----- Original Message ----- From: "Jones Beene" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, May 16, 2009 7:22 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Biberian describes explosion
In all of these explosions - if Mills CQM is even partially correct - the gradual build-up of below ground state deuterium over time could be risky for a 'runaway'.
Mills has cited an autocatalysis reaction for H or D atoms. Two H or D atoms can provide the 'energy hole' to catalyse the hydrino transition for a third H or D atom. Nominally, the reaction occurs in vacuum, or perhaps in the dense H or D enviroment of a catode in an electrolytic cell. Perhaps it may also occur in a densly loaded lattice. This is pure speculation, for the lattice atoms would prevent the catalysis as it is [seemingly] understood by Mills. But this is clearly uncharted territory possibly full of surprises.
Perhaps that is one reason that BLP stays away from deuterium. (there are other reasons)
BLP does not and has not 'stayed away' from deuterium. It is a constiluent of normal water. The BLP reactions are chemical, involving the electron not nuclear. BLP has run experiments with deuterium with rsults equivalent to hydrogen. Strategically, Mills does not want any association with the CF/LENR/CMNS phenomena.
The lesson would be NOT to reuse either electrodes or heavy water between sequential runs with deuterium, especially when they have been exposed to electrolytes that might be catalytic (as defined by either Mills or de Geuss).
If the CMNS community, individually or collectively, could produce such explosion on demand and repetivly, there would be no need or search and plead for funding. Investors would be pounding on the door with checkbooks in hand.
Mike Carrell <snip>
