Re: [Vo]:BLP really "bombs out" this time
In reply to Jürg Wyttenbach's message of Sun, 20 Dec 2020 01:43:28 +0100: Hi, [snip] >I personally do not understand why we (Mills) only wants to >produce H*-H* when in cold fusion this step is the most complicated one... Mills wants nothing to do with CF. I suspect because it has a bad reputation according to the mainstream.
Re: [Vo]:BLP really "bombs out" this time
Robin, This - self sustain mode - has nothing to do with even or odd numbers in the periodic table... It depends all on the magnetic gamma states you can activate during fusion. That's why I said: Either you understand the physics of fusion or not. We - since one year - have a clean picture of the "cold fusion mechanism". I personally do not understand why we (Mills) only wants to produce H*-H* when in cold fusion this step is the most complicated one... Just three weeks ago I improved Mills electron proton fine structure formula (1420Mhz signal) by applying the proper SO(4) coupling constant. Now it's exact for 9 digits! So there is new(SO(4)) physics and improved old one (GUT-CP). J.W. On 20.12.2020 00:32, Robin wrote: In reply to Robin's message of Sun, 20 Dec 2020 06:14:27 +1100: Hi, When I pointed out the problem with Silver, I actually suggested Lanthanum instead, which has a melting point close to that of Silver, but a much higher boiling point. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:BLP really "bombs out" this time
In reply to Jürg Wyttenbach's message of Sun, 20 Dec 2020 00:28:15 +0100: Hi, [snip] >Not using silver means a self sustain mode is no longer possible... > >It's all about understanding physics or just believing to understand >physics... > >J.W. Gallium is also an odd numbered element.
Re: [Vo]:BLP really "bombs out" this time
In reply to Robin's message of Sun, 20 Dec 2020 06:14:27 +1100: Hi, When I pointed out the problem with Silver, I actually suggested Lanthanum instead, which has a melting point close to that of Silver, but a much higher boiling point.
Re: [Vo]:BLP really "bombs out" this time
Not using silver means a self sustain mode is no longer possible... It's all about understanding physics or just believing to understand physics... J.W. On 19.12.2020 20:08, Robin wrote: In reply to Jones Beene's message of Sat, 19 Dec 2020 15:37:29 + (UTC): Hi Jones, [snip] As for the near future, we can ask - is it coincidental that Mills has shifted gears and now does not promote silver as a catalyst? Nor does he ever mention the bomb. Is that in response to high level directives? [snip] AFAIK, his reason for not working much with Silver nowadays, is because I pointed out to him that the boiling point of Silver was so much lower than the 3000C temperature that he was aiming for that Silver vapor would not condense to a liquid again inside his reactor. He then switched to Gallium which has a much higher boiling point. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:BLP really "bombs out" this time
In reply to Robin's message of Sun, 20 Dec 2020 06:08:05 +1100: Hi, [snip] Upon checking I see that I was wrong. The boiling point of Gallium is not much higher, however the melting point is much lower, which extends the temperature range between melting and boiling. >In reply to Jones Beene's message of Sat, 19 Dec 2020 15:37:29 + (UTC): >Hi Jones, >[snip] >>As for the near future, we can ask - is it coincidental that Mills has >>shifted gears and now does not promote silver as a catalyst? Nor does he ever >>mention the bomb. Is that in response to high level directives? >[snip] >AFAIK, his reason for not working much with Silver nowadays, is because I >pointed out to him that the boiling point of >Silver was so much lower than the 3000C temperature that he was aiming for >that Silver vapor would not condense to a >liquid again inside his reactor. >He then switched to Gallium which has a much higher boiling point.
Re: [Vo]:BLP really "bombs out" this time
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Sat, 19 Dec 2020 15:37:29 + (UTC): Hi Jones, [snip] >As for the near future, we can ask - is it coincidental that Mills has shifted >gears and now does not promote silver as a catalyst? Nor does he ever mention >the bomb. Is that in response to high level directives? [snip] AFAIK, his reason for not working much with Silver nowadays, is because I pointed out to him that the boiling point of Silver was so much lower than the 3000C temperature that he was aiming for that Silver vapor would not condense to a liquid again inside his reactor. He then switched to Gallium which has a much higher boiling point.
[Vo]:BLP really "bombs out" this time
Last month, with little fanfare or press coverage, BLP released some of its more impressive claims ever. The PDF is here: https://brilliantlightpower.com/presentations/Analytical_Presentation.pdf It is a large file - over 100 pages with images - but of course much of the technology has already been dropped or altered, perhaps for the latest round of investor funding. Sadly, however, one finding may benefit others in the World - more than the USA is willing to admit, and for an almost hidden reason. The experiment in question could prove the Mills theory beyond doubt ... to the Pentagon, at least. On page 10 of the citation above, Mills presents a double surprise - in that it was first published in China ! Here is that cite: R. Mills, Y. Lu, R. Frazer, “Power Determination and Hydrino Product Characterization of Ultralow Field Ignition of Hydrated Silver Shots”, Chinese Journal of Physics, Vol. 56, (2018), pp1667-1717. BLP essentially (and naively) appears to shows anyone who is interested the early stages of how to produce a "hydrino bomb" using a silver catalyst. Of course on first look, such a weapon is not nearly as devastating as your typical atomic fission bomb (by many orders of magnitude). Presumably that fact makes the weaponization of hydinos a negligible risk. However, the shockwave is another matter since it is said to be a factor of 10X more energy dense than chemical. QUOTE: "Based on the shockwave propagation velocity and the corresponding pressure, the high-current ignition of water in a silver matrix was measured to produce a shock wave that was equivalent to about 10 times more moles of gunpowder. What is glossed over is that an explosive of only a factor if 10 more energy than chemical energy can produce a nuclear fusion reaction - and without the need for fissile material. This has been arguably proved already and is called the "fourth generation" of atomic weapons. Top secret. The bottom line is that spherical convergence is a "shockwave multiplier." The pure fusion weapon (see Wiki) does not require a fissile "primary" to ignite deuterium - only converging shockwaves. Thus the easiest way to control proliferation (by fissile inventory) becomes worthless. That makes any ultra high energy chemical explosive - like the Mills' silver bullet hydrino bomb - potentially horrendous. As for the near future, we can ask - is it coincidental that Mills has shifted gears and now does not promote silver as a catalyst? Nor does he ever mention the bomb. Is that in response to high level directives? Well, the good news is that Mills has been so wrong, so often in the past 30 years, that the hydrino bomb is likely to be only so much hot air. Where is Inspector Clouseau when we need him?
