*There are two other exotic engines of interest: Papp and Stanley Meyer. I “know” of both, but have not seen documents. If you read the paper cite above you might be intrigued. Papp showed an engine of nominal standard configuration which ran nominally on ‘activated ’noble gases. *
Before Papp invented the noble gas engine, he patented and demonstrated to the complete satisfaction of the U.S. patent office an over unity engine that ran on water catalyzed with other elements. Papp discarded this water based technology because it was flawed and moved onto noble gases. It is easy to get a spark driven plasma expansion from hydrogen or noble gases. Many experimenters after Papp have done it. But what is hard to do is get over unity power production from the process. To do that requires exquisite engineering. Mills may be where Papp was back in the 1960s. Papp moved on to noble gases but Mills won’t because he is shackled himself to the hydrino theory. The fact that noble gases can do what water can speaks against the hydrino theory. On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 5:11 PM, Mike Carrell <mi...@medleas.com> wrote: > Dave, I don’t know what video you have seen. Do not be spooked by numbers > in the disclosure: Mills has indicated that the actual activation power > level is much lower. Do read the paper “Solid Fuels that form HOH > catalyst”. The key fact in the present scene is the **nascent H2O** can > be a catalyst. By “nascent” is meant **newly created**, not part of > liquid water. This avoids the need to electrolyze water to get H, which > takes energy. The paper cites several molecules which accept water. When > heated to moderate temperatures, nascent HOH is formed with can Induce > other H atoms to the hydrino state with the release of lots of energy. The > fuel pellets are apparently conductive enough that bust of current will > kick the temperature up to the activation point. Apparently the pellet is > not destroyed; once hydrated again it can be reused. [this is first BLP > implementation that can be weaponized – it could be potent. > > > > The patent application has an illustration of a two cylinder of nominal > standard configuration. The text suggests that this could be powered by a > slurry containing HOH. I think this is just a placeholder to stke a claim > against some future conversion to BLP ‘water engines’. > > > > There are two other exotic engines of interest: Papp and Stanley Meyer. I > “know” of both, but have not seen documents. If you read the paper cite > above you might be intrigued. Papp showed an engine of nominal standard > configuration which ran nominally on ‘activated ’noble gases. Meyer a > conventional IC engine that was powered electrolyzed water, but the > electrolysis was anomalously superefficient so there was power gain in > burning it. Neither Papp nor Meyer documented their work [or perhaps did > not understand their work for it to be duplicated.] Some enthusiast will > see in Mills a rediscovery of these inventors. It happens that several > ionized noble gases and nascent water can be BLP catalysts. Mills has > clearly found that 2H can catalyze a third H, which may be source of excess > heat in LENR experiments [I have made this suggestion on CMNS and have been > studiously ignored] > > > > Mike Carrell > > > > *From:* David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] > *Sent:* Tuesday, January 21, 2014 3:09 AM > *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com > > *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:PESN: Mills explains upcoming BLP demo > > > > The video raises my expectations quite a bit, but there are many questions > that need to be answered before I will be convinced that it works well. My > main question at this point is why do they need 10,000 amps of drive > current to get the power output? If the dynamic impedance is .1 ohms, > which is typical and not very large, then the input power could be the same > as the output at 10 MWatts. Nothing is said about the duty cycle of that > large input power, so if it is low, perhaps this device performs somewhat > similar to the ECAT. > > Home use of a device of this power level would be problematic due to the > extremely large input drive power requirement. Perhaps they can scale it > down to a level that would be more manageable for a single home or > vehicle. Axil seems to think the device operates like a form of PaPP > machine and that may be the case. My opinion is that it is too early to > know exactly what they have built, but it would be great if it can operate > with a COP of 3 or more. Since the output appears to be DC, the generator > efficiency should already be taken into account. > > Let's keep our fingers crossed and hope for a miracle. > > Dave > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> > To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> > Sent: Tue, Jan 21, 2014 12:53 am > Subject: Re: [Vo]:PESN: Mills explains upcoming BLP demo > > Not every photon which encounters an atom or ion will photoionize it. The > probability of photoionization is related to the photoionization > cross-section, which depends on the energy of the photon and the target > being considered. For photon energies below the ionization threshold, the > photoionization cross-section is near zero. But with the development of > pulsed lasers it has become possible to create extremely intense, coherent > light where multi-photon ionization may occur. At even higher intensities > (around 1015 - 1016 W/cm2 of infrared or visible light), > non-perturbative<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-perturbative>phenomena such > as *barrier > suppression ionization* and *rescattering ionization* are observed. > > I > > > > I suggest that Mills add some chlorine and/or helium to his concoction to > provide more powerful x-ray production from his spark. > > > > See > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excimer_laser > > > > On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 11:56 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I am very impressed. My initial suspicion has been bolstered that Mills > has developed a new version of the Papp engine. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wankel_engine > > It is a Wankel engine variation that has 60 reaction spaces that fire at > 200 times a minute. That is a firing rate of 12,000 pulses/minute, as > compared to 500 for the Papp engine. > > The fuel produces nanoparticles that are super ionized by the arc where > only the innermost electrons of the crystal remain unaffected in their > atomic orbits. > > From Papp technology, there is little heat produced by the reaction: > almost complete photo ionization of the potassium and hydrogen > nanoparticles. > > Milles most probably is using potassium carbonate as the catalyst because > it has the proper engineering characteristics to produce nanoparticles. > > Even though Papp technology is open source, the Mills engine design is > original and innovative so his intellectual property claim might hold up. > > Here is a snippet from Papp engine theory that explains the basics of the > power production principles. Remember that water and potassium can produce > solid nanoparticles just like noble gases do. > > ----------------------------------- > > *Where does the explosive force come from?* > > The force produced in the Papp engine comes from the explosion of these > clusters of gas and water atoms under the excitation of ultraviolet and > x-rays. As the energy of this EMF goes up so does the explosive power of > the clusters. > > > When TNT explodes, the mass of the expanding gas is high but the speed of > the associated shockwave is relatively low. > > > On the other hand, the shockwave produced in the Papp cluster explosion > reaction is some appreciable fraction of the speed of light even if the > mass of the gas ions involved in the cluster fragment expansion is small > when compared to what happens in a chemical based explosion. > > > Even with these large differences in the parameters in the equation of > force, the forces produced in these two dissimilar reactions; that is, > between chemical explosion and electromagnetic shockwave generation as a > product of the mass and velocity is similar in magnitude. > > > The more a cluster is ionized, the easier it is for x-ray photons to > further ionize additional electrons in that cluster. > > > Energy levels in bulk materials are significantly different from materials > in the nanoscale. Let’s, put it this way: Adding energy to a confined > system such as a cluster is like putting a tiger in a cage. A tiger in a > big zoo with open fields will act more relaxed, because he has a lot of > room to wander around. If you now confine him in smaller and smaller areas, > he gets nervous and agitated. It's a lot that way with electrons. If > they're free to move all around through a metal, they have low energy. Put > them together in a cluster and beam x-rays on them, they get very excited > and try to get out of the structure. > > > In getting to the breaking point, when the ionized cluster eventually > reaches an ionization limit where the remaining electrons cannot sustain > the structural integrity of the cluster any longer, an explosive > disintegration of the cluster and subsequent plasma expansion of the > positive ions and electrons which once formed the cluster occurs. > > > Multi-electron ionization of molecules and clusters can be realized by > photoionization of strong x-ray photons. > > > The multi-electron ionization leads to an explosive disintegration of the > cluster together with the production of multi-charged atomic ions > fragments. > > > The kinetic energy of the product ions formed by this explosion is of the > order of several or tens eV in a diatomic, hundreds of eV in small van der > Waals(VDW) clusters, and 100 KeV to 1 MeV in large (n > 1000) VDW clusters. > > > What causes this accelerating weakening of the structure under the > onslaught of x-ray photons radiation is “barrier suppression ionization”. > > > The initial arrival of x-ray photons begin the formation of plasma that is > localized within the cluster itself. > > > The electrons initially dislodged by the x-ray photons orbit around the > outside of the cluster. These electrons lower the coulomb barrier holding > the electrons that remain orbiting the cluster’s inner atoms. These > remaining electrons reside in the inner orbits closer in to the nuclei of > their atoms. > > > Excess electric negative charge in the gas carrying the clusters will also > add to the suppression of the coulomb barrier further supporting cascading > cluster ionization. > Papp uses every trick in the book to pack as many electrons in the noble > gas mix as he possibly can. > > > When enough electrons are removed, the structure of the cluster cannot > sustain itself any longer and the cluster explodes. > > > In order to take advantage of the energy produced by “barrier suppression > ionization”, the designers of the Papp reaction must satisfy two main > engineering goals: first, large noble gas clusters must be formulated, and > two, copious amounts of high energy x-ray photons must be produced. > > > *Where Excess Power Comes From* > > > The Excess energy might come about when the x-ray photons lower the > coulomb barrier during the cluster explosion chain reaction process. > “Barrier suppression ionization” changes the way electrostatic charge > attraction and repulsion work; that is, it modifies the vacuum energy. > > > > When the cluster explodes and the cluster is destroyed and electrons are > drained from the gas, the rule of electrostatic charge repulsion returns > back to normal. > > > The bigger the cluster that can be fabricated, the more energy is derived > from the cluster explosion chain reaction process because the cluster stays > together for a longer time and therefore more energy can be “pulled out of > the vacuum”. > > > The power that you can get out of the noble gas clusters is exponentially > proportional to the intensity of the x-rays that you can produce. > > > The more ionization you can produce in the cluster, the higher that the > kinetic energy of the exploding ions will have. This energy goes up > exponentially with the ionization level. > > > With xenon, the ionization level can go up to +40. You can only imagine > how powerful those exploding xenon ions can become. The other noble gases > behave in a similar way. > > > But with helium, there are only 2 electrons, so what we see now in my > current experiments are ionization energy levels that are very small. > > > At the end of the day, there are two important parameters that define the > level of power that can be produced in the Papp reaction, cluster size and > x-ray intensity. > > > Noble gas cluster creation and destruction must be an ongoing, repetitive, > and endless process in the Papp cylinder. > > > Lowering the coulomb barrier is where the energy derived from cold fusion > ultimately comes from, and this lowering is caused by electron screening > produced by large numbers of high energy electrons. > > > Experiment on Xenon explosion processes have found that the energy > released by and exploding Xenon cluster is about 2.5 KeV. > > > Here are some detailed experimental results involving the explosion of an > Xenon cluster. > How hot is 2.5 KeV? > > > > > 1 eV = 11604.505 Kelvin. > > > Xenon Cluster fragments are hot after explosion at > (2.500 eV) (11604.505 ) = 29,011,262.5 degrees > > > The energy produced when a cluster with 1500 atoms explodes is (2.5 > KeV)(1500) = 3750 KeV or 3.75 MeV > > By comparison a uranium atom produces 200 MeV when it fissions. > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 10:42 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Sort of explains. More info than I have seen so far. See: > > > > > http://pesn.com/2014/01/20/9602425_Randell-Mills_explains_upcoming-Blacklight-power-demo/ > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________ > This Email has been scanned for all viruses by Medford Leas I.T. > Department. >
