From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2005 12:31 PM Subject: Re: MAHG vs BLP reaction
> One MAJOR theoretical difference between the MAHG and the BLP process is the need for a CATALIST to extract excess energy. True, the postulated processes are quite different. > > The BLP process is driven by individual atomic hydrogen atoms coming in contact with special CATALYST atoms like helium. According to Mills' CQM theory, the catalyst is ESSENTIAL for extracting vast amounts of energy from the individual atomic hydrogen atoms. According to CQM electron orbit spheres belonging to individual hydrogen atoms shrink as they release predicted packets of stored energy when they come in contact with catalyst atoms. At present, numerous experiments performed at BLP appear to have done a remarkable job of documenting the specific amount of predicted energy that ought to be released as "orbit spheres" allegedly shrink to smaller and smaller "P" states. This is true, but not quite a statement of essence. The **essence** is the presence of an 'energy hole' of magnitude 27.2 eV which causes the H atom to transfer that energy, destablilize, collapse to a lower state, and release still more energy. Anything that can provide that energy hole, or an integer multiple of it, will initate the reaction. Two H atoms, together, can each present an energy hole of 13.6 eV, totalling the resonant 27.2 eV. Thus, in a three-body reaction, atomic 2H is a catalyst and H+2H is a "go" condition. This was extensivle discussed by Phillips et.al. in their paper using the GEC glow-discharge cell. > > In the MAHG process, however, NO CATALYST atoms are involved. No "external" catalyst is involved, but 2H (not H2) is a known catalyst. See above. >It appears that individual hydrogen atoms THEMSELVES are directly responsible for the extraction of surrounding vacuum energy. Well...actually the recombination of two atomic hydrogen atoms making molecular hydrogen are involved. No atomic shrinking of the hydrogen atom is involved. No "P" states are needed to drive the energy extraction process. Not necessarily so. The known 2H+H reaction can run in the MAHG reactor and produce hydrinos, initiating may reactions producing lots of energy. > > Can the individual hydrogen atoms THEMSELVES be considered "catalysts" when they come in contact with each other? Probably not, according to Mill's CQM theory. Yes they can, and do, and have been so observed. See the Phillips paper above. > > It remains baffling to me is why two approaches (BLP vs. MAHG) can on the surface appear so utterly different while simultaneously remaining similar in tantalizing ways. Maybe they are not actually different. Perhaps the MAHG cell was built on one set of assumptions leading from the Langmuir work, in innocent ignorance of Mills's work. A BLP reactor was built. The pulse operation of the heater, the supposed pumping of ZPE, may all be an illusion while the measured energy is coming from the BLP reactions. There are tests for this, spectroscopy of the internal gas would be informative. Hot H line broadening may be occuring, from either reaction, but UV spectroscopy would be more definitive. If you are doing science, known phenomena must be systematically excluded. Ironically in this case it is BLP, the new kid on the block, that must be excluded. That has not happened despite Jones' comments. > > What I can't avoid from my point of view is the fact that BOTH process appear to need INDIVIDUAL atomic hydrogen to drive the energy extraction process. IOW, atomic hydrogen appears to be the essential KEY. Quite right, but three H's can join the dance. Remember, 2H is not H2[molecular hydrogen]. Mike Carrell
