rexresearch.com
Randell MILLS
SunCell
Related : MILLS, Randell : Hydrino
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=siHCRp7TpoU6
Brilliant Light Power's SunCell Announced on CNN International

CNN International's announcement of the SunCell, the world's new energy source that releases massive power by conversion of hydrogen to dark matter.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0PYe-4090g
Brilliant Light Power Demonstration, January 28th 2016

On Thursday January 28th, Brilliant Light Power hosted an invitational public demonstration of its SunCell® technology. During the live demonstration Dr. Mills and his team of engineers successfully presented a working prototype SunCell® producing continuous high light power.

During the event Dr. Mills shared historical and current details about the design of the SunCell® and its operation.

The SunCell® is expected to be available for commercial use in 2017. Dr. Mills expects commercial units at volume to have a capital cost around $100 per kilowatt capacity. The units will use water as hydrogen fuel, resulting in an on-site, total generation cost of electricity of less than a cent per kilowatt-hour. The BrLP business plan promotes a leasing model for units under power purchase agreements. BrLP anticipates that SunCells® can be used to replace all power sources, such as stationary and motive sources.

0-38 minutes covers a technology and market overview, theory fundamentals, and a history of the evolution of the power system design.
38-53 minutes is a discussion of SunCell design being commercialized, the emission unlike any other light source at hundreds-of-thousands-of-watts power levels and the means to harness it as electrical power.
53-58 minutes is the SunCell plasma demonstration showing hundreds of thousands of watts of power of a nature that was previously only observable on the surface of the Sun and stars.
58+ minutes returns to SunCell hardware details.
Q&A starts at 1 hr 27 min with a focus on design implementation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5ZLqp1dX14
Preliminary video of Brilliant Light Power's December 6th, 2016 Washington, DC Roadshow

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZjJYg4Abv50
Brilliant Light Power Demonstration, June 28th 2016

US2016290223
POWER GENERATION SYSTEMS AND METHODS REGARDING SAME
[ PDF ]

A solid fuel power source that provides at least one of thermal and electrical power such as direct electricity or thermal to electricity is further provided that powers a power system comprising (i) at least one reaction cell for the catalysis of atomic hydrogen to form hydrinos, (ii) a chemical fuel mixture comprising at least two components chosen from: a source of H20 catalyst or H20 catalyst; a source of atomic hydrogen or atomic hydrogen; reactants to form the source of H20 catalyst or H20 catalyst and a source of atomic hydrogen or atomic hydrogen; one or more reactants to initiate the catalysis of atomic hydrogen; and a material to cause the solid fuel to be highly conductive, (iii) at least one set of electrodes that confine the fuel and an electrical power source that provides a short burst of low-voltage, high-current electrical energy to initiate rapid kinetics of the hydrino reaction and an energy gain due to forming hydrinos, (iv) a product recovery systems such as a condenser (v) a reloading system, (vi) at least one of hydration, thermal, chemical, and electrochemical systems to regenerate the fuel from the reaction products, (vii) a heat sink that accepts the heat from the power-producing reactions, (viii) a power conversion system that may comprise a direct plasma to electric converter such as a plasmadynamic converter, magnetohydrodynamic converter, electromagnetic direct (crossed field or drift) converter, direct converter, and charge drift converter or a thermal to electric power converter such as a Rankine or Brayton-type power plant.
WO2015184252
ELECTRICAL POWER GENERATION SYSTEMS AND METHODS REGARDING SAME

A solid or liquid fuel to plasma to electricity power source that provides at leas; one of electrical and thermal power comprising (i) at least one reaction cell for the catalysis of atomic hydrogen to form hydrinos, (ii) a chemical feel mixture comprising at least two components chosen from: a source of H2O catalyst or H2O catalyst; a source of atomic hydrogen or atomic hydrogen; reactants to form the source of H2O catalyst or H2O catalyst and a source of atomic hydrogen or atomic hydrogen; one or more reactants to initiate the catalysis of atomic hydrogen; and a material to cause the feel to be highly conductive, (iii) a fuel injection system such as a railgun shot injector, (iv) at least one set of electrodes that confine the fuel and an electrical power source that provides repetitive short bursts of low-voltage, high-current electrical energy to initiate rapid kinetics of the hydrino reaction and an energy gain due to forming hydrinos to torn! a brilliant-light emitting plasma, (v) a product recovery system such as at least one of an augmented plasma railgun recovery system and a gravity recovery system (vi) a fuel pelletizer or shot maker comprising a s me Her. a source or hydrogen and a source of H2O, a dripper and a water bath to form fuel pellets or shot, and an agitator to teed shot into the injector, and (vii) a power converter capable of converting the high-power light output of the cell into electricity such as a concentrated solar power device comprising a plurality of ultraviolet (UV) photoelectric cells or a plurality of photoelectric cells, and a UV window.


WO2011116236
Electrochemical hydrogen-catalyst power system

An electrochemical power system is provided that generates an electromotive force (EMF) from the catalytic reaction of hydrogen to lower energy (hydrino) states providing direct conversion of the energy released from the hydrino reaction into electricity, the system comprising at least two components chosen from: a catalyst or a source of catalyst; atomic hydrogen or a source of atomic hydrogen; reactants to form the catalyst or source of catalyst and atomic hydrogen or source of atomic hydrogen, and one or more reactants to initiate the catalysis of atomic hydrogen. The electrochemical power system for forming hydrinos and electricity can farther comprise a cathode compartment comprising a cathode, an anode compartment comprising an anode, optionally a salt bridge, reactants that constitute hydrino reactants during cell operation with separate electron flow and ion mass transport, and a source of hydrogen. Due to oxidation-reduction cell half reactions, the hydrino-producing reaction mixture is constituted with, the migration of" electrons through an external circuit and ion mass transport through a separate path such as the electrolyte to complete an electrical circuit. A power source and hydride reactor is further provided that powers a power system comprising (i) a reaction cell for the catalysis of atomic hydrogen to form hydrinos, (ii) a chemical fuel mixture comprising at least two components chosen from; a source of catalyst or catalyst; a source of atomic hydrogen or atomic hydrogen, reactants to form the source of catalyst or catalyst and a source of atomic hydrogen or atomic hydrogen; one or more reactants to initiate the catalysis of atomic hydrogen; and a support to enable the catalysis, (iii) thermal systems for reversing an exchange reaction So thermally regenerate the fuel from the reaction products, (iv) a heat sink that accepts the heat from the power-producing reactions, and (v) a power conversion system.


WO2016182600
ULTRAVIOLET ELECTRICAL POWER GENERATION SYSTEMS AND METHODS REGARDING SAME

A molten metal fuel to plasma to electricity power source that provides at least one of electrical and thermal power comprising (i) at least one reaction cell for the catalysis of atomic hydrogen to form hydrinos, (ii) a chemical fuel mixture comprising at least two components chosen from: a source of H20 catalyst or H20 catalyst; a source of atomic hydrogen or atomic hydrogen; reactants to form the source of H20 catalyst or H20 catalyst and a source of atomic hydrogen or atomic hydrogen; and a molten metal to cause the fuel to be highly conductive, (iii) a fuel injection system comprising an electromagnetic pump.


WO2016182605
THERMOPHOTOVOLTAIC ELECTRICAL POWER GENERATOR

A molten metal fuel to plasma to electricity power source that provides at least one of electrical and thermal power comprising (i) at least one reaction cell for the catalysis of atomic hydrogen to form hydrinos, (ii) a chemical fuel mixture comprising at least two components chosen from: a source of H20 catalyst or H20 catalyst; a source of atomic hydrogen or atomic hydrogen; reactants to form the source of H20 catalyst or H20 catalyst and a source of atomic hydrogen or atomic hydrogen; and a molten metal to cause the fuel to be highly conductive, (iii) a fuel injection system comprising an electromagnetic pump, (iv) at least one set of confinement electrodes that provide repetitive short bursts of low-voltage, high-current electrical energy to initiate rapid kinetics of the hydrino reaction and an energy gain due to forming hydrinos to form a brilliant-light emitting plasma.


WO2015134047
PHOTOVOLTAIC POWER GENERATION SYSTEMS AND METHODS REGARDING SAME

A solid fuel power source that provides at least one of electrical and thermal power comprising (i) at least one reaction, cell for the catalysis of atomic hydrogen to form hydrinos, (ii) a chemical fuel mixture comprising at least two components chosen from: a source of H2O catalyst or H2O catalyst; a source of atomic hydrogen or atomic hydrogen; reactants to form the source of H2O catalyst or H2O catalyst and a source of atomic hydrogen or atomic hydrogen; one or more reactants to initiate the catalysis of atomic hydrogen; and a material to cause the fuel to be highly conductive, (iii) at least one set of electrodes that confine the fuel and an electrical power source that provides a short burst of low-voltage, high-current electrical energy to initiate rapid kinetics of the hydrino reaction and an energy gain due to forming hydrinos, (iv) a product recovery systems such as a vapor condenser, (v) a reloading system, (vi) at least one of hydration, thermal, chemical, and electrochemical systems to regenerate the fuel from the reaction products, (vii) a heat sink that accepts the heat from the power-producing reactions, (viii) a photovoltaic power converter comprising at least one of a concentrated solar power device, and at least one triple-junction photovoltaic cell, monocrystalline cell, polycrystalline cell, amorphous cell, string/ribbon silicon cell, multi-junction cell, homojunction cell, heterojunction cell, p-i-n device, thin-film cells, dye- sensitized cell, and an organic photovoltaic cell, and an antireflection coating, an optical impedance matching coating, and a protective coating.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brilliant_Light_Power
Brilliant Light Power

Founded : HydroCatalysis Inc.[1] in 1991.[2]
Founder : Randell L. Mills
Headquarters : 493 Old Trenton Rd.
Cranbury Township, New Jersey, USA
Website : BrilliantLightPower.com

Brilliant Light Power, Inc. (BLP), formerly BlackLight Power, Inc. of Cranbury, New Jersey is a company founded by Randell L. Mills, who claims to have discovered a new energy source. The purported energy source is based on Mills' assertion that the electron in a hydrogen atom can drop below the lowest energy state known as the ground state. Mills calls these hypothetical hydrogen atoms that are in an energy state below ground level, "hydrinos".[1] Mills self-published a closely related book, The Grand Unified Theory of Classical Physics and has co-authored articles on claimed hydrino-related phenomena.[4][5]

Critics say it lacks corroborating scientific evidence, and is a relic of cold fusion. Critical analysis of the claims have been published in the peer reviewed journals Physics Letters A, New Journal of Physics, Journal of Applied Physics, and Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics. These works note that the proposed theory is inconsistent with quantum mechanics, and that the proposed hydrino states are unphysical and incompatible with key equations that have been experimentally verified many times.

In 1999, the Nobel prize winning physicist Philip Warren Anderson said he is "sure that it's a fraud",[6] and in the same year another Nobel prize winning physicist, Steven Chu, called it "extremely unlikely".[7] In 2009, IEEE Spectrum magazine characterized it as a "loser" technology because "[m]ost experts don't believe such lower states exist, and they say the experiments don't present convincing evidence" and mentioned that Wolfgang Ketterle had said the claims are "nonsense".[8] BLP has announced several times that it was about to deliver commercial products based on Mill's theories but has not delivered a working product.[8]

Company

The company, originally called HydroCatalysis Inc.[1] was founded in 1991 by Randell Mills [2] who claimed to have discovered a power source that "represents a boundless form of new primary energy" and that will "replace all forms of fuel in the world,"[9]

In 2008, Mills said that his cell stacks could provide power for long-range electric vehicles,[10] and that this electricity would cost less than 2 cents per kilowatt-hour.[11]

BLP holds several patents based on graphic modelling software.[12]

Randell Mills

Randell Mills is the founder and CEO of Brilliant Light Power.

Funding

By December 1999, BLP raised more than $25 million from about 150 investors.[2][13] By January 2006, BLP funding exceeded $60 million.[10][14][15][16] In December 2013, BLP was one of 54 applicants to receive ~$1.1M grant from the New Jersey Economic Development Authority.[17]

Among the investors are PacifiCorp, Conectiv, retired executives from Morgan Stanley[13] and several BLP board members like Shelby Brewer who was the top nuclear official for the Reagan Administration and Chief Executive Officer of ABB-Combustion Engineering Nuclear Power[18][19] and former board member Michael H. Jordan (1936 – 2010), who was Chief Executive Officer of PepsiCo Worldwide Foods, Westinghouse Electric Corporation, CBS Corporation and Electronic Data Systems.[18]

In 2008, Robert L. Park wrote that BLP has benefited from wealthy investors who allocate a proportion of their funds to risky ventures with a potentially huge upside, but that in the case of BLP since the science underlying the offering was "just wrong" the investment risk was, in Park's view, "infinite".[20]

Claims

Mills first announced his hydrino state hypothesis on April 25, 1991, in a press conference in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, as an explanation for the cold fusion phenomena that had been reported in 1989. According to Mills, no fusion was actually happening in the cells, and all the effects would be caused by shrinkage of hydrogen atoms as they fell to a state below the ground state. Mills added that the increased proximity between the atoms would cause them to fuse sporadically, and some of those atoms would be deuterium atoms (a hydrogen atom with one extra neutron), which would explain why there were occasional readings of neutrons. No experimental evidence was offered by Mills at the time to support his claims which violate accepted nuclear physics.[1][21][22][23] In a 2007 review of cold fusion research, researcher Edmund Storms put forward the hydrino model as a possible explanation for cold fusion.[24]

Experimental results

NASA

In 1996, NASA released a report describing experiments using a BLP electrolytic cell. Although not recreating the large heat gains reported for the cell by BLP, unexplained power gains ranging from 1.06 to 1.68 of the input power were reported, which, whilst "...admit[ing] the existence of an unusual source of heat with the cell...falls far short of being compelling". The authors went on to propose the recombination of hydrogen and oxygen as a possible explanation of the anomalous results.[25]

Rowan University

Around 2002, the NASA Institute for Advanced Concepts (NIAC) granted a Phase I grant to Anthony Marchese, a mechanical engineer at Rowan University, to study a possible rocket propulsion that would use hydrinos.[26]

In 2002, Rowan University's Anthony Marchese said that whilst "agnostic about the existence of hydrinos", he was quite confident that there was no fraud involved with BLP and although his NIAC grant was criticised by Park, Marchese said "for me to not continue with this study would be unethical to the scientific community. The only reason not to pursue this would be because of being afraid of being bullied."[26]
European Physical Journal D

In 2005 Šišović and others published a paper describing experimental data and analysis of Mills' claim that a resonant transfer model (RTM) explains the excessive Doppler broadening of the Hα line. Šišović concluded that: "The detected large excessive broadening in pure hydrogen and in Ne–H2 mixture is in agreement with CM [Collision Model] and other experimental results" and that "these results can't be explained by RTM". The collision model explanation for excessive broadening of the Hα line is based on established physics.[27]

Criticism

Publications

New Journal of Physics

In 2005, Andreas Rathke of the European Space Agency, publishing in the New Journal of Physics, wrote that Mills' description of quantum mechanics is "inconsistent and has several serious deficiencies", and that there is "no theoretical support of the hydrino hypothesis". Rathke said it would be helpful if Mills' experimental results could be independently replicated, and suggested that any evidence produced should be reconsidered in the context of a conventional physical explanation.[28] One inconsistency of Mills' CQM with quantum mechanics regards its inability to be reconciled with the probability density function in quantum mechanics. Rathke stated, "However, while solutions of the Schrödinger equation with n<1 indeed exist, they are not square integrable. This violates not only an axiom of quantum mechanics, but in practical terms prohibits that these solutions can in any way describe the probability density of a particle."[28]

Journal of Applied Physics

In 2005, the Journal of Applied Physics published a critique by A.V. Phelps of the 2004 article, "Water bath calorimetric study of excess heat generation in resonant transfer plasmas" by J. Phillips, R. Mills and X. Chen.[29] Phelps criticized both the calorimetric techniques and the underlying theory described in the Phillips/Mills/Chen article. The journal also published a response to Phelps' critique on the same day.[30]

Physics Letters A

In 2006, a paper published in Physics Letters A, concluded that Mills' theoretical hydrino states are unphysical. For the hydrino states, the binding strength increases as the strength of the electric potential decreases, with maximum binding strength when the potential has disappeared completely. The author Norman Dombey remarked "We could call these anomalous states "homeopathic" states because the smaller the coupling, the larger the effect." The model also assumes that the nuclear charge distribution is a point rather than having an arbitrarily small non-zero radius. It also lacks an analogous solution in the Schrödinger equation, which governs non-relativistic systems. Dombey concluded: "We suggest that outside of science fiction this is sufficient reason to disregard them."[31] From a suggestion in Dombey's paper, further work by Antonio Di Castro has shown that states below the ground state, as described in Mills' work, are incompatible with the Schrödinger, Klein–Gordon and Dirac equations, key equations in the study of quantum systems.[32]
Journal of Physics D

In 2008, the Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics published an article by Hans-Joachim Kunze, professor emeritus at the Institute for Experimental Physics, Ruhr University Bochum,[33] critical of the 2003 paper authored by R. Mills and P. Ray, Extreme ultraviolet spectroscopy of helium–hydrogen. The abstract of the article is: "It is suggested that spectral lines, on which the fiction of fractional principal quantum numbers in the hydrogen atom is based, are nothing else but artefacts." Kunze stated that it was impossible to detect the novel lines below 30 nm reported by Mills and Ray because the equipment they used did not have the capability to detect them as per the manufacturer and as per "every book on vacuum-UV spectroscopy" and "therefore the observed lines must be artefacts". Kunze also stated that: "The enormous spectral widths of the novel lines point to artefacts, too."[34]

IEEE Spectrum

In 2009, IEEE Spectrum magazine criticized BLP, concluding that "Most experts don't believe such lower states exist, and they say the experiments don't present convincing evidence." It also pointed out that BLP has made similar claims before, announcing that it was on the brink of commercializing its revolutionary technology but failed to deliver.[8]

Opinions

Robert L. Park

Since 1999, Robert L. Park, emeritus professor of physics at the University of Maryland and a notable skeptic, has been particularly critical of BLP. In 2008, Park wrote:

"BlackLight Power (BLP), founded 17 years ago as HydroCatalysis, announced last week that the company had successfully tested a prototype power system that would generate 50 KW of thermal power. BLP anticipates delivery of the new power system in 12 to 18 months. The BLP process,[35] discovered by Randy Mills, is said to coax hydrogen atoms into a "state below the ground state", called the "hydrino." There is no independent scientific confirmation of the hydrino, and BLP has a patent problem. So they have nothing to sell but bull shit. The company is therefore dependent on investors with deep pockets and shallow brains." – Park[36]

Steven Chu

In 1999, Steven Chu, Nobel Laureate in Physics in 1997, said "it's extremely unlikely that this is real, and I feel sorry for the funders, the people who are backing this".[7]

Phillip Anderson

In 1999, Princeton University's physics Nobel laureate Phillip Anderson said of it, "If you could fuck around with the hydrogen atom, you could fuck around with the energy process in the sun. You could fuck around with life itself." "Everything we know about everything would be a bunch of nonsense. That's why I'm so sure that it's a fraud."[6]

Wolfgang Ketterle

Wolfgang Ketterle, a professor of physics at MIT, said BLP's claims are "nonsense" and that "there is no state of hydrogen lower than the ground state".[8]

Michio Kaku

Michio Kaku, a theoretical physicist based at City University of New York, adds that "the only law that this business with Mills is proving is that a fool and his money are easily parted."[6] and that "There's a sucker born every minute."[7]
Peter Zimmerman

While Peter Zimmerman was chief arms-control scientist at the State Department, he stated that his department and the Patent Office "have fought back with success" against "pseudoscientists" and he railed against, among other things, the inventors of "hydrinos."[37]
Legal threats to physicists

In 2000, a law firm engaged by BLP sent letters to four prominent physicists asking them to stop making what it called "defamatory comments". The physicists had been quoted in the Village Voice, Dow Jones Newswire and other publications as dismissing BLP's claims on the basis that they violated the laws of physics. In response, one of the physicists, Robert L. Park of the American Physical Society, said that if BLP sued, he was confident the scientific community would lend its support and that the court would side with the physicists.[38] Park later wrote that a number of the recipients of the letter, who had "responded honestly to questions from the media", had since fallen silent. Scientists, Park wrote, are easy to intimidate since they are not rich enough to risk costly legal actions.[20]
Patent issues

A 2000 patent based on its hydrino-related technology[39][40] was later withdrawn by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) due to contradictions with known physics laws and other concerns about the viability of the described processes, citing Park and others.[37]

A column by Robert L. Park[37][41] and an outside query by an unknown person[42] prompted Group Director Esther Kepplinger of the USPTO to review this new patent herself. Kepplinger said that her "main concern was the proposition that the applicant was claiming the electron going to a lower orbital in a fashion that I knew was contrary to the known laws of physics and chemistry", and that the patent appeared to involve cold fusion and perpetual motion.[41] Kepplinger contacted another Director, Robert Spar, who also expressed doubts on the patentability of the patent application. This caused the USPTO to withdraw from issue the patent application before it was granted and re-open it for review, and to withdraw four related applications, including one for a hydrino power plant.[37]
USPTO court case

BLP filed suit in the US District Court of Columbia, saying that withdrawal of the application after the company had paid the fee was contrary to law. In 2002, the District Court concluded that the USPTO was acting inside the limits of its authority in withdrawing a patent over whose validity it had doubts, and later that year, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ratified this decision.[41][42][43][44] Applications were rejected by the UK patent office for similar reasons.[41][45][46][47][48] The European Patent Office (EPO) rejected a similar BLP patent application due to lack of clarity on how the process worked. Reexamination of this European patent is pending.[41] Park wrote:

"Unlike most schemes for free energy, the hydrino process of Randy Mills is not without ample theory.[49] 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.[50] Fortunately, Aaron Barth [...] has taken upon himself to look through it, checking for accuracy. Barth is a post doctoral researcher at the Harvard–Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, 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[51]

References

Robert L. Park (April 26, 1991). "What's New Friday, 26 April 1991 Washington, DC". and Robert L. Park (October 31, 2008). "What's New Friday, October 31, 2008".
Jacqueline A. Newmyer (May 17, 2000). "Academics Question The Science Behind BlackLight Power, Inc.". Harvard Crimson. Retrieved February 10, 2009.
"BlackLight Power Company Facilities". BlackLight Power. Retrieved 2016-01-18.
Mills, Randell L. (August 2011). "The Grand Unified Theory of Classical Physics" (DjVu) (August 2011 ed.). BlackLight Power. Retrieved 2016-01-18. (Self-published)
"Fuel's paradise? Power source that turns physics on its head". The Guardian. 4 Nov 2005.
Erik Baard (December 21, 1999). "Quantum Leap: Dr. Randell Mills says he can change the face of physics. The Scientific Establishment thinks he's nuts.". The Village Voice. Retrieved February 10, 2009.
Erik Baard (October 6, 1999). "Researcher Claims Power Tech That Defies Quantum Theory". Dow Jones NewsWires.
Erico Guizzo (January 2009). "Winners & Losers 2009—Loser, Power & Energy: Hot or not? Blacklight Power says it's developing a revolutionary energy source—and it won't let the laws of physics stand in its way". IEEE Spectrum. 46 (1). p. 36. doi:10.1109/MSPEC.2009.4734311.
Gerard Wynn (September 3, 2000). "Sweet dreams are made of geoengineering". Reuters. Retrieved October 15, 2009.
Morrison, Chris (October 21, 2008). "Blacklight Power bolsters its impossible claims of a new renewable energy source". The New York Times.
Mina Kimes (July 29, 2008). "BlackLight's physics-defying promise: Cheap power from water". CNNMoney.com
Chris Morrison (May 30, 2008). "Blacklight Power claims nearly-free energy from water – is this for real?". VentureBeat. US 7188033US 7689367
Erik Baard (January 22, 2008). "Quantum Leap".
http://professional.venturewire.com/story.asp?sid=NIMHPJLMMQ (dead link)
"Blacklight Power gets $50M; but is it profound, or utter nonsense?". VentureBeat.
"SiliconBeat: Blacklight Power gets $50M; but is it profound, or utter nonsense?".
"20 Middlesex companies receive part of $60 million state grant". NJ.com.
"BlackLight Power lands first license agreement for electricity from ... water?". VentureBeat.
"Management".
Park RL (2008). "Fraud in Science". Social Research: An International Quarterly. 75 (4): 1135–1150. "Companies frequently designate a percentage of these funds for investment in high-risk, high-payoff startups. Most will fail, but it is a hedge against technological obsolescence. Mills had just what they were looking for—except the risk was infinite."
E. Sheldon (September–October 2008). "An overview of almost 20 years' research on cold fusion". Contemporary Physics. 49 (5): 375–378. Bibcode:2008ConPh..49..375S. doi:10.1080/00107510802465229. "[Mill's paper], which involves a nowadays widely discredited 'hydrino' model that was proposed in 1991 to account for the excess heat observations in 'cold fusion' studies. (...) [the notion that there are electron orbital states that are less energetic than the ground state], is contrary to conventional quantum principles and unacceptable to me or to the general theoretical-physics community."
Robert L. Park (2002). Voodoo science: the road from foolishness to fraud (illustrated, reprint ed.). Oxford University Press. pp. 133–135. ISBN 978-0-19-860443-3.
William J. Broad (April 26, 1991). "2 Teams Put New Life in 'Cold' Fusion Theory". The New York Times.
Storms, Edmund (2007). Science of low energy nuclear reaction: a comprehensive compilation of evidence and explanations. Singapore: World Scientific. p. 184. ISBN 981-270-620-8.
Niedra, Janis M.; Myers, Ira T.; Fralick, Gustave C.; Baldwin, Richard S. (February 1996). "Replication of the apparent excess heat effect in light water-potassium carbonate-nickel-electrolytic cell" (PDF). OSTI 236808.
Erik Baard (January 21, 2008). "Eureka?".
Šišović, N. M.; Majstorović, G. Lj.; Konjević, N. (January 4, 2005). "Excessive hydrogen and deuterium Balmer lines broadening in a hollow cathode glow discharges". European Physical Journal D. 32 (3): 347–354. Bibcode:2005EPJD...32..347S. doi:10.1140/epjd/e2004-00192-1.
Rathke A (2005). "A critical analysis of the hydrino model". New Journal of Physics. 7 (127). doi:10.1088/1367-2630/7/1/127.
Phelps, A.V. (October 2, 2005). "Comment on 'Water bath calorimetric study of excess heat generation in resonant transfer plasmas'". Journal of Applied Physics. doi:10.1063/1.2010616.
Phillips, Jonathan (October 2, 2005). "Response to "Comment on 'Water bath calorimetric study of excess heat generation in resonant transfer plasmas'". Journal of Applied Physics. doi:10.1063/1.2010617.
Dombey, Norman (August 8, 2006). "The hydrino and other unlikely states". Physics Letters A. 360: 62. arXiv:physics/0608095Freely accessible. Bibcode:2006PhLA..360...62D. doi:10.1016/j.physleta.2006.07.069.
de Castro, Antonio S. (April 4, 2007). "Orthogonality criterion for banishing hydrino states from standard quantum mechanics". Physics Letters A. 369 (5–6): 380. arXiv:0704.0631Freely accessible. Bibcode:2007PhLA..369..380D. doi:10.1016/j.physleta.2007.05.006.
"Ruhr-Universität Bochum information page on Hans-Joachim Kunze". Ruhr-Universität. Retrieved 2011-02-20.
Kunze, H-J (2008). "On the spectroscopic measurements used to support the postulate of states with fractional principal quantum numbers in hydrogen". J Phys D: Appl. Phys. 41 (10): 108001. Bibcode:2008JPhD...41j8001K. doi:10.1088/0022-3727/41/10/108001.
"What's New by Bob Park - Friday, April 26, 1991".
Park, Bob (June 6, 2008). "Hydrinos: How long can a really dumb idea survive?". What's New?. University of Maryland. Retrieved 2010-12-04.
Erik Baard (April 25, 2000). "The Empire Strikes Back. Alternative-Energy Scientist Fights to Save Patent". Village Voice
Reichhardt T (2000). "New form of hydrogen power provokes scepticism". Nature. 404 (6775): 218. doi:10.1038/35005254. "A law firm representing the energy company BlackLight Power, Inc. of Cranbury, New Jersey, sent letters earlier this month to Nobel laureate Philip Anderson of Princeton University, Michio Kaku of the City University of New York, Paul Grant of the non-profit energy agency EPRI and Robert L. Park, of the American Physical Society ..." (subscription required)
US 6024935 "Lower-energy hydrogen methods and structures"
US 6024935, 6,024,935, Lower-energy hydrogen methods and structures, February 15, 2000. Retrieved February 11, 2011
Rimmer, Matthew (2011). "Patenting free energy: the BlackLight litigation and the hydrogen economy". Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice. 6 (6): 374. doi:10.1093/jiplp/jpr010
Patent nonsense: court denies BlackLight Power appeal, What's New, Robert Park, September 6, 2002
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. "Blacklight Power, Inc. v. James E. Rogan".
Brendan Coffey (May 15, 2000). "Follow-Through. Weird Science". Forbes.
UK-IPO decisions "O/114/08". and "O/076/08".
Blacklight Power Inc v Comptroller-General of Patents [2008] EWHC 2763 (Patents) (18 November 2008)
Gale R Peterson; Derrick A Pizarro; Practising Law Institute (2003). 2003 Federal Circuit Yearbook: Patent Law Developments in the Federal Circuit. Practising Law Institute. p. 1. ISBN 978-0-87224-443-6.
"UK-IPO decision O/170/09".
"What's New by Bob Park - Friday, January 8, 1999".
"What's New by Bob Park - Friday, May 9, 1997".
Park, Bob (October 27, 2000). "Blackout: Where do ideas like these come from?". University of Maryland. Retrieved 2009-03-02.


https://academic.oup.com/rpc/article/126/3/173/1582354/Blacklight-Power-Inc-v-Comptroller-General-of
Blacklight Power Inc v Comptroller-General of Patents

RPC (2009) 126 (3): 173-184.
https://doi.org/10.1093/rpc/rcn035
Published: 08 January 2009

This was an appeal from the decision of the hearing officer acting on behalf of the Comptroller-General refusing two patent applications in the name of the appellant. The first application GB 0521120.6 related to a plasma reactor which generated power and novel hydrogen species. The second application GB0608130.1 related to a laser which operated using the same hydrogen species.

The sole inventor of each of the applications was Dr. Randell L. Mills who was the author of a large number of publications describing what he called his “Grand Unifying Theory of Classical Quantum Mechanics” (GUTCQM). The hydrogen species which was used in both applications was supposed to exist in a lower energy state than the lowest possible energy state recognised by standard physical laws. For that purpose the electron would have to orbit at a radius smaller than any ever observed for hydrogen. The existence of this hydrogen species, referred to by Dr Mills as “the hydrino” was said by both applications to have been disclosed in Dr. Mills’ publications listed in the applications.

The applications were refused on the ground that the hydrino proposed by the appellant was contrary to generally accepted physical laws and was, in consequence, not capable of industrial application and on the ground that as the claimed inventions relied for their performance on the existence of the hydrino, the specifications did not comply with the requirement for sufficiency set out in s.14(3) of the Patents Act 1977.

The hearing officer held that where an applicant proposed a new theory and claimed an invention dependent on it, it was appropriate to demand a real but moderate level of confidence in the truth of the theory and he made his assessment on the basis that it should be more probable than not that the theory was true if he were to allow the applications to proceed.

The hearing officer found that the new theory was not consistent with existing generally accepted theories and, indeed, the whole point of Dr Mills’ theory was that it was a new theory of matter. He felt unable to assess whether GUTCQM provided a better explanation of physical phenomena than existing theories and whether it was consistent with any remaining theory that it did not displace but considered that it was more important to see how the theory was viewed by the scientific community generally. He then found that on the evidence there was substantially no acceptance of the theory by the scientific community and that GUTCQM did not meet the threshold test, namely that it should be more likely than not that it provided a valid description of atomic systems.

The appellant appealed to the Patents Court. It argued that the hearing officer had misdirected himself as to the appropriate test for claims which relied on a new theory and it submitted that the correct test was whether the theory was clearly contrary to well established physical laws. It said the test should be whether an applicant had a reasonable prospect of showing that his theory was the correct one. It also submitted that, had the hearing officer applied the correct test, he would have allowed the application to proceed to grant...


http://goodmath.scientopia.org/2014/01/14/the-latest-update-in-the-hydrino-saga/
The Latest Update in the Hydrino Saga

by MarkCC

Lots of people have been emailing me to say that there's a new article out about Blacklight, the company started by Randall Mills to promote his Hydrino stuff, which claims to have an independent validation of his stuff, and announcing the any-day-now unveiling of the latest version of his hydrino-based generator.

First of all, folks, this isn't an article, it's a press release from Blacklight. The Financial Post just printed it in their online press-release section. It's an un-edited release written by Blacklight.

There's nothing new here. I continue to think that this is a scam. But what kind of scam?

To find out, let's look at a couple of select quotes from this press release.

"Using a proprietary water-based solid fuel confined by two electrodes of a SF-CIHT cell, and applying a current of 12,000 amps through the fuel, water ignites into an extraordinary flash of power. The fuel can be continuously fed into the electrodes to continuously output power. BlackLight has produced millions of watts of power in a volume that is one ten thousandths of a liter corresponding to a power density of over an astonishing 10 billion watts per liter. As a comparison, a liter of BlackLight power source can output as much power as a central power generation plant exceeding the entire power of the four former reactors of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant, the site of one of the worst nuclear disasters in history."

One ten-thousandth of a liter of water produces millions of watts of power.

Sounds impressive, doesn't it? Oh, but wait... how do we measure energy density of a substance? Joules per liter, or something equivalent - that is, energy per volume. But Blacklight is quoting energy density as watts per liter.

The joule is a unit of energy. A joule is a shorthand for \(frac{text{kilogram}*text{meter}^2}{text{second}^2}\). Watts are a different unit, a measure of power, which is a shorthand for \(frac{text{kilogram}*text{meter}^2}{text{second}^3}\). A watt is, therefore, one joule/second.

They're quoting a rather peculiar unit there. I wonder why?

"Our safe, non-polluting power-producing system catalytically converts the hydrogen of the H2O-based solid fuel into a non-polluting product, lower-energy state hydrogen called “Hydrino”, by allowing the electrons to fall to smaller radii around the nucleus. The energy release of H2O fuel, freely available in the humidity in the air, is one hundred times that of an equivalent amount of high-octane gasoline. The power is in the form of plasma, a supersonic expanding gaseous ionized physical state of the fuel comprising essentially positive ions and free electrons that can be converted directly to electricity using highly efficient magnetohydrodynamic converters. Simply replacing the consumed H2O regenerates the fuel. Using readily-available components, BlackLight has developed a system engineering design of an electric generator that is closed except for the addition of H2O fuel and generates ten million watts of electricity, enough to power ten thousand homes. Remarkably, the device is less than a cubic foot in volume. To protect its innovations and inventions, multiple worldwide patent applications have been filed on BlackLight’s proprietary technology".

Water, in the alleged hydrino reaction, produces 100 times the energy of high-octane gasoline.

Gasoline contains, on average, about 11.8 kWh/kg. A milliliter of gasoline weighs about 7/10ths of a gram, compared to the 1 gram weight of a milliter of water; therefore, a kilogram of gasoline should contain around 1400 milliliters. So, let's take 11.8kWh/kg, and convert that to an equivalent measure of energy per milliter: about 8 1/2 kWh/milliliter. How does that compare to hydrinos? Oh, wait... we can't convert those, now can we? Because they're using power density. And the power density of a substance depends not just on how much power you can extract, but how long it takes to extract it. Explosives have fantastic power density! Gasoline - particularly high octane gasoline - is formulated to try to burn as slowly as possible, because internal combustion engines are more efficient on a slower burn.

To bring just a bit of numbers into it, TNT has a much higher power density than gasoline. You can easily knock down buildings with TNT, because of the way that it emits all of its energy in one super short burst. But it's energy density is just 1/4th the energy density of gasoline.

Hmm. I wonder why Mills is using the power density?

Here's my guess. Mills has some bullshit process where he spikes his generator with 12000 amps, and gets a microsecond burst of energy out. If you can produce 100 joules from one milliliter in 1/1000th of a second, that's a power density of 100,000 joules per milliliter.

Suddenly, the amount of power that's being generated isn't so huge - and there, I would guess, is the key to Mills latest scam. If you're hitting your generating apparatus with 12,000 amperes of electric current, and you're producing microsecond burst of energy, it's going to be very easy to produce that energy by consuming something in the apparatus, without that consumption being obvious to an observer who isn't allowed to independently examine the apparatus in detail.

Now, what about the "independent verification"? Again, let's look at the press release.

“We at The ENSER Corporation have performed about thirty tests at our premises using BLP’s CIHT electrochemical cells of the type that were tested and reported by BLP in the Spring of 2012, and achieved the three specified goals,” said Dr. Ethirajulu Dayalan, Engineering Fellow, of The ENSER Corporation. “We independently validated BlackLight’s results offsite by an unrelated highly qualified third party. We confirmed that hydrino was the product of any excess electricity observed by three analytical tests on the cell products, and determined that BlackLight Power had achieved fifty times higher power density with stabilization of the electrodes from corrosion.” Dr. Terry Copeland, who managed product development for several electrochemical and energy companies including DuPont Company and Duracell added, “Dr. James Pugh (then Director of Technology at ENSER) and Dr. Ethirajulu Dayalan participated with me in the independent tests of CIHT cells at The ENSER Corporation’s Pinellas Park facility in Florida starting on November 28, 2012. We fabricated and tested CIHT cells capable of continuously producing net electrical output that confirmed the fifty-fold stable power density increase and hydrino as the product.”

Who is the ENSER corporation? They're an engineering consulting/staffing firm that's located in the same town as Blacklight's offices. So, pretty much, what we're seeing is that Mills hired his next door neighbor to provide a data-free testimonial promising that the hydrino generator really did work.

Real scientists, doing real work, don't pull nonsense like this. Mills has been promising a commercial product within a year for almost 25 years. In that time, he's filed multiple patents, some of which have already expired! And yet, he's never actually allowed an independent team to do a public, open test of his system. He's never provided any actual data about the system!

He and his team have claimed things like "We can't let people see it, it's secret". But they're filing patents. You don't get to keep a patent secret. A patent application, under US law, must contain: "a description of how to make and use the invention that must provide sufficient detail for a person skilled in the art (i.e., the relevant area of technology) to make and use the invention.". In other words, if the patents that Mills and friends filed are legally valid, they must contain enough information for an interested independent party to build a hydrino generator. But Mills won't let anyone examine his supposedly working generators. Why? It's not to keep a secret!

Finally, the question that a couple of people, including one reporter for WiredUK asked: If it's all a scam, why would Mills and company keep on making claims?

The answer is the oldest in the book: money...