Jed
I would compare the system R.Mills is building with an refrigerator or an  
airconditioner. 
The proof of principle that compressed air that expands
cools down is not to difficult to demonstrate. 
Let a compressed spray expand into open air. You see freezing of the expanding 
liquid.
But to make a system that regenerates the expanded liquid and compresses it 
again in a 
continous loop is much more complicated. 
If you managed  to do that you almost have a equivalent of a commercial device .

Peter v Noorden

From: Jed Rothwell 
Sent: Monday, February 02, 2015 4:58 PM
To: [email protected] 
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Looking for feedback on a BLP POC disagreement

Randy Mills said:  
  "A device that runs on its own requires the sophistication equivalent to 
being a commercial device."

I do not like to be dismissive, but that is ridiculous. That's an incredibly 
ignorant thing to say. Here is a famous photo of the first transistor:


http://www.beatriceco.com/bti/porticus/bell/images/transistor1.jpg


Does that look like it has the sophistication equivalent to a commercial device?

Here is the first airplane flight in history. The machine barely got off the 
ground, and was incredibly unstable and difficult to fly:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wright_Flyer#mediaviewer/File:First_flight2.jpg


In 2003 an expert pilot with far more experience than Orville Wright had in 
1903 tried to fly a replica of this airplane at Kitty Hawk. He could not get it 
off the ground.

Here is the same machine three days earlier, after an unsuccessful attempt to 
fly:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/da/Wilbur_Wright_after_unsuccessful_flight_trial.jpg


Does that look like a commercial device to Mills?



There are several stages to developing a commercial product:

Proof of existence. A device proves that an effect is real. Any cold fusion 
reactor that produces measurable anomalous heat does this.

Proof of principle. A device proves that in principle the effect can be useful. 
A cold fusion device that produces high temperatures and high power density 
does this. A cold fusion device that produces three times input power, or 
output with no input power, proves that in principle you might generate 
electricity with cold fusion.

Further proof of principle. A cold fusion device powering a thermoelectric 
device is additional proof of principle that cold fusion generators are 
possible. This is true even when the cold fusion device consumes more power 
than the thermoelectric device outputs.

Prototype. For space heating applications, this would be a device that actually 
produces fairly stable palpable heat. Note that the smallest space heaters 
produce about 500 W. For electric power this would be a device that produces 
electricity with no external input power (a self powered unit). This may be a 
crude prototype similar to the first transistor, which could not possibly be of 
any practical use. It is a step beyond "proof of principle" because it actually 
does the full application.

Commercial prototype. A device that can be mass-produced in principle, and that 
can be submitted to safety agencies for testing.

Commercial device. Something that has actually been produced in some reasonable 
quantity, such as 100 units, and that has passed safety licensing and 
inspection. It may require intense handholding and babysitting by the company 
that manufactures it. The first commercial computers were like this. The first 
100 Tesla automobiles probably fit this description. They were very expensive 
and impractical for most people.

Mass-produced commercial device. Something that can be made in the thousands or 
millions, and that can be sold for a profit. A mass-produced commercial device 
can be used by an ordinary consumer without much training. The model T Ford was 
the first automobile that really fit this description. The Apple Computer was 
the first consumer computer of this type.


Mills has not even passed the first test, as far as I know. He has not produced 
irrefutable proof of existence. Between the first proof of existence and the 
initial proof of principle devices, all the way up to a mass-produced 
commercial device, you may have to spend billions of dollars. The first hybrid 
automobiles were made around 1912. The first practical commercial hybrid 
automobile was the Toyota Prius, which cost about $1 billion for R&D. Compared 
to cold fusion this was a minor incremental improvement to an existing 
technology.

I expect the first commercial cold fusion device of any type will also cost 
about $1 billion, or more. It will cost huge sums just to ensure the thing is 
perfectly safe. Modern society demands very high levels of assurance that a 
product is safe before it can be used. We demand that a new product be far 
safer than the older product it replaces. I expect that self driving 
automobiles will have to pass far more rigorous safety standards than human 
driven cars do. This is not rational, but it is what society demands.


- Jed

Reply via email to