Jones wrote,
> Hi Mike, > > >> There is obviously some overlap. In Mills view, hydrogen is > >> consummed, but JLN has now run this long enough to know that no > >> hydrogen is consumed in MAHG. This must mean that the power > >> source > >> is ultimately ZPE and not the hydrino. > > > ***Not so at all.*** > > > Hydrogen is a fuel in BLP reactions, but the reactions are so > > energetic that > > an MAHG device could run a **very** long time before all the H > > atoms react. > > Sorry Mike ... but that "long time" has already passed, and it > passed a long time ago... > > ... and still there is a full load of H2 after hundred of hours of > OU performance. This is clearly a ZPE phenomenon, and not a > hydrino phenomenon. I don't think the case is proven at all by the evidence you cite. The BLP reactions are highly energetic, increasingly so as the hydrinos interact to drive to higher p-values. You assumption below that the hydrinos escape may not be true, for hydrino hydrides and hydrino molecules may be present, and they are "bigger". How is "full load" determined? By pressure? That does not distinguish between H and hydrinos, which are smaller bu not significantly [by the tests used] less massive. Temperature? Where are spectra that might indicated the nature of the gases inside? So that fact that energy is produced by a given charge of hydrogen over a long period is not in itself proof of ZPE. "Excess energy" has been the gold standard for CF, excluding all but nuclear reactions to account for the long term energy production. Mills has produced similar evidence, in addition to speactral features. It is altogether natural to assume that **no known reaction** can account for the continued energy production in the closed MAGH cell except ZPE. But that is only a hopeful assumption, not proven in this particular case, for the Mills BLP reactions can run in this sealed, closed environment. The fact that the Mills research cells have been studied under flow conditions does not prove at all that this closed cell cannot run for a very, very long time so long as the hot W continues to dissociate H to start the reaction chains. > > A mole (Avogadro's number) of molecules of any gas occupies a > volume of 22.4 liters at STP. It has a mass equal to the molecular > mass expressed in grams = 2. If the volume of a MAHG tube is about > a half liter and the vacuum is 80 torrs, then there will be > rougly10e20 molecules of H2 in a MAHG tube about 4 milligrams - > yet look at the incredible energy created with no loss of gas > volume or pressure due to hydrinos. Not proof; you *assume* hydrinos will diffuse out of the reactor. The hot W is a rich electron emitter, so lots of electrons to form hydrino hydrides will be available and are no more likely to diffuse out of the system than H is. No proof here, sorry. Naudin has performed hundreds > of runs now over months, and many of the runs are several hours. I > do not know the exact summation details other than the figures > which plainly appear on the site, anyone can do the math, but the > latest show consistent 50-100 watts of excess in each run. > Multiply this by the time period of the run and number of runs and > there is absolutely no way that hydrinos could be involved as the > tube, containing about four milligrams of H2 initially - which > would have shown severe parameter changes, over this time period, > due to loss of hydrogen to hydrinos, and there would even be > eventual soft x-rays, once they became so shrunken - had they been > there. This has not happened ! What parameter changes were looked for? How were soft x-rays looked for? How could such be detected though a metal shell and a flow calorimter? Where was the VUV window and spectrophotomers that Mills used? All I see in Jone's statements above are a string of hopeful conjectures, with no data to support them. > > There are no changes due to hydrino formation. This is NOT a > hydrino situation, plain and simple... unless that is, hydrinos > form temporarily and then oscillate back - in which case ZPE is > still the driving force, and we all know what Randall thinks about > ZPE. Jones is not following the hydrino reactions closely. Each one is mediated by the resonant transfer energy exchange, which is not oscillatory. There are many possible such reactions between H and hydrinos, and between hydrinos themselves. In such exchanges, one reactant goes "up" and the other goes "down". Jones is perhaps confused by the bound-free spectrum of hydrino hydrides, which was the topic of much discussion some time ago. Electrons can be acquired by hydrinos, producing hydrides, even as atomic H can form hydrides. The extran electron is loosely bound by magnetic, not electrostatic forces, and can oscillate in a "bound-free" dance. This has nothing to do with ZPE, so far as I know. > > He can't have it both ways, and it looks to me like he may have > chosen to ride the wrong horse. It's still a horse race, the Mills reactions can run in the stated conditions, can produce large energy, and no tests have been proformed to confirm or deny their existens. Sor far as I can tell, Naudin has simply ignored the possibility. He is conducting system performance tests, which is well and good, but they could be of a BLP reactor. Mike Carrell
