BLP news

Point out news stories, on the net or in mainstream media, related to polywell fusion.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

GIThruster
Posts: 4686
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm

Post by GIThruster »

Ben, that's an impressive find. I'm an accomplished researcher and wasn't able to find that for some reason. Could be it's relatively new?

John, yes. There's no conservation issue involved and the process is very easy to understand. I've no idea why Chris chooses to so misrepresent it.

JCee, very impressive post. I agree completely with your findings and subsequent attitude. The only addition I would make is that the evidence from Rowan is very compelling and though it is not necessarily evidence for Mills' theory--just as you say it could be LENR, etc,. it is evidence of something fishy. People who claim standard chemistry can explain all that energy have not read the report.

Giorgio, the water calorimetery study at Rowan is more than sufficient to demonstrate the power output you seek. Why is it you think it's fine to dump all manner of extra effort onto the task? Why light a bulb? Seems an awfully cynical and outrageously over demanding thing, to require a turbine, etc. when those things are obviously very expensive. One wonders if you've ever done any authentic experiment yourself. Would you manufacture tertiary and expensive requirements for your own work? I think not. Your requirements are silly, and the extra energy output is obvious and real and coming from a second party with superb credentials.

As to you giving BLP several more years, what in the world made you think you set someone else's schedule? How absurd.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis

chrismb
Posts: 3161
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 6:00 pm

Post by chrismb »

This whole deal is easily proved.

Out of this process is gained these hydrinos. These would have such a high energy band gap that it would be non-flammable in air - chemical energies just wouldn't touch the 100's eV activation energies of oxidisation of a H(1/4) state.

So you take hydrino gas, you weight it, and you set light to it. If it weighs the same as hydrogen and doesn't burn, then this is positive proof that hydrinos are being produced.

It is very, very, very simple to prove or disprove..... please proceed, Rowan....

kurt9
Posts: 588
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 4:14 pm
Location: Portland, Oregon, USA

Post by kurt9 »

Black Light Power was supposed to unveil a working generator in Fall of '09.

Skipjack
Posts: 6805
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:29 pm

Post by Skipjack »

My take on BLP is:
If it works, great, we will all live happy ever after.
I would not give them a single dime though until I see a working reactor and working (cost- ) efficiently and for more than a few hours (rather months).
They just do nothing that makes me feel confident about their claims in any way. They have nothing to show other than paper (and that is "patient", as we say here). They have not held a single one of the dates that they set themselves, repeatedly. So why should I believe anything they say?

icarus
Posts: 819
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 12:48 am

Post by icarus »

Why not light a bulb?

If the darned thing can't light a simple bulb what good is it to anyone?

Has he lit up just one bulb with his millions of research dollars yet?

Seems like a fine acid test of the first order for electric generation to me.

JCee
Posts: 16
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 2:32 am

Post by JCee »

"As to you giving BLP several more years, what in the world made you think you set someone else's schedule? How absurd."

Obviously they don't live by my schedule but the longer BLP takes the worse things look for them. Example ITER and tokamak reactors. Any project that goes Long is usually encountering technical problems. Problems may be solved and projects continued but many valid projects have been killed rightly or wrongly by time and cost overruns. Investors and Boards eventually run out of patience. But as for me I typically wait, listen for information, update my opinion, and periodically do a review on various projects that caught my interest (e.g. Polywell, FocusFusion, Tri-Alpha, Mach Effect, Heim Theory, BlackLight Power, Magnetic Heat shielding, etc). I just happened to state at this point in time my patience would call for a reexamination in ~2 years. At that point I would weigh the available data, new publications, rumors, etc and make a determination. That determination could be a thumbs up, a thumbs down, or more wait and see. Now BLP doesn't care about me and my review schedule but I'm sure their investors/Board conducts similar internal reviews but knowing who they are does give me some reassurance.

kcdodd
Posts: 722
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 3:36 am
Location: Austin, TX

Post by kcdodd »

I agree with chrismb. This seems like such a simple thing to prove. Whether their black box produces power and lights a lightbulb is really irrelevant to their claim of the source of energy. I can build an engine that produces power and claim it runs on magical unicorns, but that just don't make it so. I want to see the magical unicorn.

In my mind, it's just too convenient that they need a catalyst to drop an electron to a lower energy level. That means there is no natural de-excitation from the accepted ground state to the "lower" one. He had to come up with an explanation of why no-one has ever seen any emission or absorption line like that on earth, or stars, or anywhere else. On top of the fact that every hydrogen would already be a hydrino if that were the case by the nature of thermodynamics. And how convenient it is that making the right catalyst just happens to cost millions of dollars!
Carter

GIThruster
Posts: 4686
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm

Post by GIThruster »

chrismb wrote:This whole deal is easily proved.

Out of this process is gained these hydrinos. These would have such a high energy band gap that it would be non-flammable in air - chemical energies just wouldn't touch the 100's eV activation energies of oxidisation of a H(1/4) state.

So you take hydrino gas, you weight it, and you set light to it. If it weighs the same as hydrogen and doesn't burn, then this is positive proof that hydrinos are being produced.

It is very, very, very simple to prove or disprove..... please proceed, Rowan....
I seriously doubt it's that simple but why don't you find out?

jansson@rowan.edu
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis

GIThruster
Posts: 4686
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm

Post by GIThruster »

kcdodd wrote:In my mind, it's just too convenient that they need a catalyst to drop an electron to a lower energy level. That means there is no natural de-excitation from the accepted ground state to the "lower" one. He had to come up with an explanation of why no-one has ever seen any emission or absorption line like that on earth, or stars, or anywhere else. On top of the fact that every hydrogen would already be a hydrino if that were the case by the nature of thermodynamics. And how convenient it is that making the right catalyst just happens to cost millions of dollars!
To my mind it's just too convenient that people present positions like this without having ever read the docs. If you had read the docs, you'd know all this above is wrong.

This is really the problem. I don't want to be cast as BLP advocate, but with everyone attacking them without having availed themselves to even a cursory glance at the work, just seems really wrong, and it leaves sensible people with all the work, trying to explain to ignorance over and over and over again.

Read the docs!
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis

TallDave
Posts: 3140
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 7:12 pm
Contact:

Post by TallDave »

I'm still waiting to see
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
Honestly GT, you seem like a decent guy but I'm surprised you so easily buy a claim worth trillions but only replicated by one lab.
n*kBolt*Te = B**2/(2*mu0) and B^.25 loss scaling? Or not so much? Hopefully we'll know soon...

Enginerd
Posts: 189
Joined: Sun Feb 07, 2010 5:29 am

Post by Enginerd »

kcdodd wrote:In my mind, it's just too convenient that they need a catalyst to drop an electron to a lower energy level. That means there is no natural de-excitation from the accepted ground state to the "lower" one. He had to come up with an explanation of why no-one has ever seen any emission or absorption line like that on earth, or stars, or anywhere else. On top of the fact that every hydrogen would already be a hydrino if that were the case by the nature of thermodynamics. And how convenient it is that making the right catalyst just happens to cost millions of dollars!
These types of catalysts have been well known for centuries. They are also believed to be useful for transmuting lead into gold, though their main use has traditionally been moving gold out of one person's pocket into a different person's pocket.

kcdodd
Posts: 722
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 3:36 am
Location: Austin, TX

Post by kcdodd »

To my mind it's just too convenient that people present positions like this without having ever read the docs. If you had read the docs, you'd know all this above is wrong.
Which part is wrong? I am sorry you must keep explaining how all of atomic theory would be completely overturned if I would just read the docs! Which doc exactly? A quote and reference please? Or do I just take your word that it exits but is now proprietary knowledge for "good reason".
Carter

Giorgio
Posts: 3061
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 6:15 pm
Location: China, Italy

Post by Giorgio »

GIThruster wrote:Giorgio, the water calorimetery study at Rowan is more than sufficient to demonstrate the power output you seek.
It proves just that there was a chemical reaction.
Until you have a closed loop where you can prove a net "Excess heat generation" than their technology is only hypothetical.
GIThruster wrote: Why is it you think it's fine to dump all manner of extra effort onto the task? Why light a bulb? Seems an awfully cynical and outrageously over demanding thing, to require a turbine, etc. when those things are obviously very expensive. Would you manufacture tertiary and expensive requirements for your own work?


We live in a cynical world my friend, and this is also due to people like them promising lot of beautiful things and delivering nothing in the end.

As for the effort, you probably never saw a working power plant model. It can be done with 25K US$ using off the shelves equipment. No need to manufacture anything, no need to use turbines either, just a wet steam engine with a power generator and heat exchanger will suffice.
Now, 25K is not much for a company that got extra 10M$ funding in march IMHO.

GIThruster wrote:As to you giving BLP several more years, what in the world made you think you set someone else's schedule? How absurd.
They can stay in the market promising amazing stuff for 50 more years if they are able to find the financing, not that I care, it's not my money.
If it was my money I wouldn't have given them one more day thought.

Let's face reality.
Up to today they must still demonstrate that they can revert their "hydrinos" and reuse them as Fuel.
This means they still have to prove that they can actually close the power cycle with a net energy result. Until they do this all they have is just lot of words and fancy PPT/PDF slides.
Their problem is that no one will pay a dime to licence those.

kcdodd
Posts: 722
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 3:36 am
Location: Austin, TX

Post by kcdodd »

If they take chrismb's idea and separate out the "waste" hydrinos, they should sell bottles of it on their website. I would buy some. According to mills it's dark matter! I mean, who wouldn't want a bottle of dark matter on their shelf? Oh yeah and to test it too.
Carter

chrismb
Posts: 3161
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 6:00 pm

Post by chrismb »

JCee wrote: But as for me I typically wait, listen for information, update my opinion, and periodically do a review on various projects that caught my interest (e.g. Polywell, FocusFusion, Tri-Alpha, Mach Effect, Heim Theory, BlackLight Power, Magnetic Heat shielding, etc).
An intellectually crazy bunching of experiments. It's a bit like saying you are interesting in flying so you're keeping an eye out for news on jet airliners, personal jet backpacks, intergalactic cruisers and dragons.

Post Reply