>From Jed:
> This link is in another thread here, "Blacklight:" > http://www.e-catworld.com/2014/01/report-from-the-blacklight-power-demonstra tion/ > I thought I would point this out for people not following that thread closely. > The description of the demonstration is vague. It lacks technical details. > I hope they publish a video, as they say they intend to do. Comments that piqued my interest from the e-catworld article: > I did not know most of the attendees, but there were representatives > from chemical and engineering firms present as well as OEMs and major > investment banks. ... I think the presentation was geared more towards > developing interest among potential licensees and partners rather than > media. Media will come in time. That's what I would have expected. The demo was certainly not geared for any kind of general public consumption. What would be the point. Based on how the continuing CF/LENR saga has been publicly treated over the past two decades why would Randy even care about courting the general public at this stage of the game. Most in the peanut gallery are in no position to lend any kind of serious funding. BLP is in the precarious position where if they are going to take the next big step they need to secure far more commitment, both in the financial and in the R&D field, than what they have been able to collect over the past two decades. It's pretty obvious (at least to me) that the primary purpose of Randy's demo was to sell the integrity of the mysterious BLP reaction, singular and primitive it may be, to a carefully selected group of investors and entrepreneurs with deep pockets. These would be investors willing to take risks and buck the status quo in the hope of reaping vast financial rewards. > I tend to believe people who actually view the experiments and study the results > rather than simply post negative comments on the Internet. The validator > [Rowan University] unequivocally confirmed the reported results from the newly > developed SF-CIHT cell and stated it was a "game changer". If I am to believe that Rowan University knows how to make accurate measurements, and that is the assumption I will go with for now, then the demo was a strategically sound move. Time to find serious investors who want to build a contraption - and make an obscene pile of money. > I thought one interesting moment was when the validator was asked whether he > believed in hydrinos. His answer was something to the effect that this wasn't > a matter of belief, but about experimental results and that he was confident > in the results. If you can turn the contraption on and off at will, without blowing people up in the process, that's all that matters. A nice pat theory that everyone can agree on comes later. I hope the time has finally ripened for BLP to get the assistance they need to construct a self-running prototype that can be turned on, and off without killing anyone in the process. I gather the BLP reaction, as demoed, appears to be quite explosive. History may be repeating itself. The explosive reaction reminds me of what it must have been like trying to design the first ICE. Sure, everybody knows that gasoline explodes... but design a contraption that runs continuously by creating multiple explosions through the containment of a dangerously volatile chemical reaction that must be expelled then quickly replenished with the purpose of turning a crankshaft to make useful work. Harrumph! Never been done, and never will be done! It's an engineering impossibility! You're a fool to even try! And so. with that said, I shall keep my optimism carefully reigned in because this is not the first time Randy has made promises of this kind. I remain a spectator of the peanut gallery. The floor is littered with discarded husks. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson svjart.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/newvortex/
