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:

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

  • Jas

    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.

  • Omega Z

    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.

  • nanoradical

    A surface-plasmon-polariton effect allows the selection of the radiant emissions spectrum delivered to a thermophotovoltaic, ensuring high efficiency conversion.

    [‘Squeezing’ near-field thermal emission for ultra-efficient high-power thermophotovoltaic conversion]

  • doug marker

    Am always willing to give praise where it appears earned & Axil has IMHO done so.

    Axil shows he was willing and able to both do his homework and upon recognizing what he sees as success, has publicly said so.

    His new comments about Randell Mills and Hydrino transitions are here …

  • doug marker

    That seems to be what is emerging as the current catalytic process.


  • doug marker

    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

  • doug marker

    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

  • doug marker

    Really nice explanation and very informative. Thanks

    Doug Marker

  • bfast

    “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.

  • tlp

    I don’t worry about Ag, I agree 100% with you, and have been trying to explain that as you can see.

    • doug marker

      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.

      • tlp

        What about if you could admit that you were wrong and I was right. HOH is water, just born water molecule.

        • doug marker


          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

          • tlp

            I said he does not inject water.
            HOH is water:

            • doug marker

              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

              • tlp

                Just say you admit, water = HOH is the catalyst in SunCell. Very simple way to end this.

                • doug marker

                  Take 10 deep breaths and relax. Cheers Doug (we are on the same side).

                • tlp

                  Ok I take this that you admit. It is just so difficult sometimes. Cheers.

        • doug marker

          Mills Chart
          Atomic H + Catalyst. Not ‘Water’

          The Process does not combine Atomic Hydrogen and water ! – The process obtains the atomic H >>from water<< then obtains O that is added to the molten silver to create the HOH ions which become the catalyst.

  • Michael W Wolf

    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.