HI Jones, Regarding the July 22, 2014, PDF documents:
http://tinyurl.com/poj7ga5 - 215 megabytes, with embedded video. http://tinyurl.com/q28bn4w - Abbreviated version, no video. I am less cynical in my perception of BLP's chances of pulling the magic rabbit out of the hat than you appear to be. Granted, when we take into account Mills' past prediction record it is perfectly understandable to me why you might remain considerably more cynical. Regarding item 10, you state: Bottom line - this technology could be great - or a bust for the general public, depending on the cost of catalyst rejuvenation. ... I agree with you on this point. I think much of BLP's "SunCell" success hinges on whether the company has figured out how to recycle the undisclosed metal powder substance repeatedly - ad infinitum. All I can go on is what Mills has previously stated. Mills states their labs have figure out how to recycle the process. They claim they have tested the recycling process repeatedly, and that it is easy to do. According to page 57, the fuel composition consists of: Ti, Cu, or Ag + ZnCL2 or MGCl2 hydrate powder. Sounds like they can use several variations. Another concern of mine hinges on the crucial use of solar cells to convert the "SunCell" generated light into electricity. Other Vorts have raised legitimate concerns that the cells could be destroyed in short order by continuous close exposure to the "SunCell" catalyzation process. BLP claims they will ramp up the explosion process to 2000 / sec. That's a lot of explosions. Again, Mills claims this is not an issue, even at 2000 explosions per second. Nevertheless, at face value, it's seems like a bold claim to make. Mills, on the other hand, retorts that designing a jet engine so that it will burn fuel continuously is far more difficult to do. So, do we take Mills at his word, or is he saying under his breath, move along. Move along. Nothing to see here. My position is to remain agnostic for now. Got a question for you: Mills claims their experimental evidence clearly shows not only the generation of light (which apparently closely matches the spectrum of sunlight), the "SunCell" process also purports to generate heat, UV, and soft X-Rays. See pages 24 through 28 for information on BLP detecting soft X-Rays. What I find interesting is that according to Mills there is no known chemical reaction that is capable of generating soft X-Rays. Are you aware of any chemical reaction that can? If so, we should document what kind of chemical compositions could be capable of doing this and compare it with the data BLP has published. The obvious implication Mills is claiming here is that the proprietary "SunCell" process is manipulating the exploitation of a new energy resource, presumably collected from the conversion of hydrogen into hydrinos. Regarding your speculation on: ... The most interest should come from NASA and the Pentagon. I could see this as a fabulous solid fuel rocket engine. You might want to review the previous videos from the June 25 demos. You can view them from the "What's New" menu. VIew Part 1: http://youtu.be/zGTUd68hu5M Of particular interest, I believe, is something Mills claims fairly close to the beginning of this video. Mills made the comment that the explosion expansion ratio was measured to be a mere 10%. This appears to be an exceedingly small expansion quotient for an observed explosion. I don't see how such a process could ever be exploited effectively as a new and exotic solid rocket fuel as you have speculated. According to Mills, the "SunCell" explosion doesn't generate lots of additional very hot moving molecules during the oxidation process, as what happens when one explodes gasoline in a controlled format to drive a piston... i.e.: water, carbon dioxide. According to Mills, the catalyzation process isn't an oxidation process at all. According to BLP's experimental evidence the energy released appears to be released primarily in the form of EM, as heat, visible light (the spectrum of sunlight to be more precise), UV, and soft X-Rays. But very little physical 3D volumetric expansion is generated. Apparently, this was a surprise to the BLP team. Final thoughts: BLP has requested from one of the outside engineering firms working with them that a first generation prototype be delivered to their labs within 16 - 18 weeks... with the caveat that the "current management estimate, [is] subject to change". (See page 76 from the PDF document.) I interpret this as implying that the prototype will be capable of self running. If so, and if we're lucky BLP's ultimate DOG and PONY show may transpire sometime within the month of December or soon afterwards, assuming Mr. Murphy doesn't make too many unscheduled visits. I think a 4 to 4.5 month wait is a much more realistic time schedule as compared to Mills' previous prediction - in two months which he made back in the June 25 demos. All I know is that if I was working for that unnamed engineering firm BLP has contracted with, and if I was the project leader spearheading the assembling of such a prototype, I would have done my best to build in as much extra padding into the time-line as BLP would have been willing to give me. As they say: CIHT happens. And if you're a part-time dyslexic like me... "What??? Didn't the R2-PVP bus schematics state 10 kv? Crap! Isn't that the component that took our team six friggin weeks to assemble and bury within the Optical Distribution and Photovoltaic Converter System? Where does it say 10 mv???" (See page 56... more-or-less.) Again, I try to remain agnostic about Mills and BLP. Hope for the best. But prepare for the worst. Regards, $teven Vincent Johnson svjart.orionworks.com zazzle.com/orionworks
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
