Talk-Polywell.org

Experiments and Analytical Testing Performed at Rowan University Glassboro, New Jersey over the last 9 months

Rowan Scientists confirmed BLP's 1kW and 50kW power source tests corresponding to 20 kilojoules and 1.0 megajoules respectively. Chemical analysis of the reactant and product R-Ni powder could account for less than 1% of the observed energy from known chemistry. Calorimetry and analytical testing were performed at Rowan University.

Read the full release at the link below

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

Read the independent report here (It's a .pdf file so Right Click - Save As)
http://www.blacklightpower.com/pdf/BLPI ... Report.pdf

I was wrong. This isn't just a scam, it's now spam.

But here's some more info on it, from a chemist looking into it.

http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/20 ... sponds.php

He's not sure what to think - but posts this...

Mills has been good enough to offer to help me out with any aspects of the data that they’ve published, and to get in contact with the company should I be in the area, which is a good sign, and much appreciated. They’re also supposed to have a video of the reaction up shortly, and we’ll see what we can learn from that as well. Against all this, I have to put the fact that I still find the physics behind the company quite odd and improbable. And one has to remember that the track record of odd, improbable physics breakthroughs that promise huge supplies of energy is. . .not good. And that’s putting it very mildly indeed.

But all it takes is one.

Indeed it does.

His article on "Things I won't work with - triazadienyl fluoride" is funny, also.

http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/20 ... uoride.php

"You start off by making absolutely pure anhydrous hydrogen azide, which is a proposal that you don't hear very often around the lab, and is the sort of thing that leads to thoughts of career changes. (Maybe I could go into the insurance business and sell policies to whoever took over the prep)

Ow. I barely made it through Chem1 in high school lo these many years back...

The comments in that link are pretty good, too, including this piece, which I'll take the liberty of quoting:

This is truly the scam that WON'T DIE, as Instapundit links yet another bogus story promoting it. This one's in the clueless New York Times, which fails to mention any of the history cited below. Adding insult to injury, the Times author asks 'knowledgeable' readers to add comments - WHICH DON'T EXIST on his post. Unbelievable.

Randell Mills has been announcing 'imminent' breakthroughs for at least ten years now. Below is our original post from 2005 - which was also linked by Instapundit. (Hmm. Wonder what the record is for having the same post linked by Glenn Reynolds? Because the way Mills operates, this one could break it.)

I've been following the BLP thing for about the last four, five years myself. It smells like something bogus - but...

Here's the video...

Apparently Dr. Peter Jansson at Rowan U. sees something in this.

I'm thinking this isn't some Dean Drive or over-unity cold-fusion type scam - maybe there's something to it.

(Page for Dr. Jansson - http://users.rowan.edu/~jansson/) [/url]

JLawson wrote:I've been following the BLP thing for about the last four, five years myself. It smells like something bogus - but...

Here's the video...

Apparently Dr. Peter Jansson at Rowan U. sees something in this.

I'm thinking this isn't some Dean Drive or over-unity cold-fusion type scam - maybe there's something to it.

(Page for Dr. Jansson - http://users.rowan.edu/~jansson/) [/url]

This *is* the "cold fusion" reaction. Their "big" reactor runs over 7 hours peaks at about 40 watts thermal, then declines. There IS, however, detectable warmth above unity. Then it's time to change the Nickel dust, because the nickel dust in the reactor stops working....

The problem with studying "cold fusion", is that there doesn't seem to be any good testable hypothesis beyond the same old calorimetry experiments started in 1989. Very little extra heat comes out, but what does come out, sometimes, is *interesting*. I just wish they'd get off the idea that there is some energy solution there. There isn't, because expensive preparation is required for tiny heat output. On a sunny day, a couple of roof shingles generate more "power".

Hydrogen loading into the surface lattice structures of some metals is doing.....SOMETHING. I don't give squat about the calorimetry experiments anymore. They've been going on for 20 years. What I want to see is some Hypothesis, that points to an experiment that can show what it is that's going on when hydrogen is loaded into the surface structures of the metallic lattice.

I also think we *might* see some strange phenomenon if the WB7 proliferated as a scientific instrument with lots of ports for various detectors. That it might give us some answers... and new interesting hypothesis. I'd like to see another thread devoted to some interesting, non-fusion related experiments that WB 7 could do. Wouldn't it be easier to detect various wavelengh neutrons in a the vacuum of the WB7 than in an electrolytic cell?

I think you understate the power densities they are demonstrating now.

I read the Rowan University paper to indicate that for the "50 kW experimental runs" the net heat output is about 1 MJ, or 0.3 kWh. Since Rowan appears to be confirming 50 kW, that implies 50 kW/0.3 kWh = 0.006 h = 20 seconds. That would be the interval for the bulk of the reaction.

The chamber temperature plot (Figure 4) of the report indicates that almost the entire reaction occurs in just a short time. It's hard to judge due to the scale, but there is a sharp peak of 5-10 minutes at most, and it could be a lot less, since chamber temperature is an indirect measurement of chemical activity. Also, they might have more direct ways of knowing the reaction interval. Like intense light for example? The results look to be compatible with the power density claimed.

A question. Physically, how large does the device need to be in order to generate a reasonable, continuous amount of energy?

Scammity scam scam.

nferguso wrote:I think you understate the power densities they are demonstrating now.

I read the Rowan University paper to indicate that for the "50 kW experimental runs" the net heat output is about 1 MJ, or 0.3 kWh. Since Rowan appears to be confirming 50 kW, that implies 50 kW/0.3 kWh = 0.006 h = 20 seconds. That would be the interval for the bulk of the reaction.

The chamber temperature plot (Figure 4) of the report indicates that almost the entire reaction occurs in just a short time. It's hard to judge due to the scale, but there is a sharp peak of 5-10 minutes at most, and it could be a lot less, since chamber temperature is an indirect measurement of chemical activity. Also, they might have more direct ways of knowing the reaction interval. Like intense light for example? The results look to be compatible with the power density claimed.

A sharp peak like that with a decline is compatible with a chemical reaction.

MSimon -

I don't think they're claiming it's anything BUT a chemical reaction, and it's putting out a lot more heat than it should.

The question, of course, is why it's putting out a lot more heat.

They're claiming it creates fractional electron states. That's a quantum effect, never before seen by anyone anywhere.

Again, if this was possible I would imagine that by now we'd be seeing these "hydrinos" in labs all over the world as other scientists replicated his results and Mills would be accepting the Nobel. Since that's not happening, it's very unlikely they are correct about the mechanism for the heat or its potential for power generation.

TallDave wrote:They're claiming it creates fractional electron states. That's a quantum effect, never before seen by anyone anywhere.

Again, if this was possible I would imagine that by now we'd be seeing these "hydrinos" in labs all over the world as other scientists replicated his results and Mills would be accepting the Nobel. Since that's not happening, it's very unlikely they are correct about the mechanism for the heat or its potential for power generation.

Bah! Just because it's his equipment doesn't mean his explanation is any more worthy.

Like I sad before, Tycho took great measurements, but had a bogus model. It took Kepler 30 years later to fully model Tycho's measurements correctly.

I believe it's the cold fusion thing, and it's slightly above unity as we know it. Nothing to get excited about, until there is a good explanation that will lead to great new hypothesis and new experiments, which this "hydrino" thing is NOT! A new theory has nothing to do with past experiments, a new theory only relates to new hypothesis and new expreiments. Hydrino theories will never lead anywhere.

"...Tycho took great measurements, but had a bogus model. It took Kepler 30 years later to fully model Tycho's measurements correctly."

"...A new theory has nothing to do with past experiments, a new theory only relates to new hypothesis and new expreiments. "

Thanks for clearing it all up for me.

Helius wrote:... it's slightly above unity as we know it. Nothing to get excited about ...

A violation of the law of conservation of energy is nothing to get excited about?