Peak Oilers...With this new Tech "Fuel cost would be inconsequential"

Power will be cheap and clean ...Autos will be able to travel thousands of miles on a tank of water.

http://www.blacklightpower.com/pdf/BD_Motive.pdf

and

http://www.blacklightpower.com/

I have only one little tiny problem with it.

Suppose it doesn't work?

--p!

takes energy to make hydrogen. Even at the optimum theoretical requirement it would take over 700 2,000 megawatt nuclear plants to provide the hydrogen equivalent of 20,000,000 million barrels of oil a day that we currently consume.

this is a new state for hydrogen...called hydrinos and once they reach this state there is a huge release of energy.

How do you get them to that state without adding energy?

You can't ever get out more energy than you put in without destroying matter. This doesn't seem to be any sort of nuclear power or antimatter engine--it's a very sophisticated, very powerful battery. They claim it will be a very powerful battery. But unless I'm missing something, you can't just take energy from hydrogen without adding some first.

again, take some time to read how and what.

Just calling it BS doesn't make it so.

It appears to take a lot of power to manipulate the energy available from the hydrino energy level. Even in creating their demonstration plasma, they needed to generate a "soft vacuum", apply 250 watts, and appear to have generated a significant amount of light and heat.

There are a lot of novel energy sources under investigation these days. So far, none have succeeded. I wouldn't put too much hope into this approach, though if it works, I'll be happy to have been over-skeptical about it.

--p!

Nothing particularly new here.

There is MUCH more here than fuel cells...take more than 5 minutes and see what they have discovered.

his Hot Fussion project...

"Dr. Robert Park is well know among the new-energy community for his valiant efforts to destroy the credibility of any new-energy developments that might threaten the flow of funds into the hot-fusion community. Therefore, if he is distressed, it must be a worthy new-energy discovery. "


http://www.cheniere.org/misc/mills.htm

One of the most compelling reasons (to this writer) to believe that this is an important new-energy technology is because Dr. Robert Park (a so-called spokesman for the American Physical Society) stated, "I am shocked that they issued a patent on this! This indicates that the troubles at the patent office continue."

Parks likened the process to "a perpetual motion machine."


Brigid Quinn, replying to Park for the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, said, "We do not give patents on perpetual motion machines. That this patent was granted means it met the criteria that it is new, useful, and non-obvious, and fully disclosed as to how it works."

Perhaps, she could have added that her department did not have a patent office employee placed to deny patents in this technical category as has been done for an estimated 300 patents in the category where patent applications for cold fusion inventions are handled.

From his site:

See Tom Bearden and Floyd Sweet demonstrate Sweet's 1987 Overunity device as it puts out over a Million times more electrical power than is input by the operator, taking almost all its input energy from the active vacuum. The 6 lb. unit also produced anti-gravity.

You can call Park's motivations into question all day long, but please try not to quote Bearden in the process.

example:
Most significant of all, General Daniel Graham has reported that, on the evening after the death of the Challenger, the Soviet KGB gave a party and celebrated the success of their perfect active measures against the Challenger! Note that all development, deployment, employment, and command and control of the Soviet scalar EM weapons are under the KGB. Finally, a U.S. classified investigation of the Challenger disaster was ordered by Congress, but its results have not been made public. Beyond any doubt the Soviets destroyed the Challenger, and killed the seven brave astronauts aboard the spaceship.

more of this:
http://www.cheniere.org/books/analysis/history.htm

But this is DU, and what qualifies as "insane" here is rather skewed. Mention the KGB and energy weapons on here and fifteen people will rush in and tell you it's all true. However, I don't even think the card-carrying members of our tinfoil brigade would want to back up the claim I posted. :)

i can't imagine that _anyone_ on DU buys into this stuff.

http://wired-vig.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,51792,00.html?tw=wn_story_related

(at the bottom)

The theory is secondary to Marchese -- he's more interested in the energy that might be harnessed from a new phenomenon, even if Mills' paradigms don't bear out.

"If somebody asked me if I believe hydrinos exist, it would be very tough for me to say yes because it really goes against science theory as I know it and the whole human races knows it. But from what I can tell from BlackLight's studies -- and they've been pretty good about letting others outside verify their excess energy -- there are some things going on that people are having trouble understanding."

He's saying it violates known physical laws.

Actually not...He says this new phenomenon produces verifiable excess energy...and that he is interested in it for that reason. Regardless of whether it conforms to current understanding of physics or whether Dr. Mills is correct or not in his theories of what he has discovered.

Once AGAIN, the first law of thermodynamics isn't some minor thing that you can disprove in an experiment.

If it is wrong, the universe does not work.

KNOWN physical laws.

Scientists ARE fallible.

Do you have any idea what that would mean?

http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0017,baard,14377,1.html

BlackLight Power Inc., was awarded a U.S. patent February 15 covering his claim to producing energy by shrinking the electron orbit of hydrogen below what most quantum theorists have thought possible for a century. He calls the smaller hydrogen atom a "hydrino" and theorizes it could lead to a nearly limitless supply of clean, cheap power

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/11d1d8d4598ce186?dmode=source&hl=en
(name redacted) Aug 4 2003, 7:45 pm show options
Newsgroups: sci.physics
From: (name and email redacted) - Find messages by this author
Date: 4 Aug 2003 19:45:03 -0700
Local: Mon,Aug 4 2003 7:45 pm
Subject: Re: Randell Mills, hydrinos, Blacklight Power
Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse

Without putting too much of a fine point on it, Mills is wrong. He
talks a good game, a real good game actually, but in order for his
theory to be correct, our world would have to be dramatically
different. Among other unfounded ideas, Mill's theory requires to
need for values of quantum numbers that simply are not allowed
according to all accepted quatum theories. Also, his theory and
supposed results violate the first law of thermodynamics. He claims
to see more energy come out of a hydrogen atom when it relaxes from a
sub-ground state (a completely bogus idea) than it took to demote the
atom to that state. If this is true, it requires a completely
different set of "rules" for "sub-ground" state dynamics than what we
already know of classical quantum mechanical transitions. Also, all
of this is suppose to happen an relatively benign conditions.

For a good read on bogus ideas like this and other poppycock take a
look at Voodoo Science by Robert Park.

As for Mill's funding, there's a perfectly good answer. Many
companies put money aside to fund unconventional research in the rare
chance that the research goes anywhere. To a power company, giving
Mill's 2 million dollars is like you an me buying a lottery ticket.
Logically, it's absolute nonsense to play, but if we win... Then
again, there's a 1 in 10 million chance in the lottery is alot better
than the chance that you'll repeal the laws of quantum mechanics.

Another thing to consider is the fact that Blacklight Power has had
patent applications retracted. Do a search on Blacklight Power vs.
Rogan for details.

Mills may be wrong about WHY/HOW the enrgy is produced...But the energy IS measurablly produced.

The link to your site at the end of your post shows that you have a financial interest in promoting peak oil as you sell books about it on your site

because I am a person who abhors war, enjoys democracy and likes a modern way of life.

No cheap energy = resource wars, feudalism and an agrarian lifestyle.

If you are so confident, go buy some shares in BLP.

Look up Eugene Mallove, follow the data. You're not seeing the big picture. There are things that even those smart scientists don't know yet.

http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/blacklight_power_000522.html

After two hydrino presentations at American Chemical Society meetings in California in recent months, interest among some scientists and engineers is growing too.

NASA space station engineer Luke Setzer privately formed a study circle on egroups.com to debate and explore the hydrino theory. The list has grown to 70 members since it started in March

The first is with the use of hydrogen in cars, in this or any form. Hydrogen is a very volatile element. Remember the Hindenberg? I would hate to have millions of little bombs running around, ready to blow even for just a fender bender.

Secondly, what kind and amount of radiation is going to be released during this process? There is going to be some released, the question is what kind and how much.

http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/blacklight_power_000522.html

BlackLight cells were confirmed by Johannes Conrads, the recently retired director of the Institute for Low Temperature Plasma Physics, a national laboratory in Germany.

Additionally, hydrogen plasmas created by the BlackLight process require "astonishingly" little energy to initiate and decay far more slowly than they normally should when input power is cut, Conrads said.

magnetohydrodynamics that was explored in the 60's. My bet is it's as promising as Dr. Bunkum's Miracle Snake Oil.

It wouldn't surprise me to find out that what it best accomplishes is extracting money from naive investors.

Today, it is... still 50 years away.

I expect it to be so 10 years from now, too.

It starts with water. Hydrogen is obtained through hydrolization. The hydrogen is put into a plasma. Then the hydrogen plasma is burned to produce H₂O again.

A complete circle. I don't excess energy gets generated without breaking entropy.

If there's a way to cheaply derive hydrogen from water, I'd be willing to bet it's biological. That seems to me the most promising.

but I don't know the details

without great expense. Just farm the organisms.

This violates multiple laws of physics

working with Mills on this?

This violates the laws of quantum mechanics as well as the first law of thermodynamics.

People don't get it, WE DON'T KNOW EVERYTHING, sometimes even scientists are wrong - and if I'm not mistaken many of the same scientists that poo-poo these ideas are exactly the ones tied to corporate energy interests or are just too stubborn to examine the empirical data that has been presented in the last decade.

And, didn't "experts" once call Einstein a "crackpot"? Google Eugene Mallove and get back to me.

This is like people who say relativity could be wrong - if it is, there are much larger implications than some experiment in a bottle.

Thoughts?

Look up Eugene Mallove. There is enough dissent in the scientific community about this, and dont doubt for a second that corporate energy interests wouldn't work to discredit to keep a lid on this. The proof is in the empirical evidence - and there is empirical evidence.

murdered in 2004 :tinfoilhat:

http://www.infinite-energy.com/whoarewe/gene.html

...he was a good communicator and a darn smart guy.

I was wondering whatever happened with it. Thanks for the links!

Anyone with grade 11 chemistry or physics should be able to see through this.

Basically they're saying shine a black light on water and it will magically create an atomic reaction.

Utter nonsense.

Your wrote,

"Basically they're saying shine a black light on water and it will magically create an atomic reaction."

Wrong. That is not at all what is claimed or demonstrated.


ÒThe exception tests the rule.Ó Or, put another way. ÒThe exception proves that the rule is wrong.Ó That is the principle of science. If there is an exception to any rule, and if it can be proved by observation, that rule is wrong.

Richard P. Feynman (1963), Nobel Laureate in Physics (1965)

----------------

"Showing a greater fondness for their own opinions than for truth, they sought to deny and disprove the new things which, if they had cared to look for themselves, their own senses would have demonstrated to them."

Galileo Galilei, 1615