At 05:33 PM 3/22/2010, Mike Carrell wrote:
Herewith some speculations about BLP strategy. Jed, and others, have
long advocated full disclosure by LENR/BLP investigators and
buuidilng samll proof-of-cocept toys to convince skeptics. Jed, in
particular, is an adocate of the creative energy of entrepreneurs to
expand a field. BLP's moves to cultivate a few licensees seems
contrary to such expectations.
One must follow Nature, and not human expectatons. Mills has
provided full disclosure, big time, in the years of posted
experiments, patent applications, theoretical papers, and a
constantly revised magnum opus, GUTCP. Key findings have been
confirmed by competant investigators. By policy, BLP will license
broadly and welcome *serious* inquiries and visits, but have no time
for 'proving' or 'demolnstrations' to the curious who have not done
their hiomework.
This is an utterly bogus argument. It's Mills right to not do
anything he doesn't want to do, but it's not a matter of time. All it
would take would be someone interested in toy development to be made,
under nondisclosure or whatever, cognizant of what BLP is doing, so
that a toy or toys could be designed. "Toy" means a demonstration
that is cheap, within the reach of interested individuals. Note that
stirling engines can be part of toys, large amounts of heat aren't
necessary. Toys can be very small-scale, but they demonstrate effects
-- or make it possible to study them and find alternate explanations.
Early investors were electric utilities. The pathof discovery amd
invention has led to a complex catalytic chemistry which can be
scaled to utilitiy applications where adequate technical support is
expected and can be provided. Success at the 1 MW "water engine"
level will include a mastery of all the ancillalry problems and a
worldwide program of retrofitting power utilities.
If. I'll say this: if a toy could not be easily designed, forget a 1
MW "water engine." Absolutely forget it. Maybe Mills doesn't want to
see any toys out there for complex legal strategic reasons, but
"time," no. If it works. Maybe, Mike, it doesn't work!
Once this becomes "real" one can expect a flood of entrepreneural
energy to develop small scale applications, including automotive
transportation. This is the realm that Jed has envisioned for years
for "cold fusion" applications. All of this is much too big for BLP
to handle. Garage mechanics can produce BLP effects, but will find
that best results are had with the help of a license from BLP -- and
those who invested in BLP should be repaid by royalties.
Why does this sound like Orbo? Steorn has been claiming 200% energy,
which would be plenty for a toy. A toy can be patented. It's just a
"curiosity," and it has value as a toy if it's of interest, it
doesn't actually have to work, except precisely as advertised. Don't
hold your breath waiting for an Orbo toy from Steorn!
And, apparently, don't hold your breath waiting for one from BLP. I
expect you might see an Arata cell toy sooner. My CF cells, as
designed, are toys, very small-scale demonstrations, assuming they
work. Toy neutron generators, maybe a little more.
Toys are for fun, but fun is for learning, and learning is for
science. And engineering, as well.
