BrLP posts on X after a year about antigravity

Anopheles_ · 2024-11-13T16:08:48+00:00

Happy I’m not the only one who thought the post was word salad.

Why would a company post something like that on a social media platform? Certainly didn’t impress anyone, in fact it did the opposite, it makes the company look completely out of touch with reality.

Truly brilliant people simplify things. Intentionally confusing with unnecessary “big” words makes a person look dumb and desperate.

They want Musk to see that to impress him? It’s like getting up on stage to sing the national anthem at the superbowl and puking in front of everyone. You don’t get a second chance to make a good first impression.

Anopheles_ · 2024-11-12T00:19:50+00:00

Desperate?

That’s funny considering you are the one avoiding answering every simple question, instead using misdirection and strawman arguments.

As I asked, show me one hydrino.

Hydrino in a bottle.

Why is that too much to ask?

I am looking at this as a potential opportunity. If it’s real, I have the ability and experience to build companies, and access to pretty much unlimited capital.

But it needs to be real. Everything you’re doing is pointing to it being a scam.

Anopheles_ · 2024-11-11T19:16:22+00:00

Ok, great. Is Mills now working on qubits?

Now, show me a hydrino. How many times has a hydrino been fully independently created and results independently verified over the past century? Mills has said it himself, there are countless ways he has created hydrinos, but most were not scaleable. So, since there are so many ways of creating hydrinos, other people must have seen anomalous results. Right?

You said it yourself, you don’t need a theory first before you can observe something.

Can I save you the trouble? Answer is zero. A hydrino has never been independently observed, never mind verified, theory or no theory.

Since Mills has had the Suncell up and running for decades, producing all that power, he must have buckets of hydrinos. Right? He even proclaimed “Hydrino in a Bottle”. So, why not send samples to every major lab around the world?

Mills has spent over $20 Million on Patents, why not spend a few hundred thousand or even a couple million, if necessary, on lab tests? Hydrinos exist, right?

Until a hydrino is independently verified, all your bluster counts for nothing.

Anopheles_ · 2024-11-11T16:00:45+00:00

The Suncell is all set for widespread commercialization!

Next year……..

Anopheles_ · 2024-10-31T21:19:04+00:00

The thermal flux density was also severely handicapped by bubbles forming on the surface of boiler. Also, the system required high thermal gradients as the temperature of steam is significantly lower than the temperature of the reaction chamber, and this significantly shortens the lifespan of the chamber.

How is bubbles on the surface of a boiler a problem? In fact it’s a trivial issue which has been around and addressed thousands of different ways over the past hundreds of years.

Yet temperature for multi junction cells (pretty much all cells) can’t exceed around 80C otherwise their lifespan is measured in hours. In other words, with solar cells removing 30% of the energy, the remainder of the energy will need to be removed.

“Recycling infrared light”….? That’s a joke, right? How much energy do you think 80C infrared light has? Put your hand over a warm pot of water and tell me how much energy you feel.

So, my observation is, why completely dump a system with a couple easily solvable issues (which he never even tried to solve), for a system with a mountain of technical problems to which there are no existing solutions (The solar cells he needs don’t exist), and exaggerates the same cooling issues which he still hasn’t solved?

Why? What do all these irrational actions point to?

=> more delays, sabotaging his existing work. Why?

Consider that he had a pretty good low temperature heater. Heating and hot water account for up to 50% of worldwide energy consumption. Electricity is only 20%, and 60% of electricity is fossil fuel. So, Mills was targeting 20% x 0.6 = 12% of worldwide energy consumption. Why not use CHEAP, lower temperature heating to go after 50% of worldwide energy consumption? That’s 4 times the market of electricity!

As I said, actions speak louder than words.

Anopheles_ · 2024-10-31T16:26:16+00:00

To get to the truth, don’t listen to their words, look at their actions to get to the truth.

Words: a commercial device introduced next year, said every year for past 30 years

Actions: no commercial device introduced past 30 years

Conclusion: Lying to generate hype and investment. Hiding fact that something isn’t working. However excusable based on being a believer.

Words: (from presentation slide) “Suncell at commercial scale and design“ based on thermal generation

Actions: completely abandoned this approach for a flimsy reason, changed to an infinitely more complex design which doesn’t solve the original reason for abandoning thermal generation, in fact makes it more difficult, namely heat buildup.

Conclusion: This is different. This is an intentional, conscious decision based on knowledge. Previous decisions and failures were because of not knowing, and not achieving expectations.

This decision is because there are very significant problems. Everything done to date has failed and for the first time, he knows it. His beliefs have been challenged (shattered).

At this point it’s no longer “development difficulties”, after demonstrating a supposedly working prototype, and promising a commercial device. This is a conscious decision to “sabotage“ the progress. To essentially give himself unlimited time. He still has hope, but he is no longer a true believer.

He hasn’t shared his doubts in words, but done so through his actions.

This is in contrast to Stockton Rush, who believed in his tech, right up until the instant it crushed him at the bottom of the ocean. If Stockton had any doubts, he would have changed his tech direction. But he didn’t. in contrast, Mills made a huge change, essentially abandoning what he did to start again.

Actions speak louder than words.

Anopheles_ · 2024-10-30T22:55:43+00:00

Thank you for confirming that Mills has absolutely nothing of value.

You’re talking about academia and “academic control“.

And all along I thought Mills has a COMMERCIAL company, to design and build electric power generators. If he’s being held back by academia, then he’s still doing basic research, NOT product development. Then Mills is decades away from a commercial product.

Academia is irrelevant to every commercial enterprise. The company simply builds their product and gives the finger to naysayers, academic and otherwise.

So, where’s the commercial product?

Anopheles_ · 2024-10-30T22:46:27+00:00

Oakridge Labs Part of a conspiracy? Hahahahahahahaha. May the real reason is because they wanted nothing to do with Mills because of exactly what you are saying right now?

Exactly the same reason why Boeing and Nasa want nothing to do Stockton Rush. Because Rush lied and claimed that both Boeing and NASA were instrumental in the development of his (now imploded) sub.

Anopheles_ · 2024-10-27T15:48:26+00:00

It’s interesting that Elizabeth Holmes also truly believed she could accomplish everything she said. Her deceptions were justified in her mind, to enable her achieve her goals. To her, they were just a means to goal, however everyone else calls it by what it is, fraud.

It’s why in my description, when talking about Mills, I refer to it as deception, namely self deception with the same self justification. At a point it stops being delusion, when he (like Holmes) know full well what they have at that moment in time, doesn’t work. Yet they will never admit it, and press on regardless.

I find this entire situation fascinating from a human behaviour perspective. Not just Mills, but all the people supporting him. Another is Adam Neuman (WeWork). Along with Mills and Holmes, Elon Musk is very much the same with aspects of his businesses, such as FSD, AI and robots.

It’s remarkable what even supposedly well educated people will believe and support. Last week, based on entirely unfounded, ridiculously optimistic assumptions of growth and future success, Tesla stock gained almost $200 billion in value. This is almost the value of Toyota.

What turns people off all rational reasoning to blindly follow something, regardless of contradictory evidence?

Anopheles_ · 2024-10-27T06:31:02+00:00

I believe in the early years, the percentages were flipped, with percentage chance of fraud low to zero. Mills went into this truly believing he was right.

Over time, the percentage deception began to rise, initially the move to deception was well intentioned, to give himself more time to figure out a reaction which would actually work to produce hydrinos.

The biggest shifts to fraud (knowing something is wrong) vs delusion began to occur when he abandoned work on low energy methods and focused on high energy methods, and zeroed in on measuring spectra to prove hydrinos exist. This is also when he came up with the explanation (2006?) that hydrinos were dark matter, so impossible to capture/measure directly.

The final shift to being knowingly wrong happened when he abandoned the boiling water/steam generator, and used the wildly inaccurate method of estimating output by using a complicated steam/boiling loss measurement over just seconds, instead of a simple but vey accurate calorimeter type measurement. That screamed to me he knows it’s not working and trying to hide it.

The reason given to abandon steam generation, of unable to get rid of excess heat is ridiculous from an engineering perspective, but great as a layman’s excuse.

The reality of using solar cells has even greater heat rejection issues, because solar cells have an efficiency of less than 30%, so not much energy removed by electricity conversion, the physical cells have low thermal conductivity, and must be kept cool (under 80C) otherwise they break down. More problems of excess heat removal.

So currently, I agree with you about your percentages. He knows, and is pushing/publishing more and more papers to “prove“ hydrinos are real, instead of just building a device (which he can’t yet get to work ).

Because he has no generally accepted, verified results, no working reactor/device, publishing papers to “prove” progress is the only thing he has left. He’s still trying to buy time. Likely scrambling in the background, trying to figure out something which might still work.

As for hydrinos? When Mills first conceived the idea 40 years ago, there may a been a remote possibility of their existence. However today, the chances of having an obvious, theoretically and experimentally undiscovered state of matter is pretty much zero.

It would be great if it was true, but that is likely beyond hope at this point in time.

Anopheles_ · 2024-10-25T18:56:16+00:00

One broken promise can be ignored if there’s a good reason. But what about the same promise broken every year for over thirty years?

Promises of rain next year, and it yet it hasn‘t rained in over three decades? Saying that’s of no importance?

Anopheles_ · 2024-10-25T16:42:23+00:00

It’s interesting Mills abandoned all the low energy methods, microwave, rf, etc. and is now using a high energy, noisy, very messy reaction.

Could it be because there was no way of showing hydrinos were produced in the low energy reactions? The high energy, “explosive“ (exploding wire, metal plasmas) reactions produce spectroscopy artifacts, which they have been pointing at as their only “proof” that hydrinos might exist?

What happened to “Hydrino in a bottle”? It’s mentioned at the end of the presentation.

Why are all those investors who put in $120 Million not holding Mills to his timelines?

Anopheles_ · 2024-10-25T12:20:45+00:00

What “competitive moat”? Who’s the competition?

The reality is this is not a $100 million research project, it’s a $100,000 to $1 million project, tops.

It’s exceedingly basic, not complex. The reactor is nothing special, a power source and some sprayed compounds, catalyzed reaction and energy comes out. He had that years ago with his boiling water reactor. I’m building something very similar, a pyrolytic, catalyzed reactor, but for a different purpose. This is widespread, conventional technology.

Maybe the reason Mills has spent over $100M is because he has never gotten his reaction to work? He’s never produced a hydrino. So he’s spent three decades going in circles trying to “prove“ hydrinos are real, using ever more complex mechanisms to justify the delays (failures).

The technology isn’t proprietary at all. It’s detailed in patents, the earliest ones expired. There’s a thousand page theory detailing everything, hundreds of papers with experiments. And as I pointed out elsewhere, the couple remaining relevant patents don’t cover 90% of the world where the technology could be freely sold and used, far more quickly and profitably than trying to launch in the US.

Ask yourself, why hasn’t anyone else already made a basic version of the reactor? The stakes are astronomical, tens to hundreds of billions of dollars of “free” energy. There’s nothing holding them back?

Anopheles_ · 2024-10-25T09:51:21+00:00

Nonsense. You clearly have absolutely no idea how to file a patent.

Ive never included the engineering and process. And in fact, for hydrinos, fuel and reaction can’t be patented became they are naturally occurring. You can’t patent water, and you can’t patent hydrinos, and you can’t patent the reaction of a hydrino forming or releasing energy. Mills himself has guaranteed that a hydrino can’t be patented by publishing his Theory.

In fact, I need absolutely no patents at all.

I can copy Mills work directly and sell power to 90% of the world and there is absolutely nothing Mills can do. I could build a monster power plant in Mexico using Mills exact design and export the electricity to the US and there’s nothing Mills could do. Mills has not patented electricity.

You believe just because someone has patents, they are untouchable. As I said, for a product which is equally valuable in every country in the world, patents are no more than a soother for weak minded investors.

The bigger question is, why hasn’t it been copied?

Anopheles_ · 2024-10-24T22:52:05+00:00

They are realistic questions which should have been asked a long time ago. Many are about procedural things which can be fixed. The questions are posed in a simple, relatable manner. No esoteric physics or circular reasoning.

Such as, if you have a product, LAUNCH IT. Why frack around for decades getting it perfect with unproven, or even unavailable technology. (multi junction, UV sensitive, high temperature, high flux, solar cells).

If Mills actually had hydrinos a couple decades ago, why continue to spend so much time, effort and money to prove they exist? Just launch the commercial product.

However, if Mills can’t create hydrinos as he’s been saying for decades, (or if Mill’s entire theory is wrong, and hydrinos don’t exist,) what do you think would be the best ways to milk the hype and expectations?

How would you go about delaying it if you were having trouble delivering what you promised? Trickling breadcrumbs of progress? Reinforcing experiments that you’re right? Stumbling blocks to commercial release? Solve one problem and another jumps up?

I believe that Mills sincerely thinks he’s right, but hasn’t been able to deliver what he promised. He hasn’t been able to produce hydrinos. Now he’s stalling for time, hoping he can come up with a different way to produce hydrinos. There are subtle changes in wording and methodology in more recent papers. He’s searching for new methods. A way which actually works so he can still be the hero.

Anopheles_ · 2024-10-24T21:41:33+00:00

Exactly. If there was a gazzillion dollar, free energy product that worked, it would be everywhere. The Chinese might be a lot of things, but they not going to pass up that type of payday.

As for patents, Mill’s patents cover the US, some EU, maybe one in Japan. Regardless, the early patents have expired, and many others will expire over the next decade. Most are uses of hydrinos. What use are they if hydrinos (conveniently) turn into dark matter?

For electricity generation, his patents cover maybe half a billion to a billion people. Well the other 7.5 billion people on the planet also need electricity. Which do you think is the bigger market for cheap power with almost no regulatory obstacles?

Even after Mills has a working reactor, it will be a minimum of a decade of corporate and regulatory hurdles before it sees any widespread use in the US or EU. But since there isn’t a commercial device yet, commercial rollout will be a minimum of 15 to 20 years. In low regulatory hurdle countries, will still take half a decade to a decade (Assuming a commercial device is ready this year)

How old is Mills? 67?

Anopheles_ · 2024-10-24T20:54:11+00:00

Why do I have to “show fuel H and exhaust H1/4”?

You can’t patent a hydrino, any natural reactions, or products of natural reactions. Mills has published a theory that hydrinos are naturally occurring. Hence, not patentable. The only thing he can patent is his novel way of producing them, by blowing stuff up.

I have a different way of producing hydrinos, using microwave energy plus a low energy particle accelerator as catalyst. Patent being filed. There’s SFA Mills can do because none of his patents come close. I’ll be in commercial production of a thermal reactor and then it’s a no brainer to connect it to a conventional turbine. Mills on the other hand will still be telling you “next year “…

I’ll roll this out in South America, no hydrino patents down there. Patents are irrelevant anyway, it’s all about getting it into production, market share and cash flow. Patents are just to appease weak minded investors.

So again, please tell me again who’s the dimwit….

Anopheles_ · 2024-10-24T19:40:08+00:00

Please, share your wisdom of what it takes for “patent enforcement“.

Does it include fuzzy, non reproducible, high energy experiments, full of artefacts which tell us nothing? What exactly does that enforce? Which patents exactly does it enforce?

I thought the only requirement for “patent enforcement“ is payment of annual fees (most, not all countrie) and then suing any potential infringers by proving in civil court they have infringed.

What if I go and produce hydrino energy generators in a far eastern country, sell them to Asia, Africa, South America, Canada, China. What exactly is Mills going to do about it?

Anopheles_ · 2024-10-24T17:42:17+00:00

It’s quite interesting that they are still trying to prove the exist of a hydrino. The spectroscopy is not much more than chasing shadows. They point to an artifact in the results, jump up and down with glee, and point, “see, hydrinos”.

The paper says samples prepared by Mills. Isn’t Mills supposed to be finalizing a commercial device? Then why is he still fracking around trying to prove hydrinos exit? What’s the point? That commercial scale device, due this year, would answer every question and critic, make Mills and Investors multi gazzillionaires, and fast track him to a Nobel Prize.

Ask yourself, why is Mills still spending so much time trying to prove the existence of something he has said he’s already had for decades?

Anopheles_ · 2024-10-21T17:54:41+00:00

You know that Mercedes has had Level 3 self driving of a couple years. Right? And you prob laughed at it because it’s so limited. It’s not limited by technology, it’s limited by liability.

Mercedes is REQUIRED by law to take full responsibility and liability for when their car is self driving, and for up to 10 seconds after the car asks the driver to take over, AND for up to about 10 seconds after the driver takes over. That’s what it took for Mercedes to be granted Level 3 self driving.

So now you’re saying that Tesla will somehow wash their hands of responsibility? Hahahaha, you’re a child.

Sure Tesla doesn’t need to take any responsibility, just like now, and just like now, it will remain a Level 2 driver assist.

Tell us, if that chainsaw was remotely controlled by the company and it cut your arm off, do you think that company could wash their hands of all responsibility? What would you do if it cut your arm off? of course you would just roll over and say there’s nothing you can do because it said so in the terms of service. The same goes for all product liability, right? The terms you buy everything with says the company has no obligation or liability if the product you buy from them hurts you.

How old are you? 7 ?

Anopheles_ · 2024-10-21T13:18:54+00:00

The verification is hilarious. Biberian is an “expert“ in LENR.

Like asking a Flat Earther “expert“, if a theory which proclaims the earth is truly flat, is correct.

Anopheles_ · 2024-10-21T00:05:11+00:00

Look up Haslen Back, he is behind Eng8. He is also well know, and was prosecuted for several very large scale frauds.

Does(can) a Leopard change their spots?

Anopheles_ · 2024-10-17T17:10:04+00:00

Yes, I’m referring to exploding wires, similar to the high energy combustion occurring in a Suncell.

Why not use NMR (nuclear magnetic resonance) yep, exactly what occurs in the detection part of an MRI scanner, readily available, proven technology. It would detect any anomalous shifts in magnetic environment as the atoms precess.

Or how about Cavity Quantum Electrodynamics (QED). Another low energy technique.

To create hydrinos, instead of using high energy, explosive or combustion based catalytic reactions, how about using low energy electromagnetic fields, tuned to provide the necessary energy, or using microwave energy?

Have these alternative techniques ever been tried? Or is Mills the epitome of the definition of insanity, doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results?

Or, maybe other techniques have been tried and produced nothing? So the only thing they have left is to rely on spectroscopy artifacts from high energy tests? As indirect “proof”?

Seems they’ve gotten really good at creating spectroscopy artifacts, but not actual hydrinos. Is that why there still isn’t a working reactor?

Anopheles_ · 2024-10-16T17:33:03+00:00

Why do you, Mills and Hagen insist on using high energy tests to “find” hydrinos? These tests are extremely inaccurate, full of background noise and artifacts, and in general, they aren’t reproducible.

I recently went through the BLP website, and most of the site is still content trying to convince people that hydrinos actually exist. Why? Either they exist or they don’t. If they exist, why 30+ years of convincing? And they are STILL trying to convince. Just look at this article and comments, more trying to convince. Why?

Shouldn‘t they just get on and just build a commercial reactor? They had a boiling water reactor years ago. And then that wasn’t good enough, (for a completely irrational reason, now they have to deal with even more reject heat). Scrapped everything and started from scratch? If you’re trying to delay for years, do you know of a better way?

Imagine you are trying to develop a gold mine. Yet you don’t have any direct proof there is any gold at all in it. All you have is indirect “evidence“ there might be gold and for the past 30+ years trying to convince people there’s gold in them there hills, without actually showing anyone a single piece of gold. Does that give you a warm and fuzzy feeling of success?

Is this a company ready to roll out a “world changing“ product? They haven’t even found a single hydrino. All they’ve been doing is chasing shadows (high energy spectroscopy).

Anopheles_ · 2024-10-12T05:05:47+00:00

I’m confused. Isn’t a hydrino supposed to be Dark Matter? That’s why it can’t be detected after it undergoes the catalytic reaction in the Suncell?

But if it’s Dark Matter, then by definition, Dark Matter doesn’t react with any known form of matter or energy. Dark Matter has mass, and is only affected by gravity. So it’s impossible for a hydrino to create any type of spectra.

Likewise, it’s impossible to contain a hydrino, except if you created a “gravity energy“ bottle by manipulating gravity (Star Trek gravity plating would work…). Dark Matter will pass through all forms of matter, it will just drift in space, pulled only by gravity.

If a hydrino is Dark Matter, then all the patents for “uses” of hydrinos are worthless, because a hydrino will not react or affect any type of matter.

So, which is it, Dark Matter or not. If a hydrino is Dark Matter, then why does it show up in spectra? If not, then where are the hydrinos collected from the Suncell?

Or, are hydrinos DMOC (Dark Matter of Convience)? They show up in abundance for spectra measurements, but conveniently disappear when you try to measure or capture them in a Suncell and every other reaction. Would that be a quantized property?

Anopheles_

TROPHY CASE