BLP news

[chrismb]

Opinions are like assholes--everyone has one.

...and some even appear to have two, and can talk out of both of them at the same time.

[JohnP]

These last 2 years they're accelerating their sales.

Umm... not sales of working hardware, they're sales of licenses to a bogus process.

One thing that bothers me about the BLP thing is it hinges on believing a single person--Mills. Things in nature are usually discovered by several people simultaneously in far-flung places, or which at least incrementally builds on the work of many others. Mills says, "ALL you guys are wrong, I'M the genius here, and I'm going to make a bundle!" Real science just doesn't play favorites like that. How come there aren't dozens of researchers making the same claim, fighting to be first at the patent office?

Yes, GTIT, you should look at the data for sure, but part of the data is this guy's behavior.

The thing that binds EEStor, BLP, and Steorn together is that, after you've paid for the manure, you can't put it on your plants.

[GIThruster]

first... its a perpetual motion machine. BLP and Eestor are not perpetual motion... just extremely efficient.

Errr..... not at all... BLP is a perpetual motion machine because it generates energy from nothing and outputs 'waste' hydrino hydrogen.

If this hydrino hydorgen has a differential energy state to 'normal' hydrogen then you should be able to generate yet more energy from this. Back to hydrogen, with energy coming out all the time?

BLP is a dS<0 device, as proposed, but it has hidden that fact behind the notion of a speculated hydrogen-hydrino vector.

By now there must be tons of this hydrino stuff kicking around, if they've generated net energy in these experiments of theirs. All they have to do is ship some of this hydrino 'exhaust' to non-believing labs (I mean, what else have they done with it?), and the job is done and BLP gets a big tick!

This hydrino stuff is, supposedly, going to have an energy level some 15keV/nucleon below that of normal hydrogen. So it should be inert in any chemical reactions (that can only supply a few eV). In fact, it should resemble a neutron, except for the fact that it doesn't decay back to a proton and electron on the usual 20 min half-life that solo neutrons do.

Where's the hydrino, GIT? I wanna get some and do some experiments on it.

Chris, if you spend the time to understand the theory, which from the above you obviously do not; and you then contact BLP, there's an excellent possibility they'll provide you with the hydrino compounds just as they have dozens of labs over the years. You'll want to be an authentic chemist--someone who understands how to do the kinds of spectroscopy involved in looking for what you'd be looking for.

Look Peeps, this isn't rocket science, and therein lies much of the trouble. It's chemistry. That's why Mills presents each years at ACS. The chemists don't give him grief. They look at the data, and nod, and cringe, and wait as the physicists have at. It's the physicists who are up in arms because they're the ones who have been told they're wrong.

The engineers, they just make all these claims in ignorance. Nothing against engineers. Many of my best friends are engineers, but they're not scientists. Fortunately for me, they're also the types who don't make judgements in ignorance, so they recognize they really can't say anything about BLP. People who play skeptic just look so dopey when they demonstrate they don't know anything about the target of their criticisms.

BLP is nothing like Steorn. They have a running demonstration reactor now for two years, run at a public university. that work has been subject of very careful scrutiny, including exhaustive chemical analysis and the university professors signed their names that there are no other possible chemical reactions that could account for the energy coming out of the BLP reactor. There is something NOVEL here going on that CANNOT be explained by "transmutation of nickel" or any other understood physics.

Almost a decade ago, NIAC paid for a thruster study. The evidence of some sort of very unusual chemistry and physics has been out there for almost a decade--stuff no one else has been able to explain but BLP. yet, people pretend there's no evidence! There's all manner of evidence, plain for anyone who bothers to look rather than ridicule.

[kcdodd]

Well, I have the nitrino, 7 times better then the hydrino. And you can even run the engine in air because it's 70% nitrogen! Or, for the boats, maybe the waterino, thats two hydrinos and an oxygino, which is 10x better then just one hydrino. But what if the terrorists make a waterino bomb, they could destroy the entire earth!

[GIThruster]

Further, if hydrogen can drop an electron below the ground state, I would expect any other element to also do so. There would be a whole zoo of unexplained phenomena.

Yes. The process can be used for any element for which a suitable catalyst can be found. The theory does predict that in some circumstances, a catalyst will come in contact with an element under the very low pressure and otherwise special conditions necessary for a fractal energy state to be obtained, and in Mills' book you'll find discussion of this.

The current state of the art is to drop hydrogen to 1/7 of its base state, releasing energy in the UV spectrum, which is where the moniker "BlackLight" comes from, but in Mills book you'll find several other examples of this process, and even cosmological observations he states are of this process occurring in nature.

[D Tibbets]

Chris, if you spend the time to understand the theory, which from the above you obviously do not; and you then contact BLP, there's an excellent possibility they'll provide you with the hydrino compounds just as they have dozens of labs over the years. You'll want to be an authentic chemist--someone who understands how to do the kinds of spectroscopy involved in looking for what you'd be looking for.

BLP has shipped samples of hydrinos to independant labs for confirmation of it's existence? Where are the results of this testing?

Dan Tibbets

[GIThruster]

I haven't seen data like that posted for years for good reason. These chemicals are the next target for research now that the reactors are working. If you look on their web site, they're looking to hire people to begin the work they only talked about a decade ago, which is battery research. Both batteries and highly energetic explosives are possible uses for these compounds, and because of this, there are trade secrets to be protected with regards the compounds.

I should mention that this is not the first example of BLP technology that was once open for public scrutiny, and later was held closer to the vest. All reference to the "BlackLight Brainchild" has been removed from the public forum. There's no way to know whether this early experiment based upon Mills physics, to create a self-aware computer; was successful or not, because even mention of it has been sanitized from the web. I only know about it because I have a leather bound copy of the original monograph from 13 years ago. (It's in storage so please don't ask me to look up more detail on the Brainchild.)

Try to bear in mind that BLP does not need to post this info any longer. It is years since they were looking for investors. They are now selling licenses so they don't need to worry about convincing people 5 years after the fact. They're way past that kind of pandering.

[Giorgio]

Try to bear in mind that BLP does not need to post this info any longer. It is years since they were looking for investors. They are now selling licenses so they don't need to worry about convincing people 5 years after the fact. They're way past that kind of pandering.

Actually is not like that.

The type of license that they are selling are payment against delivered results.
Which means that the company that is buying the license is not paying a dime until BLP actually provides and delivers the results promised in the agreements signed.

BLP on the contrary is still maintaining hersef with pubblic and institutional funds. After all that's the main reason why they keep all those big names in the Board of Directors.
Last round of financing from institutional investors for a total of 10 Million US$, was closed in February 2010.

[TallDave]

this unnamed journalist (worry when people refuse to sign their work)

What? His name is right at the top: "By Erico Guizzo / January 2009"

One minute cursory glance of the pseudo-IEEE web site demonstrates that the journalism is just wrong.

It isn't pseudo-IEEE, it's the magazine of the IEEE. And which part are you saying is wrong? If Mills did something before 1990 he doesn't seem to have told anyone.

FYI, there have been lots of people posit the experiments at Rowan are merely transmuting nickel (whatever that means) but the actual study done at Rowan says that is not possible.

Oh yes, the unreproducible study done with devices provided by BLP. So, why hasn't anyone else been able to replicate it? Why hasn't anyone else seen a hydrino?

These last 2 years they're accelerating their sales.

Uh huh. Are these sales secret? Why does BLP not have press releases for them? I see one license this year, to some "green energy" outfit.

http://www.blacklightpower.com/press.shtml

If they had something here, I would expect to be reading things like this:

BLP Devices Producing Power, Saving Money
XYZ Utility Credits BLP Technology For Surprising Return To Profitability, Plans Huge Additional Buildouts

or

BLP Receives Second Milestone Payment of $10M After Year of Successful Device Operation
"Blacklight" Reactors Produced 100MW With Minimal Downtime, Says Client

I give BLP another 2-5 years before the gullible VC money runs out.

This is my favorite part:

Unlike most schemes for free energy, the hydrino process of Randy Mills is not without ample theory (WN 8 Jan 99). Mills has written a 1000 page tome, entitled,"The Grand Unified Theory of Classical Quantum Mechanics," that takes the reader all the way from hydrinos to antigravity (WN 9 May 97). Fortunately, Aaron Barth (not to be confused with Erik Baard, the Randy Mills' apologist), has taken upon himself to look through it, checking for accuracy. Barth is a post doctoral researcher at the Harvard-Smithsonian Institute, and holds a PhD in Astronomy, 1998, from UC, Berkeley. What he found initially were mathematical blunders and unjustified assumptions. To his surprise, however, portions of the book seemed well organized. These, it now turns out, were lifted verbatim from various texts. This has been the object of a great deal of discussion from Mills' Hydrino Study Group. Mills seems not to understand what the fuss is all about." - Park[21]

[GIThruster]

Sorry I don't have more time to answer the above questions but in very short, to the best of my knowledge, Mills first published in 1988. Also to the best of my knowledge, they have never had any public funds. The official literature of IEEE is the "Spectrum", is it not?

Now if I'm wrong I'm sure y'all will let me know.

[TallDave]

Yes, IEEE Spectrum (where the article appeared) is one of the IEEE's publications.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_IEEE_publications

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_Spectrum

Mills first announced his hydrino state theory in April 25, 1991 in a press conference in Lancaster, as an explanation for the cold fusion phenomena that had been revealed in 1989.

I suppose it's possible Mills published something in 1988, but the article references 1990 so it isn't off by much either way.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blacklight_Power

I give Mills enormous credit as a pitchman. He must be very impressive in person to have scared up this much VC cash. If I saw, say, Vinod Khosla in there somewhere I'd be more inclined to think he might be on to something. As it stands I think he will be fortunate to avoid criminal charges from his funders.

[JCee]

I cringe even to enter this discussion but I will.
Theses are my personal observations as a scientist outside the fields of chemistry and physics.

1) Mills probably has an interesting phenomenon in his lab.

2) Mills probably is a genius but even geniuses may be wrong and get tunnel vision on an incorrect solution to a problem.

3) Mills is either correct or delusional and is not running a scam he is a True Believer.

4) Mills has an impressive publication record considering his unorthodox heresy and the difficult challenge he would have to get anything he proposes published as his theory if correct would unravel the life work of many scientists (Does not mean he is correct but does say he can do actual science, dot all the i’s, and cross all the t’s) Here is a sample of his relatively recent publication list.

3 Publications in Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics (2003-2009)
2 Publications in Central European Journal Applied Physics (2003-2009)
1 Publication in European Physical Journal: Applied Physics (2010)
5 Publications in IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science (2002-2003)
7 Publications in Physics Essays (2003-2010)
2 Publications in Electrochimica Acta (2002-2009)
1 Publication in Journal of Applied Physics (2002)
1 Publication in Applied Physics Letters (2003)
3 Publications in Journal of Plasma Physics (2003-2006)
1 Publication in Thermochimica Acta (2003)
and at least a couple of dozen more in lesser specialty journal.

5) I submit his publication record is good enough to be tenured at many Universities IF he was not in such a controversial field (Does not mean he is correct just that he can do actual real science and write fairly well).

6) Mills is impressive as a pitchman because he is Genius and True Believer.

7) I foresee four possible outcomes of his research.

a) Tunnel Vision on his GUT-CP Theory blinds him to LENR explanations. Hydrino Theory a total bust. Blacklight ends in total failure ~30% odds

b) Hydrino Theory a bust but his GUT-CP Theory yields useful short cuts and accurate predictions 95% of the time useful for predictive algorithms. Kind of like how Newtonian Physics give accurate results in most cases vs Einsteinium Physics but is much easier to compute. Partial success of theory ~40% odds.

c) The Hydrino theory and GUT-CP Theory are incorrect but his phenomenon is real and they persevere to produce an unexplained excess of energy. Partial success of energy generation but theory wrong ~20% odds.

d) Hydrino Theory and GUT-CP Theory largely correct. Achieves low cost cheap energy production and his Theories revolutionize science <10% odds.

8 ) Paradigm shifts in science are always, always fought against tooth and nail until by establishment science community eg ulcer caused by stress vs bacteria (Helicobacter Pylori), Plate Tectonics, etc

9) Nicolas Tesla was one of the foremost Geniuses of the early 20th Century. Clearly ahead of his time and inventor of many ground breaking devices. Yet he died nearly penniless after spending much of his last 2 decades of life and fortune on wireless transmission of energy and other oddball inventions that never panned out. Thus even Geniuses are susceptible( or prone) to folly.

10) The accusation of Mills plagiarizing for his GUT-CP from text books has never been established or proven not one! one! author has come forward with this charge. It is 3rd and 4th parties removed who make this charge without citation and is unconscionable to make it without proof. (Show me WHO and WHAT was plagiarized not some vague he plagiarized stuff how can a person even defend themselves from such a vague charge!!)

11) I do Not blame him for being hesitant to release extensive results if he is correct. After the 3rd party interventions of Dr Parks and others to have Patents that were tentatively approved revoked he currently has little in the way of IP protection other than Trade Secrets.

12) I definitely have seen a lot of dirty pool in the Science Community and know how bad people can be when their toes are stepped on. In Science egos are big and it is cutthroat. (I have a friend who is a full Professor at a large University submitted a paper for publication about a decade ago. 2 reviewers gave it outstanding 1 reviewer called it an Affront to Science come to find out the negative reviewer was a direct competitor and ended up delaying the publication until his paper came out first in another Journal on almost the exact same subject matter. Another Assistant Professor had his Grant Lifted at NIH review panel by a Panel member who rewrote it slightly and got the grant. My Assistant Professor friend took it to court and NIH issued him a full grant and legal fees to hush him up. He took the payoff and got his tenure as Associate Professor. There is an awful lot of insider/clique/gaming going on in the mainstream sciences.

13) Currently I will withhold judgment of Mills, Hydrinos, and his GUT-CP Theory and will give him a few more years to prove himself right or wrong. But I also will not be investing any of my money either on a long shot. But I might if I was a multimillionaire/ billionaire looking for a long shot with large potential if it succeeds.

[Giorgio]

@JCee

Quite an articulated post.
I have to say that I find myself largely in agreement with your points, except for two.

One.
On the patenting side, the best way to bypass any issue and any complain from the patenting office is just to bring em a working model of what you are presenting. Bring something working that they cannot explain with actual laws and chemical reactions and they won't care about what you are writing into your patent application as an explanation (as long as it is related with the apparatus your are delivering).


Two.
Why give him "few more years"?
Again, if they have everything ready to go to market, just make a scale model prototype of it and show to the world.

A simple set up: Hydrino heat release, water (or low boiling point fluid) heat exchanger, steam engine, hydrino regeneration and one bulb lamp just to prove continuous power generation.

Don't even need to use a turbine, a steam engine working on wet steam is still efficient enough to give a net power demonstration:
http://www.tinypower.com/store.php?crn= ... how_detail
http://www.greensteamengine.com/

So, what are they waiting for?

[BenTC]

All reference to the "BlackLight Brainchild" has been removed from the public forum. There's no way to know whether this early experiment based upon Mills physics, to create a self-aware computer; was successful or not, because even mention of it has been sanitized from the web. I only know about it because I have a leather bound copy of the original monograph from 13 years ago. (It's in storage so please don't ask me to look up more detail on the Brainchild.)

Sanitized From the Web! Could it be possible?

Google does only return 24 results
but one of those is this russian ftp site with
Table Of Contents showing ~100 pages "39.4 BlackLight Brainchild p608-703"

It will be interesting to see how long it lasts there. Get it while while the going is good. It might not be there tomorrow.
P.S. Gracious request to Brainchild Active Autonous Search&Destroy Agents...
when your virii break into my system to scour it clean, be gentle please.

Edit: Note, the server only allows you two connections at a time, so if you click those links too quickly then you may get an authenticatione error. Just try again.

[JohnP]

first... its a perpetual motion machine. BLP and Eestor are not perpetual motion... just extremely efficient.

Errr..... not at all... BLP is a perpetual motion machine because it generates energy from nothing and outputs 'waste' hydrino hydrogen.

What I got from the PDF was that the process takes in normal hydrogen from water electrolysis, becomes exposed to the catalyst, "and then a miracle occurs.." and the hydrogen spits out energy and becomes a hydrino. The input energy is in the hydrogen source.