Report from Brilliant Light Power Industry Day Event (Tom Whipple) Update: Video and Slideshows Now Posted by BLP

UPDATE (Oct 29, 2016)

A video of the Brilliant Light Power SunCell reactor in action has been posted, along with slideshows and other documents from the recent Industry Day event. The video is below:

Slideshows and presentations from the Industry Day can be found at this link:

http://brilliantlightpower.com/demonstration-days/

The following post has been submitted by Tom Whipple.

I was up at BLP yesterday for their most recent demonstration and the unveiling of the new version of the SunCell. This time the event was slightly different in that it was called “Industry Day” and featured a range of speakers, not just Mills. BLP has formed outside advisory committees and is clearly planning to be ready to market SunCells by the end of 2017 or soon thereafter — if all goes well. Mills seems to have gotten by the electrode melting problem with a very elegant solution involving two charged streams of silver and now has prototypes running in his labs for long periods. They are shut off at night. As there are no moving parts, he sees no reliability problems. They have designed these things to run non-stop for 20 years.

Among the speakers were senior reps from the company that is making the photovoltaic dome to go around the black body radiator and from the group that will make the initial batch of prototypes that are to be sent out for testing in H2. The prototype company is also getting the required safety permits and approvals to market the SunCell. The company rep told me they have the capability to produce these by the thousands, but are too small to get into the millions as engineering, not manufacturing, is their business. The schedule calls for the first test of the SunCell with photo voltaic cells and electrical output in January. There will other iterations of additional cells later in the winter that will move the output higher as they add more sophisticated PV cells.

If past practice is followed, all this should be up on the web in a couple of days. The transparency of BLP is orders of magnitude above Rossi. BLP is keeping a few details of the silver/hydroxide mixture secret and say the exact mixture is very sensitive to making a good “sun”.

In the audience of about 80 were reps from companies interested in partnering with BLP to manufacture and market the device. BLP is clearly in the marketing stage and not just R&D which is nearly completed.

In sum, Mills seems to be making good progress. After seeing who was in the audience, etc etc. I have trouble believing that Mills and his verifiers, who were there and talked about their findings, are not telling the truth. it seems clear to me that we will have to rewrite the Quantum Mechanics text books someday — about the time Mills gets his Nobel for the the greatest advance in Physics since relativity.

Where all this puts Rossi and LENR is a good question. If the SunCell works as advertised, and is ready for market within the next 18 months he will have a major head start with a device that can produce lots of electricity.

There are too many aspects to all this to include here. It would take a book. For example, the SunCell does not seem to take more than 20 watts to run after it melts the silver which can stay melted for 20 years. If the cell is producing megawatts of power, the notion of a COP is simply silly. The ratio is hundreds of thousands to one.

All I can do for now is to suggest that you take a careful look at whatever gets posted about this on the BLP website. I hope this helps your thinking about where all this is going. I hate to say this, but electricity produced from water (extracted from the atmosphere) seems to be a better potential seller than a heat-producing QuarkX.

Tom Whipple
Arlington, VA

276 Replies to “Report from Brilliant Light Power Industry Day Event (Tom Whipple) Update: Video and Slideshows Now Posted by BLP”

  1. History says they always pull back and hunker down for some additional R&D, flush with new investment money, just before actual commercialization. For decades now.

    But I hope you’re right.

    1. It feels different this time. He used to go quiet for a year or two at a time. We are now getting very regular updates and more companies are involved. These engineering/production processes often take longer than estimated, so I’m not holding my breath that the timeline will be met. But I think we will be seeing steady progress these next couple years. Exciting times!

  2. It is good to hear that some of the engineering problems with the electrodes are bring resolved. Saying there shouldn’t be any reliability problems and demonstrating good reliability are two entirely different things. My guess is that both establishing reliability and developing the high intensity photovoltaic cells (having reasonably low cost, and high efficiency) will take much longer than is now being predicted, but hopefully won’t be too big of a factor in getting the initial systems to market.
    The 20W operating power seems to be really good. However, the claim for the megawatt output power is meaningless since continuous power is not output. Does anyone know what the output energy is for the current SunCell design? The maximum theoretical COP for this device needs to be calculated as: (output energy) / (input energy). Once the system is fitted with PV cells, and the power needed to cool the PV cells is added to the input power, then the COP can be calculated as: (PV cell output power) / (total system input power).
    Dr. Mike

  3. I’ve said this before here that it doesn’t matter who has the best and most efficient device or who gets their device out first. There are billions of people on this planet that want access to cheap energy. I don’t think one company is going to have a monopoly on that.

    1. Um, such is the nature of revolutionary research. You go around the next bend, and discover something unexpected. Great scott, the Quark-X doesn’t look anything like the machine Rossi showed of in 2011.

  4. Thanks, Frank, for keeping up with brilliant light as well as e-cat. The success of either of these technologies will be revolutionary. There is LOTS of room for both to succeed. If, when the dust settles, these are truly unrelated technologies, I will be very surprised. Somehow they must both be working a different aspect of the same physics.

    Dr. Mills’ theories of physics, if correct, will truly rock the worlds of physics and astronomy. Think of it — no big bang, no quantum physics. What a system rocker. This is vastly more earth shattering than the discovery that there is a way around the coulomb barrier.

      1. I think, Mills doesn’t attack uncertainty principle, rather the existence of fundamental quantum state. Or even better to say, the energetic minimum of this state. I don’t think, that fractional quantum states in vacuum cannot exist – after all, we can observe them in solid state physics already (anyons, quantum Hall effect). But I just cannot imagine, how these states could remain stable in dynamic quantum vacuum, release the energy the more.

  5. Thanks for this very interesting first hand update. I’ve been an ardent believer in BLP since the early 2000’s. Nearly applied for a job their, wish I had now. I think Mill’s theory is right on the money, so a successful launch of a reliably working device will perhaps garner some attention in the Physics community. This thing could snowball quite quickly I think. As that guy in NZ said, here is either a total fraud or perhaps the greatest genius of our time.

    Billions of $s have been spent pursuing fusion power. I attended a lecture in the early 80’s in the UK, it was expected to be 15yrs away give or take. Hmm! A 20W powered Sun at a cost of about $100 million seems like a bargain and should get some media and government attention. I think Rossi has already become a red dwarf and is fast on his way of becoming a white dwarf.

    Personally I’m looking forward to the movie.

    1. I think these pictures are extremely boring and say nothing without a proper comment. I would rather prefer to watch a fishbowl during an hour than watching these pictures. I guess that a life demonstration may be more convincing.

      1. The video of the industry day should be posted within a week or so. There he will tell us what we see in more detail I guess.

    2. Very impressive, only 1% is visible light. This would mean a very broad efficient PV cell spectrum capture for all photon radiation.

          1. The SunCell generates plain heat, it doesn’t require any progress in photovoltaics for its utilization. Once the most of energy is generated in ultraviolet, the existing solar cells would be deadly ineffective anyway. On the contrary, I consider such a delays a bit suspicious – what prohibits Mills to surround his cell with normal boiler and to generate the steam directly from it?

          2. Why don’t you also study what blackbody radiation means?
            And there is not any delays, everything is going as planned.

  6. As long as Andrea keeps us sleeping this is also something that can become interesting. I look forward to the moment that an apparatus will be demonstrated that will be able to generate a lot of (excess) energy. At the same time I’ll be very interested to see what this does to the world of physics, which will need A considerable revamp.

    1. That moment is here now. SunCell prototype is already generating a lot of excess energy. It just needs those solar panels to close the loop, so that it does not need any input electricity to continue energy production forever.

      1. I hope they can demonstrate that soon Tom, that would really be the prove of the pudding. Andrea Rossi has never shown a unit generating excess energy without any connection to the grid. Any idea how much energy (%) is generated in light and how much in heat? What is the average power capacity of the SunCell prototype (in/out)?

        1. They demonstrated that two days ago (I’m not Tom, and I wasn’t there), and also at the previous demo in June.
          Previous demo had a problem, that it melted very quickly. Now it does not melt anymore because of electrode-less design and graphite construction.
          Look at http://brilliantlightpower.com/plasma-video/
          In practice all energy is converted to heat first, that graphite ball is heated to 3000-3500K and then that heat can be converted to electricity using CPV panels, as it is glowing like a mini Sun. Power in is some watts, max some kW and out is about MW heat, about 250 kW electricity, initially perhaps 100 kW with simple CPV panels.

          1. tip,
            Data from the August 3, 2016 post on the website above that you cited says about a megawatt output power was achieved for a little over 8kW input power which would result in a COP of about 120 for heat output. They should be able to achieve a COP of 10-20 for electrical output with good CPV cells after accounting for the power required to cool the cells.
            Dr. Mike

          2. Yes but in the latest demo they showed how it work without any heating and even without ignition, so only input energy was to retract hydrogen from water, about 20 watts, as very tiny amount of hydrogen is needed.

          3. You are welcome. 20W is said in this report, and that it goes for hydrogen retraction is said by Mills in the video description. One section of the video is marked “ignition off” and “ignition on”. There seems to be a little difference in light intensity, so the power is probably less during that section.

      2. According to the other source I referenced below the earliest for closing the loop, ie a standalone system where they power the ignition with the CPV, is January 2017. Pretty sure this will not happen then but it does seem to be next on their scheduled milestones,

        1. Yes but the question was: lots of excess energy. That is already done and is the most important step. And of course essential for closing the loop.

          1. Yes and this is the surely most fundamental point that mainstream science should be commenting on. If Mills really has achieved net energy production from his device, it shouldn’t matter to SCIENCE whether that net energy is not yet in a convenient form, such as electricity. It does obviously matter to the world of technology and green energy but NOT to science itself.

            The skeptics, led by Robert Park, only seem to have two arguments against Mills – that the SunCell violates the “laws” of physics and that it is not yet a commercial device. While the latter argument is by far the weaker one, a successful commercial launch of the SunCell will obviously have implications far beyond the introduction of “yet another energy generation device” as some of the more sleepy MSM may, at first, describe it. Park will know better and he and his fellow “spin surgeons” will have to start “scrubbing up” urgently. That promises to be hilarious in itself.

          2. But this technology must be researched in major government labs for 20, NAH- 50 years. As we have no understanding of it, we can not know what the long term consequences may be.

            This technology could generate some type of unknown radiation (Liken Waves) which could turn everyone to werewolves. Or Worse. Zombies.

            So Says, Robert Park

            One can stop or delay any technology. You merely need Imagination to create fear…

  7. Does the SunCell produce EMF interference which affects electrical equipment near it? Does the SunCell produce Sub-Atomic particles? Does the SunCell transmute elements to other elements or change the isotope of the elements that it is made from? Does the SunCell produce any type of gamma radiation?

  8. Do you the approximate amount of hydrogen that gets used up per hour for a 1MW device? Would all H be H 1/4 afterwards or will it probably be a mix with also smaler H?

  9. I think the market is big enough for both in the same segment I also think mills plan (acording to a video) is to have one commerical device per hundred of homes. Not one per household.
    But I agree Rossis device is much less complex and better sutable for devices like robots or stand alone home heaters etc.
    It will be interesting.

    1. The SunCell is less complex with direct reactor to electrical conversion. The QuarkX requires a heat exchanger and a steam generator.

      1. I’ve never heard Mills talk about cheap energy for the masses.

        I have heard him speak many times of huge profits to those who produce and sell energy to the masses. I’ve heard him talk of his income alone from this technology being the equivalent of current retail price. In short. Every time Mills speaks, the only words I hear is greed, greed greed greed. greed greed. I’m greedy.

        Rossi on the otherhand always says to cheap to copy. Cheap energy for the people. All he does seems aimed at making the technology and it’s energy cheap for the masses.

        However, I’ll repeat what I’ve been saying since 2011. I want there to be competition. To temper the greed of people like Mills and to keep those like Rossi true to their word. Competition is good for everyone.

        1. BrLP and their investors and energy sellers can make a very healthy profit at the same time as electricity consumers see electricity bills decrease. It’s a win win for almost everyone, short and long term.

          Rossi is an inventor with a backer like IH. Rossi hardly has to talk about money incentives. Backer entities like IH do the money talk to investors.

          Mills on the other hand is the entrepreneur and business owner besides being a theoretician and experimentalist. He’s the money talker, and of course he is going to talk about incentivizing profits. Judging Mills as greedy because of this is beyond the pale.

          1. If Mills was speaking only of profits, you could be right.

            However, Mills put numbers to it. 18 cents to 24 cents retail per KWh and him recieving 50% of that fee. Rossi has mentioned about 2 cents retail per KWh. I currently pay 8.08 cents retail per KWh.

  10. I will be pleasantly surprised if the engineers can solve all the technical challenges by end 2017. Getting this far has been a monumental challenge even if BLP appear to be on the ‘home run’.

    Anyone who ever believed back in 2010 that BLP or Andrea Rossi, would or could be in production inside 12 months, will clearly have never been involved in setting up a new mfg facility let alone doing so with world changing concepts.

    My advice is perhaps 2018 at the most optimistic but 2020 for some better probability.

    However, the future is looking a lot better.

    Doug Marker.

  11. The use of a Carbon based dome is a big mistake. The vapor pressure of Carbon is much higher than many metals and ceramics at the temperatures needed (it is nearly 10,000 times as high as Tungsten at 3,000K), even though the melting temperature for Carbon is the highest of the materials. The result would be evaporation Carbon coating the solar cells in a fairly short time. A much better choice would be a dark high temperature ceramic with sufficiently high melting point and very low vapor pressure at the required temperature (possibly as as a coating on the Carbon)

    1. The reasons for an intermediate dome toa ct as dark body radiator is to prevent the heat from vapourizing the
      photovoltaics (PV) directly and to prevent the silver vapour from forming a coating, that is opaque to the ultraviolet light produced, on the surfaces where the photo-voltaic cells are located. This makes the Suncell more complicated than it has to be.

      A sufficiently fast moving gas current is required to to allow the silver vapour to be scavenged by vacuuming. The required gas must also be transparent to the light, mostly ultraviolet. During operation of the Suncell, as it is currently configured, the used Hydrogen, now Hydrino gas, and Oxygen, is removed somehow to prevent a build up of pressure inside the Suncell. The direction of the purging gas would preferably be away from the location of the PV. Since the Hydrino gas is so inert that it will not react with any materials normally used in the cell, then that same Hydrino gas can be gathered and used for purging the space between the silver stream and PV. The vaporizing silver fills the space at a rate that is required to be countered by a sufficiently forceful and continuous purge blast or current of Hydrino gas.

      The other issue, heat, can be then be mitigated much easier with the opaque vapour out of the way. The silver streams can now be much smaller and still produce sufficient light for high efficiency PV conversion. With a much smaller stream the excess heat will also be much less. A smaller silver stream will
      also produce that much less opaque silver vapour and allow for easier vacuuming.

      This could allow for a much smaller pumping device and silver stream in relation to the existing globe radius wherein the reaction occurs. A tiny, but still highly efficient light density flux, that is easy to prevent opaque silver deposition in the PV area is thus achievable.

      1. If Mill can control the flow of silver vapor with hot ionized hydrogen, he could extract electric current directly from that plasma with a coil of Yttria-stabilized zirconia (YSZ), a ceramic that becomes conductive at high temperatures.

        Magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) Power Generation

        Magnetohydrodynamic power generation provides a way of generating electricity directly from a fast moving stream of ionised gases without the need for any moving mechanical parts. The plasma acts from charge carriers (electric current)

          1. I know co-generation as combined electricity and heat generation in power plants.
            I think MHD was rejected as more complex method than CPV panels. Better keep it simple.

          2. It is much cheaper to invest in another suncell rather than waste money on a cogeneration unit(ESWAG 10 times more costly) because high efficiency solar cells that convert 2000 sun equivalent flux are highly efficient(30% to 40%) and exceptionally cheap and compact for what they do with no moving parts!

      2. The purpose of the intermediate dome was to block the silver vapor from coating the solar cells, and also to convert the UV rich radiation to visible and near IR suitable for the solar cells. A gas flow shield would not work for the internal dome geometry. The only practical solution is selection of materials with sufficiently high melting temperature and low vapor pressure at the required temperatures. A thin Tungsten coat on the inner surface is ideal to protect the shield and avoid evaporation. A coating of of Tungsten Carbide would have low enough vapor pressure and good emissivity for the solar cells.

  12. Research and commercialization science and engineering is a fast process now because of all the learning, instrumentation, and super computer improvements that has occurred since 1903. It’s a different ballgame now.

  13. Mills is deviating from his old fund raising pattern. His demos show increasingly sophisticated science, presentations, instrumentation, and equipment. He is a good research scientist, a fun bit eccentric, and even has a well developed but somewhat disputed theory.

    I say, “Give him a break, research always takes longer than we hope.”

  14. Mills is deviating from his old fund raising pattern. His demos show increasingly sophisticated science, presentations, instrumentation, and equipment. He is a good research scientist, a fun bit eccentric, and even has a well developed but still debatable theory.

    I say, “Give him a break, research always takes longer than we hope.”

    1. he has a theory which is quite a large crock of shit. At least LENR actually makes some sense within established physics theory, in fact in some estimates it would make less sense if it didn’t work. Mills’ hydrant theory though is such an outlandishly ridiculous notion that it defies belief that he has got as much funding as he has.

      If he even has anything it is probably LENR based, but with his track record (and I’ve looked at his publications), he seems like a snake oil salesman.

      1. “Mills’ hydrant theory”. I get a vision of a canine doing his job on a, you know, a hydrant. Especially the bright yellow type. With a bright yellow stream one side consisting of a conducting fluid that makes a mess. Oh, I can’t go on.

      1. Mill theory is based on electron behavior outside of the nucleus. The disparate isotopes of hydrogen are bases on nuclear activity, the reaction poisoning based on an incompatibility of nuclear factors.,

        1. I’m not an expert, so could you link some evidence, that the mixture of isotopes does perform worse than the diluted single isotope? And why Mills should bother with 50/50 mix of protium and deuterium in the SunCell?

          1. This factor has come from the experiments of Piantelli. That should be enough to get your research going.

          2. Link, link please … you should already know, I’m always dealing with substance – not with surface…

          3. Did you try the Google at least, before rising such objections? I’m not here for teaching the people to Google the facts, but for pointing to facts.

  15. That is all correct but hardly relevant today. We have quite different level of resources and capabilities today than a hundred years ago. Technical and scientific progress today is much faster so I would expect much less time being used to bring these new technologies to widespread use. The only reasons that can slow them down are human factors like politics, national security, conspiracy, greed, stupidity, etc.

  16. I think, if you could see the QuarkX reactor on video, you would say the opposite. The people are behaving like silly animals, they just believe what they can see. And what they can just see is the SunCell, not QuarkX. But what is good is the mutual competition of these technologies. I don’t trust neither Rossi, neither Mills – without competition there will be always temptation to sell the whole project to military and to embargo it before publics completely.

  17. Comment for Axil Axil. Re the questions you have posed here, asking them here seems a lost effort as Mills is not here to answer you. However he does answer posts at the Yahoo group (link below). The group is called ‘SocietyforClassicalPhysics’

    https://beta.groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/SocietyforClassicalPhysics/info

    I have never asked him a question there myself but on the few occasions I have visited the forum, have seen him reply to politely worded and sensible questions at that forum.

    So, I am sure if you pose your questions politely and thoughtfully, you will get a thoughtful and polite response.

    One other point, though, is that many of the issues you are raising don’t seem related to Mills hydrino theory and process ? – but far more related to LENR+ processes ?. Do you agree that The ‘claimed’ hydrino process is quite unrelated to the ‘claimed’ NiH LENR processes. If not then my advice is to do some research before you ask Mills any questions.

    However, one topic you are very familiar with and that you have a lot of excellent ideas on, is (IIRC) the combined magnetic moment created by synchronised electrons when spinning in unison. Anything you ask him in that respect could prove very informative, certainly to myself.

    Cheers

    Doug Marker

    1. Doug Marker:

      There is nothing new under the sun, that includes the SunCell. There have been a number of other systems that have been very close in design to the SunCell. These other systems showed transmutation, electric interference, the need for isotopic purity, production of excess electrons, the suppression of gamma radiation, and the generation of high frequency of EMF such as XUV and soft x-rays.

      For example, Mills might not want to see one of these common characteristics show up and be recognized in his system so he will not test for them. One example would be isotopic shifts in the silver from normal distribution.

      Mills would not want to admit to such an isotopic shift appearing in his SunCell after a long duration run. That finding would indicate that the source of excess energy that the SunCell is seeing is derived from nuclear processes rather that the production of energy from lowered electron orbits.

      1. Axil

        You said “Mills would not want to admit to such an isotopic shift appearing in his SunCell after a long duration run.”

        Can you explain why this would be ?

        Thanks

        Doug

        1. Mills rejects the idea that his results come from low energy nuclear reactions from a marketing and fundraising perspective because that association would taint his work with crackpotism associated with LENR.

          Mills started out as a cold fusion researcher but came up with his own interpretation of science in a few years where no nuclear connections where allowed.

          IMHO, the lowered orbitals that Mills sees is a result of Hole superconductivity that sets in when many elements and compounds are formed under extreme pressure.

          His HOH is an example of metalized water that is formed under extreme pressure.

          physics.aps.org/articles/v9/43

          http://physics.aps.org/assets/60396dd8-5897-4189-bd22-d5e6f539a906/e43_1_medium.png

          “To explain their results, the researchers conducted first-principles calculations and found that a water molecule can occupy six symmetrical orientations in a beryl channel, in agreement with the known crystal structure. A single orientation has the oxygen atom roughly in the center of the channel, with the two hydrogen pointing to the same side (like a “<” symbol) toward one of the channel’s six hexagonal faces. Other orientations point to other faces, but are separated from each other by energy barriers of around 50 meV. However, these barriers don't stop the hydrogen from tunneling among the six orientations and thereby splitting the ground-state energy into multiple levels. The energy differences among these levels were consistent with the seven peaks observed in the neutron scattering data, the researchers found."

          1. No, it was a hydrino reaction device. From your link:
            However, it could well be that the wet electrolytic hydrino technology, and perhaps some of the original personnel, did not fit well into the Modine corporate culture, and realizing the unfulfilled potential of the wet cell, these R&D folks decided to leave.

          2. Axil wrote “Mills rejects the idea that his results come from low energy nuclear reactions from a marketing and fundraising perspective because that association would taint his work with crackpotism associated with LENR.”

            Sorry but I don’t agree with this speculation. (That is all it appears to be).

            Mills and his biographers say that once Mills realised what a Hydrino was, he could see (as anyone should) that a hydrino transition is unrelated to D+D fusion or to neuton capture events W&L.
            Do you dispute this ?.

            But I do agree that in his early days when he built and tested CIHT cells, he didn’t know quite what the process was as those devices were electrolytic cells but using light water rather than heavy water. So, yes with his CIHT cells he regarded them as related to what we now call LENR+

            Axil, I usually enjoy your ideas and so often when following your links, am able to really enjoy what they lead to. Have said so often. But on the matter of Mills and hydrino theory and processe, am sadly of the opinion you really need to read up on it. Am hoping you will accept this as good advice from a friend.

            Cheers Doug.

          3. Holmlid has confirmed that the reduction of electron orbitals below the base level does produce an energy of condinsation of about 600 eV per electron when hydrides are metalized. This process is a result of the formation of Hole superconductivity

            see

            http://physics.ucsd.edu/~jorge/hole.html

            but this state of matter produces muons which is a nuclear based process when muons because of their large mass orbit at low levels close to the nucleus and interact with it.

            See

            http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/pdf/10.1142/S0218301316500853

            This new understanding of compressed matter as related to high pressure physics does not contravene quantum mechanics as Mills postulates but places a new face on it.

            As what Mills really believes, who can say, but Mills has been well funded as LENR has not been. Be as it may, whatever is the thinking behind Mill’s sales pitch, it has worked.

  18. The closest PV tech to do high temperature and high photon flux conversion was the Solyndra – they failed. There are patents on high flux PV, most claims in those patents relate to cooling techniques.
    My general take on LENR industrialists like Rossi or Mills is that they leave too few clues for independent replication, and so their proof of validity is in their product release. It means there is not much point in paying attention to them until that release date. Even estimates from them of release dates are demonstrably questionable and not reliable.

    1. Solyndra’s failure was entirely managerial and financial, not at all in the tech. People (as in distributors, let alone end-use customers after supply chain price inflation) didn’t want to pay the cost of CIGS when lower-efficiency but MUCH cheaper alternatives were on the market.

      1. The tech worked albeit expensively. China pretty much killed Solyndra, well, that and some dubious financial decisions.
        High flux PV is tricky stuff and I’d be a lot worried about various gaseous metals depositing themselves onto the PV in a Suncell. It is quite the engineering challenge.

  19. With that kind of life style available to Suncell powered society, then there will be a greenhouse effect that will make the current one look like peanuts. All the more reason to get it to replace all FF sources of energy replaced and then use Suncell energy to power as many green house causing gasses scavenging methods as possible so that the extra heat produced by Suncells doesn’t get trapped by the green house gasses.

  20. A system similar to the SunCell as follows:

    http://www.infinite-energy.com/images/pdfs/NagelICCF19.pdf

    Anatoly Klimov was lead author of two papers at ICCF19.
    Both of them dealt with plasmoids. They are defined as
    coherent structures of both plasmas and magnetic fields. The
    first, single-author paper listed Klimov’s affiliation as the
    Joint Institute of High Temperatures RAS in Moscow. It was
    a review of about 20 years of research on energy production,
    transmutations and ball lightning involving “cold heterogeneous
    plasmoids.” Klimov stated that energy gains in the
    range from 4 to 10 were reported in papers dated 1985 and
    1994. In an experiment with energy gains of 2 to 4, the concentration
    of Li and Ca were increased by factors of 100 to 1000. That determination was based on Optical Spectroscopy. Infrared, Atomic Absorption, Ion Mass and XRay Spectroscopies were also used in the research.

    The second paper by Klimov was co-authored with six others, all authors affiliated with the company New Inflow LLC.11 According to their website, the company has a broad program spanning experiments, theory and numerical simulations in seven listed organizations of Russian universities Figure 1. The top image shows an E-Cat made by Rossi, which was tested by Levi and his team. At the bottom is a photograph of the replica of the E-Cat as made and tested by Parkhomov.

    JULY/AUGUST 2015 • ISSUE 122 • INFINITE ENERGY 6
    and the Russian Academy of Sciences (RAS). The website also
    states that LENR effects have been confirmed in several laboratories
    with energy gains of 6 to 8 and evidence of transmutations
    was obtained. They assert that devices from the company
    can use a wide variety of materials as fuels, not just Pd or Ni.
    The paper by the group at ICCF19 reported energy gains
    from plasmoid vortex reactors in the range of 2 to 10, supposedly
    due to LENR. They recorded “intensive” X-ray emission in
    the 1-10 keV range. Numerical simulations of the plasmas and
    their emissions were performed. The poster from this paper is available from the New Inflow LLC website http://www.newinflow.ru.

    1. Hi Axil,
      I read the infinite energy article but could not find data in it that appeared to confirm that Klimov had conducted experiments that match Mills Hydrino claims ?.

      Is there a web site that explains it in a way that a comparison can be attempted ?

      Thanks

      Doug Marker

        1. No, only transmutation happens to the hydrogen atom as it transmutes to hydrino. Only hydrogen is consumed in SunCell, and hydrinos are waste product, though those could be collected and used instead of helium, where helium is needed.

          1. I didn’t say anything about NUCLEUS, of cource it doesnt change. But Hydrogen ATOM changes to Hydrino. And you know very well what that means.

          2. Even if overunity will be proven for Mills’ apparatus that would still not prove that Hydrinos are being made. It is a problem if you predict the production of something that by definition is inert.

          3. What is the problem? Hydrino formation has been verified in more than 100 scientific papers. They plan to offer hydrinos as a cheaper alternative to helium. They are basically waste product, but some effort is needed to collect them.

          4. So what? Papers by who? Mills? Well, then it must be true, doesn’t it? Do you have any idea, how many papers out there are nonsense? If a new idea contradicts fundamental principles that are well established and proven over and over again, it will not be widely accepted before the according experiments haven’t been repeated by several independent researchers. That Mills tried to intimidate critical scientists certainly won’t help his point.

          5. Mills is an author of nearly all the journal articles found under this link. That is not what would generally be considered independent replication.

          6. Fine. Then there is many with Mills marked as a coauthor, when he just provided some advice or some equipements.

          7. If he is an author on the paper it is not an independent replication. Anyway, we can let time decide. If Mills ever gets his device to the market, my scepticism could be disproven, because then there would be a significant supply of hydrinos for everybody to do experiments with.
            Knowing the history of Mills’ multiple announcements of near-term commercialization, the trend is on my side.

          8. Hydrinos are proven by the detection of EUV continuum radiation with predicted cutoffs at 91.2nm / (n – 1)^2. Other techniques confirm hydrinos as well. It’s as proven as it can be. Read the reports.

  21. Mill’s SunCell may generate additional energy coming from the change of hydrogen to hydrino’s, but has he ever done some proper analysis of transmutation or shifts in isotopes (of e.g. Silver) in his reactors? Is helium being formed?
    Does Mills dismiss LENR or does he see LENR as a competing technology?

  22. ->”if you are sure that __X__ works… Why does it take you months and years to prove it?”

    Where the variable ” X ” can be of a vast number of topics.

    The answer to many of which can be-

    Lack of viable theory-
    The complexity of the Topic-
    The lack of Funding-

    And many other reasons.

  23. I think most of the numbers so far came from short term measurements (like 8 minutes or even smaler. A more exact COP should come a bit later when the now better running device is measured. I read that it is allready planned in one of the PDFs that were posted. Numbers I read are arround 100 with potential to near infinity. But as long as it is over like 20 it is good enough.

  24. What will happen if the SunCell reaction is somehow produced by a Holmlid type low orbit process where a trillion trillion muons per second impact those solar cells in a 24/7/356 100% duty cycle.

    Mills is making an assumption that will soon be tested. Producing steam using a heat exchanger is a lot less sensitive than producing electric power using solid state solar cells. Time will tell.

    1. Axil,
      You posted “What will happen if” <= note the "if" – the problem with *if* is that anyone can say it. What is needed is a base of documented research and evidence that *specifically* deals with the 'if' and doesn't leave it as open ended speculation. What ever one can say about Mills, he has at least provided a large body of documentation and research to back up what he says. Is it all true ? – that we are still seeking to learn.

      Where exactly can I read where Holmlid states he has generated atomic particles with electron orbits less that ground state ?. And does he describe the process (i.e. in the same way W&L describe their process for neutron capture. ?.

      Thanks

      Doug Marker

      1. If you can search this site for “holmlid” you will find at least 100 references on his work.

        Here is one of them to get you going.

        http://www.e-catworld.com/2016/04/05/holmlid-olafsson-slideshow-on-ultra-dense-hydrogen-and-low-energy-nuclear-reactions-atomecology-com/

        Holmlid is a good place to start if you want to understand low electron orbits, LENR, and sub-atomic particle generation.

        see holmlid latest article here

        Leptons from decay of mesons in the laser-induced
        particle pulse from ultra-dense protium p(0)

        http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/pdf/10.1142/S0218301316500853

        1. Axil,
          Excellent and many thanks – this is very interesting. Am working through it. I know you have mentioned Rydberg state of H many times in many places. My challenge in trying to visualise it is that AFAICT Rydberg state required temperatures at very low Kelvin whereas LENR creates very high temps. It is this aspect that I am trying to better understand. It seems a contradiction.

          Cheers Doug.

          1. The ability of metalized hydrogen to remain a superconductor at the operating temperatures of the SunCell is far more amazing than LENR itself. LeClair has shown that metalized water can stay together at temperatures greater than that of a supernova. This resistance to heat and pressure is produced by the magnetism of the spin waves on the surface of the metalized hydride crystal.

          2. Axil,
            This issue of temperature and the H atoms in Rydberg state is for me a stumbling block. If we look at the DWave quantum computer we are told it only works when that suoerconducting Rydberg matter used to hold qubits, is held at close to absolute zero temp.

            It is this issue that has me thinking that the Mills process and explanation makes more sense.

            But, I do appreciate your links to Holmlid’s work.

            Thanks.

            Doug Marker.

          3. This persistence of below base level electron orbitals are a stumbling block for everybody; it is near impossible to beleive, But the SunCell does show it. The electric arc forming the plasma only lasts a microsecond but the plasma maintains itself fro another 22 microseconds. This means that low orbitals stay intact for a long time after activation. The plasma maintains a high temperature that should ionize any compound but the hydride stays intact all though the high temperature plasma phase.

          4. Axil,
            Good points, but what hydride is involved in MIlls process ? – Mills claims the silver is used as a catalyst. There is no loading of H (or even D) into silver prior to triggering the process. Am sure we agree that hydrating a lattice is required for LENR (PdD) & LENR+ (NiH).

            The water (light water) used in the MIlls process is thermalized into atomic H & O as part of the firing event. The Suncell is at room atmospheric pressure. There is no forced or other apparent hydrating of the silver.

            Cheers

            Doug Marker

          5. Ken Shoulders shows what happens after arc discharge into a transition metal. The transition metal is vaporized by the arc, but it cools into micro and nanoparticles. The hydrogen produces surface plasmon polaritons. Shoulders calls them white and black EVs.

            More of Black EVs from Ken Slouders

            http://www.svn.net/krscfs/Permittivity%20Transitions.pdf

            Figure 5 and 6 on page 4 show how a white EV transforms into a black EV.

            Ken Shoulders states as follows:

            “In order to develop some reality about the appearance of white and black EVs, refer to Fig. 5 and Fig. 6 with each showing a single run of an EV toward a target at the top of the photo. These photos were taken from (1) as Fig. 4:40 and Fig. 4:42 where there is other photos showing similar affects. What can be seen is the white EV coming in from the lower side of the photo and then disappearing from camera view just before striking the target and disintegrating it. The white glob at the top is a plume of ions coming from the explosion.

            This can be validated by applying an analyzing field in the camera that produces a deflection to the left for ions and to the right for electrons. This analysis field has been applied in Fig. 6 and it can be seen that the white EV has moved to the right, signifying its emission products are electrons, while the ion plume moves to the left. The fact is, there is an omission of both electronic and optical traces during the black phase of the EV run

            This is not an artifact of the measurement method because there are many examples where multiple cameras and visual observation showed such a disappearance.

            In the black state, there is no ability to ionize gas or to excite fluorescence from the nearby dielectric materials whereas there is with a white EV.

            Unidirectional Current Flow:

            Under the conditions of white and black EV looping as stated above, there is an electrical peculiarity worth noting. The current flows in only the white EV direction thus giving the basic conditions for magnetic field generation without closing the current loop. The return charge flows around the other half of the loop without being registered in our instruments. This might be the basis for predicting something like a magnetic monopole.

            Under the conditions stated, it is possible to detect the vector potential, Ā, outside of the current loop usually used to define the vector potential habitat. This offers a communication method that is not shielded by conventional conductors because the electrons in the conductor are not excited into generating a mirror image. One must wonder what other electrons we are working with is also not excited by this unusual method of generating longitudinal emanations or potentials.”

            The black EV is produced by polariton creation.

            Of note Shoulders states:

            In the black state, there is no ability to ionize gas or to excite fluorescence from the nearby dielectric materials whereas there is with a white EV.

            From figure 5, it can be seen that the condensed vapors of the metal target take some short time to form nano-particles.

            In the Black EV state electrons are converted to polaritons when the electrons of the white EV, the infrared EMF from the spark discharge, and the condensed nano-particle combined to form these polaritons. The infrared radiation of the spark explosion helps produce the polariton plume through the action of Fano interference.

          6. Axil,

            AS always another intriguing source of research – thanks – I did note this info in the Shoulders link – it seems it is telling us something of the EV events.

            QUOTE:

            “Many of the observations of EV phenomena are totally without explanation. It would seem that EVs live in an entirely different and bizarre world compared to ours. I have written about many of these observations over a long period of time in a scattered fashion using various interpretations but this writing will differ in that a single explanation will be used as the root cause for all such citations. In an attempt to draw together these observations under one roof of explanation, the cause for them will be focused on a single basic reason even knowing this can lead to a large error in interpretation”

            Doug

          7. There has been many advances in nanoplasmonics since Ken Shoulders did his research. Ken had no idea what a polariton was; he did not know that light and matter can combine into a bose condinsate, and that condinsate can exist without limits on temperature and pressure.

            If you have some time for research, here is how nanoplasmonics has produced overunity systems for over 100 years.

            http://www.egely.hu/letoltes/Fusion-by-Pseudo-Particles-Part1.pdf
            http://www.egely.hu/letoltes/Fusion-by-Pseudo-Particles-Part2.pdf
            http://www.egely.hu/letoltes/Fusion-by-Pseudo-Particles-Part3.pdf

          8. This is not a variant of LENR! The silver is not the catalyst!
            The silver is a conductive matrix that allows the catalysis and atomic hydrogen to meet. The oxide is a stable source of oxygen that allows the catalyst to be formed, which is a water molecule unattached to other water.

          9. You must have missed the fact that the plasma self-sustains for minutes, not microseconds. In fact, Mills stated that under proper conditions, both the arc current and the EM Pumps can be turned off and the plasma will continue to make power indefinitely.

            And the hydrino is the simplest explanation, not some esoteric nuclear process.

          10. Very Good. R V thanks for that update which is very important. Do you have a reference for that bit of info so I can hear it from Mills himself.

            It may be possible to calculate how much energy that the hydrino reaction produces per atom and match it up against the consumption of hydrogen in the SunCell.

            Can Mills shut down hydrogen flow and still produce self sustaining power production?

            These are the characteristics of the SunCell reaction that I am interested in.

          11. From MIlls

            “a catalyst comprises a chemical or physical process with an enthalpy change equal to an integer multiple m of the potential energy of atomic hydrogen, 27.2 eV. For He+m = 2, due to its ionization reaction to He2+, and two H atoms formed from H2 by collision with a third, hot H can also act as a catalyst with m = 2 for this third H. The product is H(1/p), fractional Rydberg states of atomic hydrogen called “hydrino atoms” wherein n = 1/2, 1/3, 1/4, …, 1/p(p≤137 is an integer) replaces the well-known parameter n = integer in the Rydberg equation for hydrogen excited states.”

            Doug M

          12. Axil, just wanted to say that I removed two references in 2 of my posts, to Rydberg state only occurring and low kelvin temp. I had mixed up my knowledge of BCE (Bose Einstein Condensate) with Rydberg state. My thinking on Rydberg state being limited to low temp was not right so I edited those 2 refs out. But, wanted to make it clear I had done so.

            Cheers Doug

  25. Ripped? I’m not sure what you mean. The hydrino theory is far away from proven. This theory is just so far out there, it would need proof by experiments from several independent groups. I don’t say that the whole thing is a fraud, but scientist can be very wrong and still believe in what they do, fooling themselves. For years and even decades. Happens all the time. You can go on and believe it now, I will be happy to do so if it seems reasonable in the future.

  26. Morgan,
    I know where you are coming from re this remark. I started reading MIlls claims just over 4 years ago. I am not convinced yet that it is what he claims or is commercially viable, but, the more I read, the closer that ‘seems’ to be getting.

    The really interesting work for me was Brett Holverstott’s book as at last we had a view of Mills that is very well articulated, incredibly well detailed, and by someone who watched much of the Mill’s story unfold. If I could attain half the knowledge of quantum and science in general that Holverstott shows he knows, I would be very very pleased with myself.

    The critical aspect for all our (us here) interest is to keep an open mind. But, we each have to do our own research as in the short term, it is our own self we need to convince. Convincing others is a very hard slog.

    So many eventual advances in history had to run the gauntlet of ridicule and criticism before they became accepted. And even then, in time each of those advances may have been bettered.

    So the 64,000$ question re Mill’s theories, is “has Mills come up with a better theory that will allow greater advances in science ?” – if yes, great !, if not then so be it.

    Doug Marker

  27. Just a quick thanks to everyone on all side of the debate who are participating and taking the time to express views no matter what side they are on.

    It is open debate and questioning that help everyone get a better sense of the issues and the outcomes.

    Again, a big thanks – debating these matters really gets us to think.

    Doug

  28. I’ve followed BLP for well over a decade. My impression of them has gone up and down as they have declared success and imminent commercialization several times. I must say, however, that this times seems different. I can’t quite put my finger on why. But it does.

    I’ve never liked how Mills has often emphasized power output over energy balance. We are now hearing more discussion of energy balance. That is what matters, and what should be emphasized, assuming they have something commercially viable. The prototypes they put together also look very kludgey and high-maintenance. But I guess we can’t expect too much from a mere prototype. Mills seems confident that with few moving parts, the system will have high reliability.

    I think that perhaps they are finally getting to an important turning point for the company, after several hundreds of millions of $ of investor money. Let’s hope they pull this rabbit of their hat. But I personally don’t think it will happen by 2017. I’m in the “more like 2020” crowd right now. I’d be quite happy to be proved wrong. My guess is Mills is itching to prove his many detractors wrong. Good for him. That provides a nice incentive to push it across the finish line.

    1. SG,
      Good assessment. I too looked at the early Suncell units – they looked *very* kludgy – also then read of the various changes they made to try to keep the catalyzing process running at a useable rate. The electrodes gave them years of trouble.

      The take home message to me was that if indeed the ‘step 1’ process of hydrino transition was real, then the ‘step 2’ engineering aspect was the next phase once Mills could prove step 1 was real. There are a lot of very smart engineers in the world who could look the engineering and manufacturing aspects. That is not Mill’s forte, and, one can imagine this is what is taking place. I am sure we have all heard of what people thought of those early, ugly, smelly, noisy peculiar devices that became horse-less carriages then evolved into today’s ‘cars’ the latest with scavenging injection, turbo-chargers, etc: etc:.

      Mills only ever had to prove his process was real and that he had an acceptable explanation. Without these it would be hard to attract the engineers and manufacturers.

      I still regard the Suncell as an awkward device and seriously cannot imagine driving a car that is powered by the device that we see on the BLP web site. BUT, this is where MIlls should and appears to be, handing it over to other clever people who can exploit the hydrino transition process (assuming it is proven to those who are getting involved).

      And, like you, I won’t hold my breath that we will see commercial ready devices in 2017. 2020 seems a bit more likely.

      Doug Marker

  29. ->”So they just elected to vent it off.”

    This kind of thinking always leads to disasters down the road.
    This kind of thinking lead to rivers that burned with fire.
    This kind of thinking lead cities where you could not breath.

    What shall we do with all that excess heat?

    We shall just vent it off.

    What could possibly go wrong.

      1. We currently produce approximately 3KW thermal to generate 1KW electric. To think changing that ratio to 100KW+ thermal to generate 1KW electric wont have consequences would be naive. We also have a history of failing to see the possible consequences until after the fact.

        1. Your figures are wrong, SunCell is 1MW thermal, 250kW electric, more when better solar panels are developed. The first prototype may be closer to your figures, but it is just a first prototype, to show to the world as quickly as possible first ever “free electricity” generator. I mean electricity from just water, which shouldn’t be possible, but it is.

          1. “Electricity from water which shouldn’t be possible.”

            Why not. It contains hydrogen. Also by adding some salt you can draw low voltage from it using the proper electrodes.

            Many are talking primarily about being off grid. What are you going to do with 250KW. Your back to mostly waste heat.

            Light is made up of various wavelengths. Solar cells convert only the wavelength it is designed for. Thus they will always have limited efficiency. Beyond that, you can only place a certain amount of solar cells around the reaction Mills is producing. The more you place around it, the more distance and reduced efficiency you will have.

      1. That was an old proof of concept. In this video there is a minute or two period of “ignition off” and power consumption is about 20 watts. Output is about the same, but maybe a little less than with ignition on, but around 200-1000 kW.
        So the COP is over 10000.

  30. Agreed – The issue of the heat is really an engineering vs benefits challenge. No doubt some engineer will see a way to harness that wasted heat (assuming this device works as stated) and may be able to increase the efficiency. Mills problem today is to get a working device out the door so to speak, and to show a broader audience that his devices work at levels that are revolutionary. Dealing with some wasted heat can come later.

    Doug

  31. One contrarian view on the Suncell.

    Decided to add this comment about an email I received from Brian Ahern (via Peter Gluck’s Ego Out blog) where Brian expresses interest in the idea of hydrino transitions but adds serious doubts about the ability of the PVs to take the generated EUV light and convert it into electricity with todays PV devices (Photo Voltaic).

    Just worth bearing in mind that the success of the Suncell is still hotly in dispute such as Brian’s views, even if the Hydrino theory proves correct. It is also worth considering that the Suncell alone is just one potential application of a successful hydrino transition process. Brett Holverstott in his book about Hydrino energy, details the chemical industry potential for new materials based on utilizing hydrinos in (IIRC) polymers.

    The heart of Brian Ahern’s issues with the Suncell are quoted below. Brian can be very outspoken however what he has to add deserves consideration but it doesn’t mean he has it all right – science & technology are a moving target …

    QUOTE: (exactly as he wrote it – typos and all)

    “High efficiency solar cells are metastable and the high energy photons will quickly homogenize the local chemistry and quench the conversion efficiency. This is why it took decades to develop the Blue LED. The high energy blue photons were breaking bonds and degrading operation. Higher frequency photons are much more challenging and are unlikely impossible to operate more that one minute.

    I worked in the solar cell Group at MIT Lincoln Labs in 1979 where they had achieved the world’s record with tandem cells. These cells were degraded by near UV and were not suitable for space applications.

    There are no cells that can survive 27 eV radiation. Mills will avoid any measurements until he secures his next round of funding. At that time he will likely announce a new and better scheme due in 2019!
    The foregoing does not prelude the existence or viability of Hydrinos. It simply identifies a ridiculous prescription for their use.”

    1. The light does not get directly to the PV cells but it heats a material that then emits blackbody radiation that normal PV cells are made for.

    2. He’s simply full of misunderstandings. Mr. Ahern simply has his facts wrong. I mean, some may be true, but are irrelevant to Mills’ device.

      First, he seems not to understand that the spectrum the cells absorb is not UV but IR/visible. Second, he ignores that the cells are being developed from scratch and tailored to match the spectrum using compound semiconductors, not existing commercial cells, and certainly not 1979 technology. Thirdly, the cells do not see 27ev radiation. Ahern seems confused about the hydrino transition process and is conflating that with the SunCell design. Lastly, Mills and his team, as well as his partners are constantly taking data and refining this device and process, he is not ‘avoiding’ measurements.

      1. What I don’t understand about the hydrino theory is how electron orbits can produce a temperature in a plasma that is equal to that of the Sun’s surface.

        Every atom including hydrogen should be totally ionized in an environmental condition where the electrons are completely dissociated from the atom.

        How are the hydrino atom orbitals protected from solar level heat? This does not make sense to me. Please explain.

        1. Mills spells out the energy transfers in detail at the BLP site. Brett Holverstott spells it out in great detail in his book.

          Is there any reason not to read their explanations ?. – I don’t ‘love’ Mills but did bother to read the details.

          I am puzzled at complex questions that have clear answers but the questioner declines to look at where the answers are. These are moments I think we live in a weird world.

          Cheers

          Doug

  32. My understanding re Mills current industry days is to attract manufacturers of PVs to enter into agreements to design PVs that can be deployed in the Suncell. They would (one imagines) also be used to seek interest from other manufacturers who might identify other types of opportunity. I don’t believe MIlls is only addressing investors at these events or that he is just telling them (investors vs manufacturers) that it is all a done deal. To be fair, Mills only has to get the energy generation process working and let other experts productize it.

    Investors help with research and go-to-market funding. Manufacturers and their engineers look at the opportunity to expand their own businesses into new markets.

    Re the blackbody radiation in a Suncell, I think artefact (see nearby post) has the correct answer re shielding the PVs from direct interaction with the plasma. The Suncell diagrams show this shield.

    Cheers Doug

  33. This is not the case. On of the involved companies who had a speaker at the demonstration day was from Masimo semiconductor. If they say this would work than I would trust them.

  34. Nonsense, Ahern is completely wrong and misinformed. Even if the CPV cells don’t work as well as planned, there is always the backup of coupling the SunCell as a heat source to a standard closed cycle generator.

  35. The concept of COP is usually is only used by free energy types. One does not speak of the COP of natural gas. Neither does one need the concept for the hydrino based energy as the hydrino is a valid energy source.

  36. Holmlid has an alternate theory about how electron orbitals are relaxed below base levels. In his theory, there are trillions of muons produced by the electron lowering reaction.

    If Holmlid is right about what is going on, then any solid state power production process will fail.

    If the solar cell conversion works then Mills theory is right, it solar cell power conversion does not work, then Holmlid;s theory is right.

    Here is Holmlid’s ideas and research

    http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/pdf/10.1142/S0218301316500853

  37. Morgan,
    Your thoughts about Mr Ahern is not unique.

    I was willing to post his comments as a contrarian view only because he did once have notable credibility and reading counter views can be helpful in ones own analysis and research.

    I too doubt just how much of Mills work Mr Ahern has looked into.

    Doug

  38. Fair comments – like you I believe there is a high level of optimism as to target dates. My background in industry tells me loud and clear that really always bites and dates slip. That is especially so for ground breaking new technology/science.

    However I still come back to the fact that Mills doesn’t need to have *all* the answers – to expect him to spell out in intricate detail how to engineer every aspect of his creation is unrealistic. Yes he needs to show confidence and yes he has the right to speak optimistically.

    The absolute reality is he only needs to show the core principle is sound and leave it to the engineering geniuses (genii ?, Genie(s) ? 🙂 ) to productize the process.

    Cheers

    Doug

  39. It is a pity he doesn’t ask the person who can answer it.

    Those of us following this story are not BLP technical sales staff. But some of us are able to tickle our keyboards just enough to get to where these complex questions are answered, repeadedly and in great detail. 😉

    Cheers Doug

  40. Do you’s think Brilliant Light Power should have the ability to have a monopoly on this technology? And if BLP does in fact have a monopoly over it, he just might become the first or second trillionare.

    1. I think Dr. Mills deserves to have a monopoly, at least for some time, for all that downplay. But eventually competition is welcome. Also maybe Rossi could compete with his QuarkX.

        1. COP is not so important if it is good enough, lets say over 20 or so. And that (over) 10000 COP was in self sustain mode, we don’t know yet how much that can be used compared to normal mode. Rossi has also very high COP in self sustain mode.

    2. How about we see the thing work *then* waste words and space arguing our biases as to control of it.

      Am assuming you do realise that the world per se does not accept the idea even works!

      Cheers DSM

      1. We have seen it works, I mean you and me and maybe a couple of thousand others (over 2000 have seen the YouTube video, but probably many don’t believe what they see), but over 7 billion people have not seen or know anything about this.
        Early next year when it works totally off the grid more people may be able to see it works.

        1. Tip
          Yes, but it is amusing how some of us want to debate which university our new baby should go to just at the time Baby is showing us it can walk. 🙂

  41. A turbine generator would be ideal for the SunCell. The dome could act as a heat exchanger that extracts the phase change heat from silver vapor that converts silver vapor to a liquid again.

    CO2 could be used to produce energy at very high efficiencies (way over 90%)

    1. I hope that I’m wrong but I think that this is an indication that he’s just trying to stretch out the maximum amount of time before he could be expected to produce a product. Saying that it needs to be a self-contained electrical device means that he can spend three years collecting investment money developing the solar cells. Whereas someone who actually had a working magical solar radiation generator would be getting rich selling it to power plants to make steam.

      1. The efficiency that those solar cells will produce is a meger 30%. Another patent could be submitted that would produce power 3 times more efficiently than what Mills can offer.

        1. I’m quite sure that Mills has patented also other means to produce electricity. Initially they are developing 10kW, 100kW and 250kW machines, and CPV panels are the fastest to market in this power range. Small CO2 turbines are not yet feasible products, and at least integrating those takes more that three months. Mills plans continue up to “10MWs” where that s means tens of megawatts. In those power ranges other means comes to play.
          I think the name SunCell is not from those solar panels but from that “cellurar sun” concept, everybody should have their own “mini sun”.

  42. They say that they’ve had these things running for long periods of time-I take it that have not published or given out any kind of energy balance information from their tests.

    1. http://brilliantlightpower.com/validation-reports/
      http://www.brilliantlightpower.com/wp-content/uploads/presentations/PMJansson-BrLPIndustryDay-102616.pdf

      These independent validations were made half a year ago. That time the machine was not able to survive more than half an hour before tungsten electrodes or some other place melted.
      Just recently they have built this machine using graphitized carbon for those hot parts, and eliminated electrodes by just using those already melted silver streams as electrodes.
      So now it works several hours, they just stop it during the night because I think it still needs constant baby sitting as controls and safety features are not yet finalized.
      Tomorrow the video of the Industry Day event should be ready, so we hear more details.

  43. Easiest way to think about it: the reactor “burns” ordinary hydrogen into an ash composed of hydrinos (a.k.a. dark matter). Di-hydrino gas is extremely stable and simply floats through the atmosphere and escapes into space. “Burning” is inaccurate since the reaction isn’t chemical, but a novel catalytic reduction predicted by Mills’ theory. The reaction is confirmed by various techniques, chiefly the detection of EUV continuum radiation with predicted cutoffs.

    1. Thanks all. So the fuel is hydrogen. I’ll talk to the scientists at my work about the hydrino theory, but for now I’m happy to consider it similar to fission.

      Love to get hold of one of these and measure it’s emissions and radiation.

      Is it possible that the process is stripping off neutrons from hydrogen atoms, resulting in smaller/lighter hydrogen atoms?

      Be interesting to see if blp have the same regulatory issues as the ecat devices, or if they get an easier path. They have been avoiding the “nuclear” moniker to date.

      1. There is no neutrons in hydrogen atoms. Deuterium has, and there might some deuterium atoms also be there, about 0.015%.
        But hydrogen becomes hydrinos, which are smaller/lighter hydrogen atoms. And those few deuterium atoms becomes deuterinos, still holding that neutron, but otherwise similar to hydrinos.
        There is no regulatory issues, as this is not nuclear process.

      2. Can’t see ant fission or fusion in Mills process. It is all about obtaining more energy from an H electron than previously believed possible.

        The core of opposition to Mills theories is from Scientists who have not been able to agree or acknowledge that H electron orbitals can or will drop below ground level. It is that simple.

        Cheers Doug M

  44. R Mills tells us that the power density of the SunCell reaction comes from a volume of a tea cup. A few million watts of power inside a tea cup tells us something important. Such power density cannot come from a chemical source, the source of this huge power density must come from the nucleus.

    The recent demonstration of self sustained reaction that lasts for minutes adds to the evidence that the power cannot be a chemical source. The amount of gaseous chemical combustion material in a tea cup cannot sustain a power density of megawatts for minutes on end. Such huge energy must come from the nucleus.

    New chemical based fuel cannot get into the plasma ball to feed the reaction. Once the plasma process starts, the zone of plasma at 7000K cannot be penetrated by any new material inflow.

    The success of the SunCell is undercutting what Mills is saying produces the energy coming from the SunCell. As the SunCell grows in strength and power density, Mills theory is reduced in believability in like proportions.

    1. From Dr. Mills: (to a question about deuterium tests)
      “We have run hydrogen and deuterium in the SunCell. Within experimental
      variation, the power is the same. We are working on analytical tests and
      will have a paper as soon as we are finished.

      One thing for sure, the switch of the nucleus from a proton to a deuteron
      is an infallible method to prove that the reaction is not a nuclear one,
      rather it is chemical.

      Cold fusion (A.K.A. LENR) is not theoretically possible.”

      1. As the SunCell operates for longer periods of time, the spectral line of helium will begin to appear in the light produced by the SunCell.

        The power density that is apparent in the Sun Cell cannot come from chemical means.

        I wanted to assume the worst case condition to determine through the use of the ideal gas law how many hydrogen atoms participate in the hydrino reaction within the plasma ball. If a vacuum is assumed, then not many hydrino atoms can transfer their energy of reduced orbitals to the plasma reaction. The hydrino carries just tens of electron volts when a hydrino is formed and then from that point does not contribute to the energy density accounting.

        How many vacuum constrained hydrinos can keep a two megawatt plasma reaction going for two minutes?

        In the vacuum of space, the space in the core of the galaxy. the density of hydrogen is 1000 hydrogen atoms per CC in the absolute zero cold temperature of space. That means that in teacup volume 150 cc there would be (150) (1000) = 150,000 hydrogen atoms producing energy in the best case.

        If that volume is heated to 7000K, the number of hydrinos in that volume is greatly reduced. Something about the energy density produced by the SunCell and the hydrino theory does not add up.

        Can anyone get things to add up and explain to me what I am missing?

        1. You are missing the thing that hydrogen is added all the time to the reaction. And it not just that two minute period, about the same plasma is there all the time, several hours.
          I think you have those figures a bit wrong, hydrino reactions are some hundreds, not tens eVs, total power is not 2 MW but around 1 MW.

          1. A megawatt hour is 2.246942291e+28 electron volts

            The self sustain lasts for 100 seconds so that means
            2.246942291e+26 electron volts are required.

            if the hydrino produces a 1000 electron volts

            then 2.246942291e+23 hydrogen atoms are needed to feed the plasma.

            A mole of hydrogen atoms contains 6.02 X 10e+23 atoms

            In order for the feed of hydrogen to meet the power density needs, then hydrogen must be feed into the SunCell at 2.246942291e+21 atoms a second more or less.

          2. Because the hydrogen is in a high vacuum, can that much hydrogen fit inside the vacuum chamber and still maintain such a high vacuum?

            The vacuum is indeed high where hydrogen atoms are few and far between because the extreme temperature of the gas at 7000K.

          3. If the vacuum is 10e-6 bar and the temperature is 10,000K then the number of hydrogen atoms that can fill the container is increased to 10e10.

            The hydrogen needed to produce the reaction would fit into .00022 or 2.2e-4 letters at one bar at room temperature. But the volume needed to hold that hydrogen at 1 millionth of a bar at 10000K is

            (2.2e-4) (10e10) or 10e6 litre.

            In english, that is a million litres or the size of a blump.

          4. Good that you are listening to Mills and learning. I remember hearing that figure also. But anyway, it is a continuous, maybe not yet so smooth process. I understood 5MW was a peek power in one of their tests.

          5. Mills seems to be saying that the hydrino magically leaves the pressure vessel as dark matter.

            For the sake of science, Mills needs to prove this conjecture, it is hard to beleive.

            I still think that the hydrogen is transmuted to other isotopes of silver and the like.

          6. Mills has proved many times that his experiments produce hydrinos. He has many different ways to prove that, explained on his papers. He said in the video that they have done these measurements for this latest SunCell proto also, but of course have not have time to write a paper of that yet.

  45. Can anybody calculate this?

    How many hydrogen atoms (hydrinos) exist in the volume of tea cup (150 millileters) at a temperature of 7000K at 1 bar.

    How much power does each of these hydrinos in the teacup volume need to produce in order to sustain a reaction that lasts for 2 minutes at a continuous power output of 2 megawatts?

    1. From Dr. Mills: “Hydrogen permeates through the blackbody radiator sphere (reaction chamber) and molecular hydrino (H2(1/4)) permeates out.”

      So hydrogen is added all the time. If not then the reaction ends. It is good to have a way to stop it if you want.

      1. I contend that gas cannot move into a high temperature and pressure regime from a lower temperature/pressure regime. In this way, the plasma ball is isolated from matter inflow that can feed the reaction.

          1. At a temperature of 7000K the gas inside the plasma ball is moving fast compared to the gas outside the plasma ball. Fast moving gas atoms with a lot of kinetic energy have a higher pressure than colder gas.

            In an explosion, which way does the gas move, into the explosion of vis versa.

            Why not calculate the energy release per hydrino without gas inflow? Do you think it will tell you something that you don’t what to know?

          2. Tip,
            Axil should be asking Dr Mills, not you.

            Whatever answer you give will always be your best interpretation.

            I cannot understand why Axil asks these questions in places he knows are only our best interpretations.

            The worst conclusion one can draw is that Axil doesn’t want expert answers.

            D

          3. Thats true. But Axil asks so many questions, so maybe it is better that he doesn’t ask those directly from Mills.

            Btw. those pressures are about 0.01 mbar inside and 10 bar outside. And the gas inside is 3% hydrogen 97% argon, I’m not sure outside, maybe the same?
            I dont quite understand how hydrinos can permeate out, I have thought that they are sucked out by that vacuum pump.
            But as I said, soon we will hear more information from those presentations.

          4. Tip,

            (Can’t see any good reason to keep Axil away from Mills? Why ?) .

            Worth adding that as we know hydrinos are said to have IIRC 27 energy levels and Mills hypothesis is that they can continue to react with both the silver and other hydrinos up to that last level (said to be reached when the orbital speed of the electron reaches light speed).

            Also IIRC Their increasing lightness draws them out from surrounding heavier atoms.

            But Mills is the man to ask.

            Doug.

          5. I have recommended Axil to join SCP list to be able to ask questions directly from Mills, but Mills is quite busy and may not have time to answer too many questions.
            Especially if those questions he has already answered in some video talks some have not bothered to listen.
            There is not just 27 but 137 energy levels. Silver is not reacting, it is just a good conductor for electricity, and has other good properties, like perfect melting and boiling temperatures for this process.
            Hydrino reaction needs a catalyst. There is many possibilities, but one of the best (and used in SunCell) is water, and that yields 1/4 level hydrinos.
            There is not any water injected anymore, but they found a better way:
            mix some stable metal oxide to the silver. Then in the reaction chamber hydrogen and oxygen from that oxide form a water molecule to act as the catalyst.
            This way only consumable in the process is hydrogen (which is extracted from water outside of the actual reaction chamber) and only “ash” is hydrinos.

          6. Tip,
            My reading of the process (I’ll go back and check) is that the water is broken into 2x atomic H and 1xO by electrolysis from the arc. Then some of the H atoms are transformed to hydrinos from collisions with the vaporises silver atoms.

            Thanks for clarifying the full number of energy levels.

            This obviously needs clarifying to get the actual detail claimed by the process.

            Cheers Doug

          7. It has been changed recently, water is not used directly anymore, but hydrogen and some (still secret what exactly) oxide mixed with silver.

          8. Holverstott states in his book (and I am certain Mills does in his papers) that the silver and some other compatible atoms such as lithium, act as a catalyst. Even Mills earlier cells were called ‘CIHT – Catalyst Induced Hydrino Transition cells’.

            I have posted above, a comment from Holverstott’s book about this catalyst effect.

            Cheers Doug.

    1. Yes they may have, many times and always differently.
      One scientist, Dr. Randell Mills, has identified it more than 20 years ago.

  46. Beijing, China and western society had no intentions of fouling the air and limiting visibility to 50 yards. It was an unintended consequence.

    Currently, we produce approximately 3KW thermal to generate 1KW electric. Even that is done at a fair distance and distribured by the grid. Suncell appears to be 100’s of kilowatts thermal per 1KW electric. Consider billions of these for homes and billions more for transporation and billions more for industry, you may find your cities suffering the heat island effect on steroids. Regardless, that amount of excess heat will create problems. We may only know how serious with 20/20 hindsight. We have a poor record with our foresight.

    Note I also considered this a problem with Rossi’s orginal E-cats when used by the masses. The peak kilowatt size required to meet their needs running 24/7 365 also created huge amounts of excess waste heat. The Quark appears to eliminate this issue. They can be activated in minutes or less and in 20 watt increments.

    It may be that Mills claims it isn’t economic to harness this heat because the approach/technique he uses is not well suited for turbine generation to begin with.

  47. Adding from Brett Holverstott’s book,

    how energy is said to be transferred from a H atom’s electron to a suitable atom capable of ‘resonating’ with and adsorbing energy from H atom.

    Chapter 4…
    Hydrino states (a table of H levels below ground state) allowed by the resonant coupling of a hydrogen atom to a suitable (I.e. Silver) catalyst capable of providing an energy hole of M * 27.2 eV. The hydrino atom transfers energy to the catalyst, then decays with the release of light to form a hydrino.

    Doug Marker

    NOTE lithium is also a capable catalyst for this resonant energy transfer. ( IIRC Mills used lithium in early experiments).

          1. I tried to post the page from his book. It isn’t all that clear. I’ll do it again when my overseas trip ends (flying home today).

            Cheers Doug

      1. Tip,
        I will also dig up the papers that explain that both water and deuterium can be used and only used in electrolisys to obtain 2xH + 1xO or 2xD and 1xO.

        Mills points out that they obtain the exact same energy from H2O as from D2O and cites this as evidence that there is no nuclear activity.

        Cheers Doug

    1. Am osea travelling so it is difficult to post actual easy to read data.

      I think we need to iron out this “what is the catalyst” issue to minimise confusing other people.

      Cheers Doug

    2. Silver (Ag) is not on that list, I checked those pages from the book. But water is a special case, just check those Mills papers with HOH in the title. HOH is about the same as H2O but so called nascent water molecule, just what is happening inside SunCell.

        1. Tip, Optiongeek,

          I accept the point and have concluded that the description in Holverstott’s book must be a simplified version.

          Tip, you are right in that Silver isn’t listed in the full table of Hydrino transition catalysts.

          Good debate and we all learn.

          Thanks Doug

      1. Tip,
        I can see what you are saying but there is a contradiction here.

        I can see that in those papers where Mills mentions HOH he is specifically mentioning ‘CIHT’ cells using electrolysis. That goes back several years and prior to the Suncell concept.

        I am satisfied that in the Suncell he uses Ag as the catalyst exactly as explained in Holverstott’s book.

        Again, will add more when not waiting in airline terminals. This issue is an excellent example of debating what us claimed and explained. I agree you had a good basis for your belief re water. I am satisfied with Holverstott’s explanation.

        We do need to debate it more.

        Thanks.

        Doug

  48. Below is an extract that use one well understood meaning as to the use of a catalyst in the Mills Suncell. There may be other uses in a different context.

    I’ll post a link to the source as a reply.

    EXTRACT:
    Mills’s theory used the latest advances in electrodynamics to understand the stability of the ground state. But Mills also predicted that under certain conditions, the electron of a hydrogen atom may occupy a lower orbit than the ground state. Instead of jumping to this orbit by releasing light, the hydrogen atom must collide with another atom, called a catalyst, and exchange energy in a process known as resonant coupling. The catalyst must be able to absorb just the right amount of energy in the process of ejecting electrons or breaking chemical bonds.

    According to Mills, the electron in the hydrogen atom then releases light as it falls to an orbit that is an integer fraction (1/2, 1/3, 1/4… etc.) of the ground state, forming what Mills named a hydrino.

  49. THE PROCESS FOR THE >>SUNCELL<< ….

    INPUT:
    'Light Water' is 'one' source for the fuel (H2O)
    (There are other sources being experimented with)
    Atomic H is a fuel obtained by electrolysis from H2O (via arc)
    (Atomic H can be obtained by other means as well)

    PROCESS:
    Silver is used as a hydrino catalyst (in the current SunCell)
    Electron energy is transferred to the catalyst element by 'resonant coupling'
    (Other elements with certain electron configurations can also be used)
    The Silver now also aids in triggering the arcing that fires the plasma
    (A development needed to eliminate solid electrodes that kept burning out)

    OUTPUT:
    Hydrinos are a product out
    EUV is a product out
    Oxygen also comes from the electrolysis process when that approach is used.

    1. Except silver is not the catalyst. There is small amount of still secret oxide mixed with silver. Look especially those validation reports. There are many places where that oxide name is sensored out. Oxygen from that oxide forms nascent water molecule HOH which acts as the catalyst. This is so new invention that it is not covered in Holverstott’s book. But anyway Brett did not mention anywhere that silver could be the catalyst.

      1. Tip,

        I agree that we may not be getting the full story 😉 – certainly the Brett Holverstott book simplifies the description and uses the word catalyst differently to how it is used in the CIHT documents.

        So your point is well made and well taken.

        Cheers Doug

          1. tlp,
            This issue has been resolved. Calling the catalyst ‘water’ is wrong and calling it Silver is wrong. See Mills presentation and the papers that you already posted about the CIHT cells. See also the full chart Brett Published where he lists all the elements that can be act as catalysts.

            We have all done well to get to this level of understanding.

            Time to move on 😉

            Cheers Doug

          2. Tlp,

            You can’t let this go – please go back and read the list of nominated catalysts and also show where Mills states he injects water ‘as the catalyst’. He doesn’t. He injects water to obtain atomic H, the current Suncell process uses a separate technique to inject O from an oxide into the molten silver which is later blended with the atomic H to trigger the catalytic effect in the current SunCell – please go study the diagrams !.

            The process can use ANY of the catalysts in Holverstott’s and Mills list.

            At this point can we end this in peace – lets agree to disagree – you can keep claiming that the water injected into the SunCell is the catalyst and I will continue to point to the list of catalysts in Holverstott’s book and at the Mills web site, and how for this version of the SunCell H is extracted from the injected water, is then blended with O from an oxide embedded in the molten silver and this combination is used (at the moment) as the catalyst in the current model.

            Sorry but if I were to tell anyone that Mills SunCell uses water as the catalyst (let alone the only catalyst) I would consider I was misleading them in a naive way.

            Please can we move on !.

            Thanks

            Doug

          3. No, you just go an read all my replys to you, and admit that I did not say water is injected to work as catalyst, but still water is the catalyst, HOH is water. How can this be so difficult fo you to admit that I was right? Now just a short reply please, where you say “I admit”

          4. See my latest post about catalysts up above – but do take 10 deep breaths. This is not game of thrones 🙂 – we are on the same side , really.

            Cheers Doug

  50. Wow. industry day videos are up. I wonder if any of the brilliant people here can refute the astounding revelations of Dr. Mills’ theory. If not, explain why they can’t refute him.

    1. tlp, your original post said ‘water’ was the catalyst and I disagreed. Then I said it was Silver. We were both off.

      What we are hearing is that the catalyst is HOH (and yes you later said so). Also what we are hearing is that HOH is not water per se – OptionGeek’s summary of it being …

      “The only secret ingredient, for now, is the source of oxygen Mills is
      using that, in combination with H2 gas being diffused into the vessel by
      a pressure gradient, forms the HOH catalyst.”

      So we have an up-to-date answer.

      Cheers Doug.

        1. tlp.

          I’ll call you right if you can just show any statement by Mills that he injects water into the SunCell as the catalyst. You surely read the Holverstott list of potential catalysts for the O part of each HOH molecule !. Your original remark was Mills uses water as the catalyst. That is wrong!. The HOH molecules generated are >>not<>extracted from water<< fed into the SunCell, and, uses O extracted from other chemicals in the catalyzing process and this allows the transitions that produce EUV light and Hydrinos.

          Don't get so hung up on this mistake. We have all done our best to interpret what is proving to be a little more complex process than we 1st thought.

          Let it go – time to move on.

          Cheers Doug

          1. tlp
            You originally said ‘water is the catalyst’.

            But, please see my newest post at the top. I believe it is the way to end this part of the discussion.

            I will be surprised if you don’t agree with it 🙂

            Cheers Doug

  51. “Where all this puts Rossi and LENR is a good question.” I contend that the market will have GOBS of room for Rossi’s technology. The sun cell seems quite large, whereas a single QuarkX will likely fit into a cell phone. There is all manner of question about how the sun cell will work in a moving application like a vehicle. QuarkX is very likely to work just fine in such an application.

    The biggest question I still have is, have two separate physics transforming technologies been discovered effectively simultaneously? This seems highly doubtful to me. When the dust settles, I expect that the laws of physics will only require one rewrite to accommodate both technologies. IOW these are two sides to the same coin.

    Exciting days these.

  52. There has been a side debate here on what the catalyst is in the SunCell. Tlp says it is water and I at 1st said Silver but later agreed that in fact Silver is not among the catalysts that can make the hydrino transition work. I withdrew that comment.

    tlp wants me to say “the catalyst is water” but I argue that this is not really true and at best is a simplistic interpretation of the Hydrino transition process.

    Below is the text from Brett Holverstott’s book where he states that there is a long list of catalysts that can trigger the transition and explains why each catalyst works and how.

    If I am wrong am happy to say so, but at the moment can not agree to the simplified statement “the catalyst is water” as was originally posted by tlp.

    ************************ Per Brett Holverstott …..

    New energy is the holy grail of invention, and Mills lost focus on his other activities to dedicate himself full–time to the hydrino research.

    He started by making a list of atomic catalysts that could absorb the required amount of energy from the hydrogen atom, 27.2 eV. The catalyst, as the receiver, must be able to expel the energy it absorbs, perhaps by breaking off (ionizing) electrons or breaking molecular bonds; the ionized electrons would carry off the energy kinetically. So any ionization that occurred at (or close to) integer multiples of 27.2 could potentially serve as the catalyst. The list was long: many of the atoms in the periodic table could be catalysts. Lithium, twice ionized, could catalyze a transition to an H(1/4) hydrino; beryllium, twice ionized, could catalyze a transition to an H(1/2); potassium, thrice ionized, could catalyze a transition to an H(1/4). Ions could also serve: a previously ionized helium ion (He+), if it ionizes again, could catalyze a transition to an H(1/3) hydrino.

    Catalyst m
    He+ → He2+ 2
    Rb → Rb7+ 14
    Li → Li2+ 3
    Rb → Rb8+ 14
    Be → Be2+ 1
    Sr → Sr5+ 7
    Na+ → Na4+ 8
    Sr+ → Sr3+ 7
    Ar+ → Ar2+ 1
    Nb → Nb5+ 5
    K → K3+ 3
    Mo → Mo6+ 8
    2K+ → K + K2+ 1
    Mo → Mo8+ 18
    Ca → Ca4+ 5
    Mo2+ → Mo3+ 1
    Ti → Ti5+ 7
    Mo4+ → Mo5+ 2
    V → V5+ 6
    Pd → Pd2+ 1
    Cr → Cr3+ 2
    In → In3+ 2
    Mn → Mn4+ 4
    Sn → Sn5+ 6
    Fe → Fe3+ 2
    Te → Te2+ 1
    Fe → Fe4+ 4
    Te → Te3+ 2
    Fe3+ → Fe4+ 2
    2Ba2+ → Ba++Ba3+ 1
    Co → Co4+ 4
    Cs → Cs2+ 1
    Co → Co5+ 7
    Ce → Ce5+ 5
    Ni → Ni5+ 7
    Ce → Ce6+ 8
    Ni → Ni6+ 11
    Pr → Pr5+ 5
    Cu → Cu2+ 1
    Sm → Sm4+ 3
    Zn → Zn2+ 1
    Gd → Gd4+ 3
    Zn → Zn8+ 23
    Dy → Dy4+ 3
    As → As6+ 11

    Atomic catalysts capable of undergoing resonant absorption of approximately m * 27.2 eV of energy from a hydrogen atom to produce an H(1/(p+m)) hydrino. For instance, an H(1/1) hydrogen atom (where p = 1) may undergo a transition to an H(1/4) hydrino by transferring 3 * 27.2 eV to a potassium atom, which undergoes ionization to produce K3+. The catalyst may later recover its electrons, and is unchanged in the overall reaction. Hydrinos may then undergo further catalysis, or themselves act as catalysts.
    (Mills 2000)

    Even molecules may serve as catalysts. If gas–phase sodium hydride (NaH) breaks apart, and ionizes one of the sodium atom’s electrons, the reaction could allow a transition to an H(1/3) hydrino. And a water molecule, if it breaks up and ionizes the oxygen, can allow a transition to an H(1/4) hydrino (a reaction which will become important later on). After inducing the hydrino transition, the catalyst is then free to recapture its electrons or reform its bonds later on, so overall it remains unchanged. The only permanent change (a loss of energy) is within the hydrogen atom itself. Once the catalyst absorbs the necessary energy, the electron orbit in hydrogen is made unstable, and it can then shrink, emitting a photon in the process, to form a hydrino. The hydrogen is permanently altered, forming an atom hitherto unexplored by science. Mills was still working out of Farrell’s lab. He had arrived at a list of catalysts, but not yet begun experiments, when news broke out from the University of Utah that two electrochemists were unveiling a new major energy source of their own.

    ****************************************************

    The concession I am happy to make to tlp is that if we agree that there can be be many catalysts I will agree that in the current version these words from Holverstott apply … “And a water *molecule*, >>if it breaks up and ionizes the oxygen<<, can allow a transition to an H(1/4) hydrino.

    I hope this explanation placates us all.

    Cheers Doug Marker

  53. Lets all agree to call the current SunCell catalyst ‘nascent water molecules’ where the oxygen has become ionized. That is my understanding of how Mills describes it

    Cheers Doug

  54. Stomps feet making demands.

    MFMP: LENR research by individual collaborators from multiple countries. Most of these individuals have day jobs. They donate their time and use their money to purchase expensive materials and equipment to build devices for these tests. They also pay for their own travel costs when joining others to do tests.

    MFMP accepts contributions and donations to help offset the cost of materials and equipement, but it falls far short of covering all costs. One should keep that in mind when asking them to provide a Demo that will have zero impact wasting their time and money. It is also not MFMP’s intent to prove anuything to us or develop a consumer product.

    MFMP’s goal is to develop a device that produces excess energy beyond error and is highly repeatable. When this goal is met, they intend to produce and provide kits to be provided to hundreds of research labs and Universities to replicate their work proving once and for all to a large group that the affect is real beyond doubt.

  55. What I found interesting from watching the videos was that there were people from Vodaphone and BT in the audience. The person from BT got up and spoke. Servers use a tremendous amount of power. The telecoms industry would obviously benefit from cheaper electricity. BLP have even postulated that telecom companies could become energy suppliers.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *