature of about 10,000 K. Also. So how hot is the plasma really?

      Yes, yes. I know. I am splitting hairs on what is just a matter words aimed at giving a general description.

      Play the video frame by frame and it may look a bit more impressive, though.

  • Omega Z

    Mills Originally worked with a device ‘Much” like the H-Cat, Except prettier. 🙂 Always it was a matter of more research to scale up the output. If I Recall, It had a high COP. But Ultimately, His progress was miniscule. Possibly he should have bought some Spice from Rossi?

    Now he comes up with this device.
    I will withhold my judgement on this for the time being. There is not enough information to really make a judgement either way.

    That Said- As someone posted, It appears he has found a way to explode water. I agree it appears a micro drop of water arcs between electrodes. However he uses a catalyst. Molybdenum I think?? After ignited can be reused.(Re-hydrated)

    Roll the Video. Hmmm, Tells me nothing. I can make a similar demo in the shop. If ever a Device needed Independent 3rd party measurement results. This is it. If this should happen, then I’ll begin to judge whether it’s Real or Not. Reliable data measurements mean everything.

    If this technology is real,
    It appears to be problematic engineering wise. A continuous precisely timed feed would be challenging tho Not Impossible.
    Energy harvesting with PV may also be a problem. Tho if the COP is high enough, Even low efficiency PV’s would work.
    So, I will wait for Independent Verification as to the Data. If Mills wants my Support, He needs to enable duplication just as Rossi is doing. I Don’t care if it’s black box. Just Independently done. I don’t even care if there acquaintances as long as there reputable people who have name/credentials at risk.

    To My Fellow ECW’ers. If you don’t believe in Mills Device, That’s fine. But Be Careful how you present your views. Else you may start sounding like those who oppose Rossi. Try & be reasonably fair with your posts.

    NOTE: I’ve read elsewhere that Molybdenum may also be a candidate catalyst for LENR. My primary reason for staying neutral at this time.

  • Andreas Moraitis

    I have no doubt that Mills is a brilliant thinker. But his talent as a scientist and these demo videos do absolutely not fit together. It’s an enigma to me. The demos are at best to evaluate “sine laude”, so far. Sorry.

  • BroKeeper

    he has proved yet again is experimental inventor/engineers trump physicists/theorists
    in converting concept into firm products.

  • Ophelia Rump

    “highly conductive H2O-based solid fuel powder”

    Is it cheaper than gunpowder to produce?

  • Curbina

    I’d be much more impressed by a clearly done report with the measured inputs, outputs, the methodology of measurements, the details on the equipment used, etc, that would clearly show to me the excess energy. Videos don’t provide any kind of proof, but data does.

  • jousterusa

    While I see the source of light to power an electric current via photovoltaic cells, where’s the output? What’s it doing? Notwithstanding the fact that no one wants 1 billion watts under their hood, we need to see an engine that runs via this process. I’m sure Mills is capable of creating one, and it’s a mystery to me that he hasn’t done so yet – or hasn’t told us he’s done so.

  • Otto1923

    You are describing what I see flying off a tool grinder.

  • Foks0904 .

    I’m in a constant state of confusion over BLP. I want to believe, but they make it difficult. I know there is fair evidence of them being screwed over during a patent application sometime back…but I can’t chalk up their seeming lack of progress to suppression or some such thing. Is it possible that they are distributing their products privately to customers who don’t want to be publicized and are not in the business of selling consumer goods? Shrug.

  • Christopher Calder

    His original idea of turning plasma into electricity was at least credible. To me the idea of using solar cells to produce large quantities of electricity is not credible. Solar cells are not designed to produce that kind of high density electricity. They are an ultra low energy density devices because solar energy is so weak and diffuse. If the mini explosions really produced that much light and energy, the machine would melt and the video camera would be blinded, as would the close-up audience. I just do not see much energy there. In the system he describes I doubt you would even break even between energy input and energy output.

    • Rob Lewis

      Well, there is a thing called Concentrated Photovoltaic, in which lenses are used to focus the sunlight on small, high-efficiency solar cells. The hardware costs more than flat-panel PV, but if you can keep them from melting the output can be impressive.

      • Fortyniner

        If Mills’ claims for his system are even partly true, he would need a ‘Diluted Photovoltaic’, in which lenses or Fresnel optics are used to spread the concentrated light onto large, high-efficiency solar cells placed a little distance away.

        Regarding his demo, as someone who uses an electric arc welder quite a lot on various car and boat projects, I remain to be convinced. Anyone who has welded wet steel will be familiar with the brilliant arcs that small amounts of water can cause, as it flashes to plasma and the arc momentarily draws massive current.

  • Gerard McEk

    One million watt during 0.5 ms is 500 J per flash, which is not spectacular. A rechargeable AA battery I use has a energy contents of 13230 joules. I wonder how Mills determines the produced energy of his ‘water fuel’. It looks like a spot welder and not more powerful than that. The sparks seem burning iron. Not impressive nor convincing at all, unless you are a non-technical investor.

    • Omega Z

      It is a seam welder.

  • bachcole

    It does not impress me in the slightest. I get no indication that anything important is happening.

    • mcloki

      Exactly. Ewww Sparks. Big deal.

    • Ophelia Rump

      I thought it was very impressive, I bet kids would love that mounted to their bicycle wheels.