----- Original Message ----- From: "Abd ul-Rahman Lomax" <a...@lomaxdesign.com>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Saturday, March 20, 2010 2:51 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Heads Up! BLP Update


At 11:43 AM 3/20/2010, Mike Carrell wrote:

Cited references in the documents include technical apers also on their website, except Mills et.al, "Thermally Reversable Hydrino Catalyst Systems as a New Power Source" which is not posted as yet [this is the heart of the matter, possibly awaiting patent protection]. The papers about the chemistry involved are dense and technical, but the results have been verified by work at Rowan University in Glassboro NJ.

Work, of course, supported by Blacklight Power. I have no problem with that, but independent replication it is not, not yet! I'm not placing any bets in this race. I wish them well, their personal fortunes are at stake.

The issue of "independance" is a stinking red herring, casting apersions on
the staff of Rowan, and showing only a cursory review of what is actually in
the reports. The more severe test is tghe seven licensees of BLP
technioplogy, who had first-hand due diligence access to the personnel and
facilities of BLP and in some cases at least, replicatged the effects in
their own labs.

I've written before that if this is fraud, it's approaching the end game. I appreciate BP's approach, they are bypassing normal scientific process, which is probably necessary. In the end, though, unless they have operating power plants, or demonstration models you can buy and operate, overall scientific isn't likely to be moved unless there are truly independent replications or verifications, and probably more than one or two.

I don't know how anywone who has closely followed Mills' publications could
use the word "fraud". Yes, BLP is in the end game. A useable :"water engine"
must result from the two decades of effort and $60+ million investment. All
eveidence is positive at this point.

If I were them, I'd be trying to make a toy demonstration that shows clear excess power, make it as cheap as possible, and sell it. But they could be hampered by patent issues, that's the problem with the patent office refusing patent protection. That's a legal problem. It should be possible to get protection on "impossible devices." Perhaps some protection from having filed with adequate description to build a device. Even if the patent is not issued; later on, when someone tries to infringe, you'd have evidence that the original filing was actually not of something impossible! And that therefore the patent should have been issued, and that therefore it should be issued now. And the infringer required to pay licensing (perhaps with standing "damages" ameliorated, since they, too, could be seen to be acting in good faith, after all, there was no patent!)

Mills' extensivwe pulications through the years constitute cointinuing
"reduction to practice". Patents have been inssued throughout the world, but
not "basic" patents, whci may require a court fight. [Mills has discovered
new "natural law" which is difficult to patent] A world-class patent firm is
handling the Intellectual Property issues. Making a toy or water heater is a
sure pathto bankruptcy. Electric utilitis were among the first investors.
Achievement of a working protoype "water engine" will refute critics and be
a basis for retrofit of power plants worldwide. As benchmarks are met, the
private funding available continues to increase.

Mike Carrell



Reply via email to