• There is a problem with the forum sending notifications via emails. icerat has been informed. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Blacklight Power

Astrodude

Critical Thinker
A
Joined
Nov 19, 2010
Messages
371
Blacklight Power has been an apparently financially successful "free energy" startup by a Randell Mills, a medical doctor turned Physicist and Chemist. The company's flagship claim is their manufacture of the "hydrino", a hydrogen atom with an electron below ground state. They claim to be able to solve all sorts of energy crises. This isn't that unusual, but the capital they've accrued from two decades is impressive, about $60,000,000. They claim to have several contracts to build hydrino generators and revolutionize energy.

I would love few things more than scientific achievement on the scale that Mills promises, but I've noticed one big problem: Most of the companies don't appear to exist. They're legal entities, but they don't have websites, sales reports, or even employees. The most legitimate one is Akridge Energy. It appears to be part of a real estate company called Akridge that actually exists. Still, there is no real evidence of a division called Akridge Energy. It's as though they have imaginary business partners. Estacado Energy Services, one of two New Mexico-based customers supplying Blacklight, is also a subsidiary of Roosevelt County Electric Cooperative. This is normal because it is a rural area, but what is strange is that Roosevelt County Electric Cooperative only has about 39 employees and sales far shy of a million dollars. Estacado Energy is probably a one man operation.
 
Astrodude said:
The company's flagship claim is their manufacture of the "hydrino", a hydrogen atom with an electron below ground state.
Click to expand...
That would suggest that the hydrino is more stable than a hydrogen atom. If this were true, why isn't hydrogen always in the form of a hydrino? And how do you get energy -out- of something that's more stable than normal? You'd have to put energy into it to turn it into normal hydrogen to do anything with it.
 
Astrodude said:
Blacklight Power has been an apparently financially successful "free energy" startup by a Randell Mills, a medical doctor turned Physicist and Chemist. The company's flagship claim is their manufacture of the "hydrino", a hydrogen atom with an electron below ground state. They claim to be able to solve all sorts of energy crises. This isn't that unusual, but the capital they've accrued from two decades is impressive, about $60,000,000. They claim to have several contracts to build hydrino generators and revolutionize energy.

I would love few things more than scientific achievement on the scale that Mills promises, but I've noticed one big problem: Most of the companies don't appear to exist. They're legal entities, but they don't have websites, sales reports, or even employees. The most legitimate one is Akridge Energy. It appears to be part of a real estate company called Akridge that actually exists. Still, there is no real evidence of a division called Akridge Energy. It's as though they have imaginary business partners. Estacado Energy Services, one of two New Mexico-based customers supplying Blacklight, is also a subsidiary of Roosevelt County Electric Cooperative. This is normal because it is a rural area, but what is strange is that Roosevelt County Electric Cooperative only has about 39 employees and sales far shy of a million dollars. Estacado Energy is probably a one man operation.
Click to expand...


Lots to read on Mills.

Some dont like him and i am beginning too

Note the wiki quote;

"Mills claims that much of standard particle physics, while having experimental validation, should be rejected due to its reliance on overfitting:[11]

The Dirac equation does not reconcile this situation. Many additional shortcomings arise such as instability to radiation, negative kinetic energy states, intractable infinities, virtual particles at every point in space, self-interaction, the Klein paradox, violation of Einstein causality, and 'spooky' action at a distance. Despite its successes, quantum mechanics (QM) has remained mysterious to all who have encountered it. Starting with Bohr and progressing into the present, the departure from intuitive, physical reality has widened. The connection between quantum mechanics and reality is more than just a "philosophical" issue. It reveals that quantum mechanics is not a correct or complete theory of the physical world and that inescapable internal inconsistencies and incongruities arise when attempts are made to treat it as a physical as opposed to a purely mathematical 'tool.'
""




How many here have read the GUT-CP?


I will bet, not ONE.
 
Astrodude said:
Blacklight Power has been an apparently financially successful "free energy" startup by a Randell Mills, a medical doctor turned Physicist and Chemist. The company's flagship claim is their manufacture of the "hydrino", a hydrogen atom with an electron below ground state. They claim to be able to solve all sorts of energy crises. This isn't that unusual, but the capital they've accrued from two decades is impressive, about $60,000,000. They claim to have several contracts to build hydrino generators and revolutionize energy.

I would love few things more than scientific achievement on the scale that Mills promises, but I've noticed one big problem: Most of the companies don't appear to exist. They're legal entities, but they don't have websites, sales reports, or even employees. The most legitimate one is Akridge Energy. It appears to be part of a real estate company called Akridge that actually exists. Still, there is no real evidence of a division called Akridge Energy. It's as though they have imaginary business partners. Estacado Energy Services, one of two New Mexico-based customers supplying Blacklight, is also a subsidiary of Roosevelt County Electric Cooperative. This is normal because it is a rural area, but what is strange is that Roosevelt County Electric Cooperative only has about 39 employees and sales far shy of a million dollars. Estacado Energy is probably a one man operation.
Click to expand...

Where did you get the $60,000,000 figure? Is it any more reliable than the "physics" the idea is based on?

Bishadi said:
How many here have read the GUT-CP?


I will bet, not ONE.
Click to expand...

What is "the GUT-CP", Bishadi?
 
Blacklight power is crap. They have been around for a while and have done nothing but make publicity for themselves.
 
It's a scam, and apparently a fairly old (1992) and well run scam. Don't bother looking it up on wiki, the article is completely bland and I wouldn't be surprised if they had people grooming Wikipedia to keep the scam going.

There are articles and forum discussions about this going quite far back and they all seem to boil down to the same thing. Actual atomic physicists who have looked at the numbers seem to be saying that they don't add up properly and don't cover a bunch of known atomic behaviors.
 
Weak Kitten said:
It's a scam, and apparently a fairly old (1992) and well run scam. Don't bother looking it up on wiki, the article is completely bland and I wouldn't be surprised if they had people grooming Wikipedia to keep the scam going.

There are articles and forum discussions about this going quite far back and they all seem to boil down to the same thing. Actual atomic physicists who have looked at the numbers seem to be saying that they don't add up properly and don't cover a bunch of known atomic behaviors.
Click to expand...

There is the against version.

Now how about the '4"?


i.e ...... is cold fusion related?

Then the scope is,(without the peanut gallery additions) per wiki


In the hydrogen atom, these states are postulated to have an effective radius of 1/p of the ground state radius, with p being limited by the speed of light to a positive integer less than or equal to 137.[4]:31, 207 He terms these below-ground hydrogen atoms 'hydrinos'. Mills' mechanism consists of a non-radiative energy transfer between a hydrogen atom and a catalyst that is capable of absorbing a certain amount of energy. The total energy Mills says is released for hydrino transitions is large compared to the chemical burning of hydrogen, but less than nuclear reactions. Mills claims that limitations on confinement and terrestrial conditions have prevented the achievement of hydrino states below 1/30, which would correspond to an energy release of approximately 15 keV per hydrogen atom


Nothing magical or new other than a catalyst (who knows what it is?) and H react with at a 'state' (????) (i suggest a specific wavelength is absorbed (non-radiative energy (resonant energy transfer basically)), Then the H (hydrino is like a open state of Hydrogen for burning, if not, it should be), but that reaction is supposedly hotter than just H and O, apparently)

So his idea must be to expose the 'catalyst' and hydrogen, he is creating a 'hydrino'.... which is the store-'able' fuel but that reaction is his objective apparently. The key is, he believes he can put less energy into the production of the 'hydrino release'.

i noticed the patent on a microwave producing item. (magnetron produces ONE wavelength).


Or maybe that catalyst and Hydrino are what cause the reaction and it has another step (create the catalyst and the hydrino) before the reaction.

Either way, i can understand 'it could work'. The scope of his (Mills) whole 'general universe' i am not standing on in any way.


But, i do believe the cold fusion and the above hydrino ideas could work.



..
 
Last edited:
Weak Kitten said:
It's a scam, and apparently a fairly old (1992) and well run scam. Don't bother looking it up on wiki, the article is completely bland and I wouldn't be surprised if they had people grooming Wikipedia to keep the scam going.

There are articles and forum discussions about this going quite far back and they all seem to boil down to the same thing. Actual atomic physicists who have looked at the numbers seem to be saying that they don't add up properly and don't cover a bunch of known atomic behaviors.
Click to expand...

Oh, the whole idea is impossible physically. There's no question about that.

If it were possible, it would be extremely dangerous.
 
Weak Kitten said:
It's a scam, and apparently a fairly old (1992) and well run scam. Don't bother looking it up on wiki, the article is completely bland and I wouldn't be surprised if they had people grooming Wikipedia to keep the scam going.

There are articles and forum discussions about this going quite far back and they all seem to boil down to the same thing. Actual atomic physicists who have looked at the numbers seem to be saying that they don't add up properly and don't cover a bunch of known atomic behaviors.
Click to expand...
Yes. I remember being asked about something like this in the late nineties by a co-worker. It was rubbish then and chemistry hasn't changed to allow this rubbish now.
 
The $70,000,000 number is the venture capital. I believe this is still a private company, and the venture capatalists have so far got 0 money out. 0% is a far cry from successful.

Walt

P.S. And as far as the venture capital number goes, that may be just Randell Mills' number.
 
Madalch said:
That would suggest that the hydrino is more stable than a hydrogen atom. If this were true, why isn't hydrogen always in the form of a hydrino? And how do you get energy -out- of something that's more stable than normal? You'd have to put energy into it to turn it into normal hydrogen to do anything with it.
Click to expand...



His claim (at least currently) is that he uses a catalyst of some sort to make regular hydrogen into hydrinos. As the hydrino supposedly has a lower energy state than the hydrogen, this process would produce energy, and it is this energy he claims to be harnessing.
 
As far as I'm aware*, catalysts facilitate reactions by lowering or circumventing the activation barrier. Most reactions will go without a catalyst, having one simply makes them more efficient and economical.

Mills is claiming a reaction that absolutely will not go without his magic catalyst, hence the activation energy for this transformation must be absolutely bloody enormous since we don't see hydrogen spontaneously converting to hydrinos. He may have found a material that circumvents this barrier but I think it's..... unlikely.

*I'm currently working for my PhD in the field of catalysis. If I'm wrong about this, it'll be embarassing but I'll probably survive
 
Evilgiraffe said:
As far as I'm aware*, catalysts facilitate reactions by lowering or circumventing the activation barrier. Most reactions will go without a catalyst, having one simply makes them more efficient and economical.

Mills is claiming a reaction that absolutely will not go without his magic catalyst, hence the activation energy for this transformation must be absolutely bloody enormous since we don't see hydrogen spontaneously converting to hydrinos. He may have found a material that circumvents this barrier but I think it's..... unlikely.

*I'm currently working for my PhD in the field of catalysis. If I'm wrong about this, it'll be embarassing but I'll probably survive
Click to expand...

It's not just unlikely, it's as impossible as just about anything I can think of. The hydrogen atom has been thoroughly understood for about 90 years. Everything from extremely sensitive lab tests to very high energy collider experiments to nuclear fuson to supernova to big bang nucleosynthesis supports our model for it. And according to that model, it is impossible for there to be any state with energy below that of the standard ground state.

If there were a lower energy state, no matter how high the barrier, ground state hydrogen could tunnel to it (without a catalyst). But huge collections of hydrogen atoms (1023 and more) never exhibit such tunneling - not one atom tunnels.

If there were a lower energy state, why has it never shown up in any astrophysical observations, despite the fact that hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe? Why wasn't it populated in supernova? Why didn't hydrogen end up in that state after it first formed? Why is it that when one combines an electron with a proton it quickly settles down to the standard ground state, and never to this lower energy state? Etc. etc.
 
If that would be the case, it would be EASY to demonstrate. Give the "catalyst" to labor so taht they can characterize hydrino. But hey....

The "catalyst" has sqare quote, because a catalyst is *NOT* giving energy for a reaction to occurs. A catalyst is only making an enthalpy of activation lower by giving a substrate support for the formation energy to be lower (platinum IIRC has this mode of action for water formation) or they enter as an intermediate product and are recycled as in in an A->B reaction with a certain enthalpy of activation, A+cata->C and C->Cata+B where both enthalpy of activation are lower and thus easier to produce. Remark on the cata is recycled.

What THEY pretend is that they have some MAGIC substance which allow them to produce hydrogen at a lower level than the ground level , called hydrino. But that could not be a catalyst because the energy would STILL be missing from the equation (the energy the system give off when going from suposedly H+cata->Hydrino).

Furthermore that would still leave "Hydrino" ashes which would be easy to characterise and differentiate to H. Unless they pretend the hydrino is immediately getting energy from the environment to go back to H.

Last time I had looked at their PDF article with the nice eliptical orbital, I laughed myself very hard. Their article was more or less classical physic without much of QM.

So yes. Scam. Thru and thru.
 
sol invictus said:
It's not just unlikely, it's as impossible as just about anything I can think of. The hydrogen atom has been thoroughly understood for about 90 years. Everything from extremely sensitive lab tests to very high energy collider experiments to nuclear fuson to supernova to big bang nucleosynthesis supports our model for it. And according to that model, it is impossible for there to be any state with energy below that of the standard ground state.

If there were a lower energy state, no matter how high the barrier, ground state hydrogen could tunnel to it (without a catalyst). But huge collections of hydrogen atoms (1023 and more) never exhibit such tunneling - not one atom tunnels.

If there were a lower energy state, why has it never shown up in any astrophysical observations, despite the fact that hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe? Why wasn't it populated in supernova? Why didn't hydrogen end up in that state after it first formed? Why is it that when one combines an electron with a proton it quickly settles down to the standard ground state, and never to this lower energy state? Etc. etc.
Click to expand...

That is another good points. But good points never stopped BL proponent.

You know the type "you are a dogmatic idiot which think everything beside your 'science' is heretic" , "he will be suppressed by men in black" etc...
 
I'd be interested in some responses to articles they've posted here:

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

Particularly the second one down, from 11/29/10, "GEN3 Partners and Harvard Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics (CfA) Scientists have confirmed the light signature of hydrino formation, high-energy radiation emitted as the electron of the hydrogen atom undergoes a transition below what was previously considered the lowest energy state."

There's been some suggestions that they've misrepresented the relationships between these researchers, and I'm wondering if anyone here can comment on the physics. It's a bit beyond my level, I'm afraid.
 
sol invictus said:
It's not just unlikely, it's as impossible as just about anything I can think of. The hydrogen atom has been thoroughly understood for about 90 years.
Click to expand...
which is irrelevant.

ie.... to lower an H atom to its lower state, is simply to absorb the energy upon that mass and the atom is left hydrino. (the mills model)

I would be like taking a Hydrogen gas and removing all the energy from it and then using it. Nothing changed of the atom except the state (energy level; resonance (energy upon that mass).

Everything from extremely sensitive lab tests to very high energy collider experiments to nuclear fuson to supernova to big bang nucleosynthesis supports our model for it.
Click to expand...
WOW......

That is like ranting, we use fire, so we know what fire is; but that is a lie.

And according to that model, it is impossible for there to be any state with energy below that of the standard ground state.
Click to expand...
'Ground state'

Is BEC (cold) a 'ground state'?

What is the difference of a Hydrogen atom at 100 degrees f and BEC cold?

WHat is the difference of the 2 atoms? Is it 'energy' upon that mass?
If there were a lower energy state, no matter how high the barrier, ground state hydrogen could tunnel to it (without a catalyst).
Click to expand...
Tunnel......

isnt that spooky action stuff? ie.... what tunneling is there for hydrino production? I read that the catalyst upon CONTACT is causing the 'release' of energy. (the reaction)

But huge collections of hydrogen atoms (1023 and more) never exhibit such tunneling - not one atom tunnels.
Click to expand...

That statement means, you dont know much about the accellerators as that is how the symmetry interpretatins even exist. (they rant on tunneling and you say NOT ONE ATOM TUNNELS.
If there were a lower energy state, why has it never shown up in any astrophysical observations, despite the fact that hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe?
Click to expand...
Astrophysics is not using lab experiments. Did you know the spctrum of H at BEC has a completely different spectrum? http://focus.aps.org/story/v2/st22
Why wasn't it populated in supernova?
Click to expand...
what's a super nova to this thread?

THe SN in itself is a speculation.
Why didn't hydrogen end up in that state after it first formed?
Click to expand...
kind of like asking why Ice forms from snow. You need to comprehend the path from beginning to ending.

Why is it that when one combines an electron with a proton it quickly settles down to the standard ground state,
Click to expand...
that ground state is relevant to the environment. ie.... compare and H atom at 100 degrees with a BEC atom. Both are H atoms with a proton and electron but they are in completely different states (of energy upon the structure)

and never to this lower energy state? Etc. etc.
Click to expand...

Your post is a perfect example of showing to the people on this forum why so little is understood within the complacent.


Think in the sense of how molecules form, elements combine with energy upon that structure and when a reaction occurs that energy (em) is released. That is why we eat food, our metabolisms cause a reaction, the remaining elements are pooped out....... 'we use the energy'
 
Last edited:
Bishadi said:
which is irrelevant.

ie.... to lower an H atom to its lower state, is simply to absorb the energy upon that mass and the atom is left hydrino. (the mills model)

I would be like taking a Hydrogen gas and removing all the energy from it and then using it. Nothing changed of the atom except the state (energy level; resonance (energy upon that mass).

WOW......

That is like ranting, we use fire, so we know what fire is; but that is a lie.

'Ground state'

Is BEC (cold) a 'ground state'?

What is the difference of a Hydrogen atom at 100 degrees f and BEC cold?

WHat is the difference of the 2 atoms? Is it 'energy' upon that mass?
Tunnel......

isnt that spooky action stuff? ie.... what tunneling is there for hydrino production? I read that the catalyst upon CONTACT is causing the 'release' of energy. (the reaction)



That statement means, you dont know much about the accellerators as that is how the symmetry interpretatins even exist. (they rant on tunneling and you say NOT ONE ATOM TUNNELS.

Astrophysics is not using lab experiments. Did you know the spctrum of H at BEC has a completely different spectrum? http://focus.aps.org/story/v2/st22
what's a super nova to this thread?

THe SN in itself is a speculation.
kind of like asking why Ice forms from snow. You need to comprehend the path from beginning to ending.

that ground state is relevant to the environment. ie.... compare and H atom at 100 degrees with a BEC atom. Both are H atoms with a proton and electron but they are in completely different states (of energy upon the structure)



Your post is a perfect example of showing to the people on this forum why so little is understood within the complacent.


Think in the sense of how molecules form, elements combine with energy upon that structure and when a reaction occurs that energy (em) is released. That is why we eat food, our metabolisms cause a reaction, the remaining elements are pooped out....... 'we use the energy'
Click to expand...

Have you ever had a physics lesson? It doesn't look like it.
 
Madalch said:
That would suggest that the hydrino is more stable than a hydrogen atom. If this were true, why isn't hydrogen always in the form of a hydrino? And how do you get energy -out- of something that's more stable than normal? You'd have to put energy into it to turn it into normal hydrogen to do anything with it.
Click to expand...

I think they're claiming that the ground state of a hydrogen atom doesn't exist and stability is variable depending on reactions currently going on, but I don't understand his science. I don't understand quantum mechanics either so that doesn't mean it's wrong, but I think Mills' reports are cooked and not any real hydrinos. I'm more interested in the experiments and tests because that's much easier to understand than the theory.
 
sol invictus said:
Where did you get the $60,000,000 figure? Is it any more reliable than the "physics" the idea is based on?
Click to expand...
I would assume it is. Investors report their investments to the IRS or SEC for tax purposes. With computers and the "Edit and Find" buttons a quick search of Blacklight power in tax forms should reveal how much investment they've received.

Banks also have to report loans they make. 60 million dollars a reasonably safe approximation.
 
Weak Kitten said:
It's a scam, and apparently a fairly old (1992) and well run scam. Don't bother looking it up on wiki, the article is completely bland and I wouldn't be surprised if they had people grooming Wikipedia to keep the scam going.

There are articles and forum discussions about this going quite far back and they all seem to boil down to the same thing. Actual atomic physicists who have looked at the numbers seem to be saying that they don't add up properly and don't cover a bunch of known atomic behaviors.
Click to expand...

The question is what has happened to their investors? Power statistics are reasonably well kept, they have to be for financial purposes. Have any of their generators delivered as promised? That's what I'm trying to figure out.

It is possible for a legitimate product to be based on junk science as one can reach the correct conclusion from the wrong premises.

Weak Kitten said:
It's a scam, and apparently a fairly old (1992) and well run scam. Don't bother looking it up on wiki, the article is completely bland and I wouldn't be surprised if they had people grooming Wikipedia to keep the scam going.

There are articles and forum discussions about this going quite far back and they all seem to boil down to the same thing. Actual atomic physicists who have looked at the numbers seem to be saying that they don't add up properly and don't cover a bunch of known atomic behaviors.
Click to expand...

The question is what has happened to their investors? Power statistics are reasonably well kept, they have to be for financial purposes. Have any of their generators delivered as promised? That's what I'm trying to figure out.

It is possible for a legitimate product to be based on junk science as one can reach the correct conclusion from the wrong premises. For instance, Isaac Newton invented the reflecting telescope but based it on an incorrect theory of of light because he thought it had a corpuscular nature. The wave theory and wave/particle duality turned out to better explain Newton's invention than Newton's theory!
 
Last edited:
Astrodude said:
The question is what has happened to their investors? Power statistics are reasonably well kept, they have to be for financial purposes. Have any of their generators delivered as promised? That's what I'm trying to figure out.
Click to expand...

Have any of their generators been delivered at all?

I would guess "no".

It is possible for a legitimate product to be based on junk science as one can reach the correct conclusion from the wrong premises.
Click to expand...

Sure. For example, a drug could work even if the theory about it is wrong. But energy generation isn't a very good candidate for such events. Energy generation requires energy input, and it's generally pretty hard to keep providing the required input if you don't know what the required input is. Blacklight's theories aren't just a wrong explanation for a real event, they're an impossible explanation for something that doesn't happen.
 
I'm trying to remember the anecdote... there was a physicist who first proposed the possibilitiy of a stable low orbital below traditional ground state while driving, and phoned home to leave the idea on his answering machine in case he crashed. He thought it was that amazing an idea as an energy source and that he had to secure the knowledge for the world.

I think that was back in the '60s, so Blacklight is essentially pitching a failed hypothesis from two generations ago.

Does anybody recognize that anecdote? I sincerely can't remember where I read it. I know it wasn't Feynman.
 
BenBurch said:
You know, if you want to look at an "out there" idea or two for energy production, look at the Polywell or Paul Kolok's Plasmak. Both are unproven by there is no reason we know of YET why they cannot work.
Click to expand...

Both of these look very cool.
 
I have followed the BLP story for awhile. I think I even started a thread about it years ago.

It certainly seems like a scam. The claims are grandiose and at least some of them seem readily testable. But there never is any independent verification of the claims and the ideas and products described on the site remain well below any mainstream visibility.

The only thing different about this scam and more routine scams that I can see is that the site and the reported research have the patina of legitimacy. It seems like they might have legitimate researchers producing legitimate documentation of research, but everything produced has to be part of supporting the bogus science claims that underlie the BLP business.

I have wondered what it would be like to work in the organization. I envision a leader that is viewed as looney by the researchers who chug along doing what they are told. But I know too little about the organization to know even if they still have or ever had legitimate researchers. It is a private company which is too poorly known to generate enough interest to justify investigation by independent journalists so almost all that is knowable by the public is what they publish on their website.

It has been quite awhile now, but I tried to pin down some of their claims of investment by utilities and I wasn't able to do so as I recall.

ETA: Here's a link to a paper produced by a Rowan University research group purporting to have found energy greater than was predicted for the known heat production for various reactions. I quickly read through it and there is a table where they list a lot of different reactions where they found extra energy. What I couldn't figure out quickly was what they did differently to get the extra energy.

http://users.rowan.edu/~jansson/blacklight_power_summer2009.pdf

From the conclusion section:
The scientific investigations completed at Rowan University make it quite clear that there is a source of heat being generated in these numerous chemical reactions that cannot be explained in the confines of conventional modern chemistry. Dozens of calibrations on both the 5X and 50X calorimeter cells have given our research team confidence that there is but a small error in the water flow calorimetry, (having coupling efficiencies averaging above 98%). In all cases the heat gains observed are many multiples greater than any potential inaccuracies of our measurement system.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
davefoc said:
I have followed the BLP story for awhile. I think I even started a thread about it years ago.

It certainly seems like a scam. The claims are grandiose and at least some of them seem readily testable. But there never is any independent verification of the claims and the ideas and products described on the site remain well below any mainstream visibility.

The only thing different about this scam and more routine scams that I can see is that the site and the reported research have the patina of legitimacy. It seems like they might have legitimate researchers producing legitimate documentation of research, but everything produced has to be part of supporting the bogus science claims that underlie the BLP business.

I have wondered what it would be like to work in the organization. I envision a leader that is viewed as looney by the researchers who chug along doing what they are told. But I know too little about the organization to know even if they still have or ever had legitimate researchers. It is a private company which is too poorly known to generate enough interest to justify investigation by independent journalists so almost all that is knowable by the public is what they publish on their website.

It has been quite awhile now, but I tried to pin down some of their claims of investment by utilities and I wasn't able to do so as I recall.
Click to expand...

from their website

GEN3 Partners and Harvard Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics (CfA) Scientists have confirmed the light signature of hydrino formation, high-energy radiation emitted as the electron of the hydrogen atom undergoes a transition below what was previously considered the lowest energy state. Read the results in the GEN3 and CfA Report "Validation of the Observation of Soft X-ray Continuum Radiation from Low-Energy Pinch Discharges in the Presence of Molecular Hydrogen."

11/29/10


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


i did not find the direct publication but i did find an item that could assist in the energy states

Often when something new is coming not too many are publishing. Did you notice in a previous post i mentioned the patents (magnetron/microwave)? Because i knew, they would tie that part up as it will establish what the catalyst wavelength is.



Read below about establishing the 'states' of H




The performance of our computational technique is tested by comparing our calculations of the p - s and p - d transitions in Fe XVIII and Fe XIX to known experimental results. An estimate of the Lamb shift for these transitions shows that it may start to play a role at this level of 10-3Å accuracy and therefore it has to be included for more precise calculations.

Finally, I will present my work on NIST databases. In particular, I will show two interactive databases designed to calculate total energies and transition frequencies of hydrogen and deuterium as well as hydrogen-like ions. The values are highly accurate and based on current knowledge of the relevant theory, which includes relativistic, quantum electrodynamic, recoil, and nuclear size effects. The hydrogen-like ion database is possibly of interest for X-ray spectroscopy, whereas the hydrogen and deuterium data base lays the theoretical groundwork for precise determination of ground and excited energies.
Click to expand...

http://www.cfa.harvard.edu/itamp/xdap/abstracts/kotochigova.html
 
Thanks for the link to the paper Bishadi. As you might have noticed I added a link to a paper written by a Rowan University researcher to my original post.

I looked around the web for academic responses to the paper I linked to and I didn't find any. The paper was linked to on a few science type blogs, but the comments as yet didn't go beyond making note of the fact that the paper wasn't published in a peer reviewed journal, the study was funded by BLP and that it unlikely that the hydrino theory is correct.

The paper you linked to seems to be subject to the same criticism, i.e. not peer reviewed and it is funded by BLP. However, it seems legitimate and it seems to report a result which is not consistent with current scientific knowledge. Beyond that, I don't have any comments, at least not yet.
 
Bishadi said:
from their website

GEN3 Partners and Harvard Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics (CfA) Scientists have confirmed the light signature of hydrino formation, high-energy radiation emitted as the electron of the hydrogen atom undergoes a transition below what was previously considered the lowest energy state. Read the results in the GEN3 and CfA Report "Validation of the Observation of Soft X-ray Continuum Radiation from Low-Energy Pinch Discharges in the Presence of Molecular Hydrogen."

11/29/10


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


i did not find the direct publication but i did find an item that could assist in the energy states

Often when something new is coming not too many are publishing. Did you notice in a previous post i mentioned the patents (magnetron/microwave)? Because i knew, they would tie that part up as it will establish what the catalyst wavelength is.



Read below about establishing the 'states' of H






http://www.cfa.harvard.edu/itamp/xdap/abstracts/kotochigova.html
Click to expand...

Ah, GEN3 partners has verified their claims. Surely, GEN3 is a chemical powerhouse or biotechnology giant, right? Well, according to their website GEN3 partners is basically a consulting firm. Also, look at their testimonial section:

“Even though our R&D group had been working on this problem for over a decade, GEN3 developed a breakthrough solution in 90 days — a solution we never considered.” Fortune 100 industrial products company

“We think of GEN3 as providing the R&D expertise of a very large corporation for the budget of a small corporation.” Fortune 500 agricultural production company

“It’s fascinating to find an organized method for stretching your thought process in directions that you never considered before.” Leading Fuel Cell Company

“The students’ extreme satisfaction is derived from the level of the materials, the instructors mastery of the fields and the extraordinary instruction skills they demonstrated.” Fortune 100 industrial manufacturing company




I think it's strange that they didn't specify which companies gave the endorsements! GEN3 probably set up the bad experiment and paid Bykanov to write about their data.

Also, Alexander Bykanov never specifically played a part in data collection. He was not operating the spectrometer. He was at Cymer. Never in the paper is it suggested that the entire process was peer reviewed. The experimental method tells all. "The BLP light source loaned to CfA and the experimental set up for recording EUV spectra are shown in Figures 1 and 2. These electrodes and test equipment including the high-voltage supplies, turbo pumps, back-illuminated CCD and CCD data processing equipment were also provided by BLP."(page 2)

That's reminiscent of the stories about Uri Gellar bending flimsy plastic silverware but claiming that it was metal.
 
Astrodude said:
I would assume it is. Investors report their investments to the IRS or SEC for tax purposes. With computers and the "Edit and Find" buttons a quick search of Blacklight power in tax forms should reveal how much investment they've received.

Banks also have to report loans they make. 60 million dollars a reasonably safe approximation.
Click to expand...

Don't know anything about researching the above, but I did find this:

Most of BLP’s investors are undisclosed, but it did receive $10 million from electric utilities Conectiv and Pacificorp, as well as high-profile members of its own board like Shelby Brewer, assistant secretary of nuclear energy under Reagan, and Michael Jordan, chief executive of Electronic Data Systems.
Click to expand...

http://venturebeat.com/2009/07/30/b...xth-utility-deal-to-produce-power-from-water/
 
davefoc said:
Thanks for the link to the paper Bishadi. As you might have noticed I added a link to a paper written by a Rowan University researcher to my original post.

I looked around the web for academic responses to the paper I linked to and I didn't find any. The paper was linked to on a few science type blogs, but the comments as yet didn't go beyond making note of the fact that the paper wasn't published in a peer reviewed journal, the study was funded by BLP and that it unlikely that the hydrino theory is correct.

The paper you linked to seems to be subject to the same criticism, i.e. not peer reviewed and it is funded by BLP. However, it seems legitimate and it seems to report a result which is not consistent with current scientific knowledge. Beyond that, I don't have any comments, at least not yet.
Click to expand...

Fair bet across the board.

ie... i like it when people see that a representation from a single source cannot really be confirmed unless you did it yourself.

That could be a good argument.

Ie... i have a question; if scientific information can benefit mankind, no one has a right to subdue its testing and application to assist the benefit of mankind, right? For example, if Edison (GE) had the flourescent light for 100 yrs, and now it is mandated as required because it benefits us all, isnt there a conflict of interest? They discounted the usage to sell another product and sold more juice and products because of it (profit). But all the time, the 'business' knew, the flourescent light was better.

The next poster claimed some corp is funding them?

I wonder who? (Which invisible hand)


Now if 'the students' want to do it, then do it. Who is going to assist a private funding and 'get er done'.


I posted that i think its possible and why.

But i am a hydrogen energy kind of guy (from water, store solar energy to H/O production; anyone can do it)
 
Excuse my ignorance of physics, but can someone explain what the following means or is supposed to mean: "a hydrogen atom with an electron below ground state".
 
something that is physically impossible. it is called the ground state because it is the lowest possible state. anything below the ground state just doesn't make sense.
I have done some of this stuff in quantum physics. it gets quite complicated, especially the Schroedinger equation. Not looking forward to 3rd year QM too much!

I am still confused about 'energy upon mass':confused:
 
Last edited:
Astrodude said:
Ah, GEN3 partners has verified their claims. Surely, GEN3 is a chemical powerhouse or biotechnology giant, right? Well, according to their website GEN3 partners is basically a consulting firm.
Click to expand...


When you start looking into these claims, it just gets more woo. If you take a look at the comments here:


http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/a-gigawatt-from-a-liter-of-water/


you find this:

"Hmm - I received the following response to my request to CfA for verification of the study. They acknowledge that a study was commissioned by Gen3 and performed within their facilities and by their technician but deny a relationship with A. Bykanov. Make of it what you will.

———————————

Dear <name withheld>:
The company Gen3 (representing Blacklight Power) paid for the use
of one of our spectrometers and the technicians to operate it to make
standard measurements of a supplied hydrogen sample. The results of
those measurements were submitted to Gen3. A. Bykanov has no affiliation
with the CfA and the Center for Astrophysics makes no claims nor did it
participate in any research involving “hydrino transitions”.
"
Click to expand...


So it seems they're misrepresenting the nature of the involvement of the Harvard CfA, in an attempt to borrow their credibility. If you have something real, why would you do that?


Spindrift said:
Excuse my ignorance of physics, but can someone explain what the following means or is supposed to mean: "a hydrogen atom with an electron below ground state".
Click to expand...


It comes down to the fact that Mills and his Blacklight crew believe our current understanding of the states of hydrogen are just plain wrong. What we consider to be the ground state actually isn't, according to them.
 
MattTheTubaGuy said:
something that is physically impossible. it is called the ground state because it is the lowest possible state. anything below the ground state just doesn't make sense.
Click to expand...

have you ever thought maybe the battery in the scale is bad.

What if the scale was reestablished?

I have done some of this stuff in quantum physics. it gets quite complicated, especially the Schroedinger equation. Not looking forward to 3rd year QM too much!
Click to expand...

It isn't so tough, once you comprehend what each portion of theorem is describing.

I am still confused about 'energy upon mass':confused:
Click to expand...

That is normal when not taking into consideration that energy is not just speed (kinetic). Guys like Lavoisier shared what caloric is.


Here is a publication, in math that will offer you a venue on all three fronts of your post; a).... ground state, b).... energy upon mass (caloric) c).... and all in math

GEOMETRIC RENORMALIZATION BELOW THE GROUND
STATE

9/30/10 (maybe to new for a few)

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1009/1009.6227v1.pdf

Abstract. The caloric gauge was introduced in [24] by Tao with studying
large data energy critical wave maps mapping from R2+1 to hyperbolic space
Hm in view. In [1] Bejenaru, Ionescu, Kenig, and Tataru adapted the caloric
gauge to the setting of Schr¨odinger maps from Rd+1 to the standard sphere
S2 ֒! R3 with initial data small in the critical Sobolev norm. Here we develop
the caloric gauge in a bounded geometry setting with a construction valid up to the ground state energy, which for maps R2+1 !Mm is the natural limitation
imposed by the harmonic map heat flow used to define the caloric gauge. =In
[20] we apply these results to the study of Schr¨odinger maps lying below the ground state energy.[/b]



But this is an interesting item within the doc...


Lemma 7.4 (Equations of motion). Let ϕ : R+ × R2 → M be a heat flow with
classical initial data whose energy E0 is less than Ecrit, let e be a caloric gauge for ..., and let ψx, ψs, Ax be the associated derivative fields and connection fields. [/u]Then we have the evolution equations...[/u]




Enjoy the ride
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom