I was thinking about the PAPP engine and had a couple of interesting ideas to 
pass on.  When I look at the design of the device I see that it has some 
similar features of a cross field system.  The magnetrons that generate large 
amounts of RF at high efficiency are one type of cross field design.  Notice 
that the PAPP structure has a large electric field at one end generated by the 
spark gaps and also contains a axial magnetic field due to the outer coil.  
These fields are at right angles over a portion of their spatial common region 
and hence the comparison.

I would expect the large electric field and the current that flows because of 
it to ionize the noble gasses to various degrees, depending upon the location 
of the gas during the process.  Helium has an interesting characteristic if it 
has one electron stripped from its neutral atom.  In this case the helium very 
much resembles hydrogen except that it has a single unmatched charge remaining. 
 If hydrinos are a real fact of nature, then why would not helium with one 
electron exhibit behavior that compares?  It might even be capable of releasing 
much more energy as the electron becomes ever closer to the nucleus.

With this line of thinking in mind, perhaps the other noble gasses are blended 
into the mix to catalyze this stored energy release process.  I have not 
followed Mills' technology well enough to know if this is possible, but someone 
else can help with that understanding.  Now, since I am suggesting that the 
helium that is active has one electron removed then it would be propelled down 
the axis of the cylinder toward the piston by the positively charged spark gap 
electrodes at the sealed end.  Electrons that are stripped from their atoms 
would be attracted toward the gap, but follow a helical path due to interaction 
with the magnetic field.

This total process appears to separate the positive from the negative charges 
and thus produces an electric current that is not balanced within the cylinder. 
 The piston is located within the unbalanced region as well and I suspect is 
conductive.  Ultimately the helium ion must find an additional electron to fill 
its shell and balance its charge.  I wonder if the force that is generated in 
the piston is caused by Lenz's law as a result of the rapidly changing current 
flows.  The gas pressure would not be the driving force in this scenario, but 
would result in some cooling on expansion.  I would expect the cooling to 
reverse as the piston returned to its nominal starting position.

Perhaps the energy released by the helium ion being subject to hydrino type 
effects would tend to speed up the trapped positive ions, thereby increasing 
their speed and effective current.

Recall that helium comes in a monotonic form at room temperatures, unlike 
hydrogen which pairs.  This allows the ionization energy to be directed toward 
removing electrons only and not to break apart bonds between atoms.

A nice feature of a machine that operates with noble gasses is that they do not 
form chemical bonds with the impurities that needs to be often removed. 

These thoughts might not be new to the field as I have just recently began to 
give the PAPP engine attention so I apologize if I am repeating the postings of 
other members with these unusual ideas.  I am currently operating under the 
assumption that the engine is real, of which I have doubts, and my thoughts 
flow freely with little constraint.

We could all remain skeptics on the sidelines and get nothing accomplished or 
spend energy with our minds as we attempt to make sense of such a wild system.  
I do not want to cease to create new designs and concepts just because I fail 
to understand what others claim to observe.  Our field, LENR, has been 
subjected to the same insane prejudice for far too long.   I have never seen a 
meteorite crash to ground but I believe they exist because of the information 
supplied by others.

If these systems are a physical reality, then we must not neglect them due to 
our skeptic normal tendencies.  Being a skeptic is easy.  One can come up with 
an infinite number of reasons why something might not be possible, but only a 
few where it is.  You can always dismiss the work of others as being sloppy and 
useless.  Not long ago we had these skeptic  types hanging around like vultures 
on telephone lines.  They would deny that LENR devices generate excess heat 
even if one was stuck up their butts cooking them from the inside out.

Dave


Reply via email to