Comments on: BlackLight's physics-defying promise: Cheap power from water

By: Jim Clements, Scottsdale, AZ

Jim Clements, Scottsdale, AZ — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 23:41:04 +0000

I'm just a humble aerospace engineer. Theadore Karman met similar opposition from the Collegiate Elite for his mathematical theories and designs for super-sonic flight. Some made statements to the media claiming even if a pilot can achieve super-sonic speed, he will not be able to return to subsonic speed. Yet in 1949 Chuck Yeager made the first super-sonic flight proving it can be done. Six utility companies, five public and one private, are moving ahead with construction of Black Light power generators. Let's see what happens.

By: Brad Arnold, St Louis Park, MN

Brad Arnold, St Louis Park, MN — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 11:19:36 +0000

You'd have to be extremely dense to disagree that the BlackLight Process has been independently verified:

In a joint statement, Dr. K.V. Ramanujachary, Rowan University Meritorious Professor of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Dr. Amos Mugweru, Assistant Professor of Chemistry, and Dr. Peter Jansson P.E., Associate Professor of Engineering said, "In independent tests conducted over the past three months involving 10 solid fuels made by us from commercially-available chemicals, our team of engineering and chemistry professors, staff, and students at Rowan University has independently and consistently generated energy in excesses ranging from 1.2 times to 6.5 times the maximum theoretical heat available through known chemical reactions."

By: Robert Stahl, Birmingham, AL

Robert Stahl, Birmingham, AL — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 16:08:39 +0000

This response is so SLIPSHOD! There is not a hint of authority in it, or references to debate! Just a paradox introduced. But, I can tell you in the first example of Pascal's Paradox, there just is not the water there is to provide pressure that there is on the next, or the one after that. (http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~scdiroff/lds/NewtonianMechanics/PascalsParadox/PascalsParadox.html)Oh, yeah, I forgot. He was there. Big F*^&#ing deal. I guess it means he is worth $60 million for the braindead cells 'he' needs to spread all over creation.

By: Burt, York SC

Burt, York SC — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 17:59:25 +0000

Joe, Santa Cruz, Dec. 20: "Well can we at least all agree that Mercy Vetsel from New York, NY is a fraud." No, we can't all agree on that. Mercy's claims are no less believable than BLP's. Which is to say (intentionally, on Mercy's part) not believable at all, by anyone who has even a minimum understanding of physics. You and all of the other lunatic fringe/conspiracy theorists are free to belive in BLP, tooth fairies, bridge trolls or whatever else strikes you as credible.

Incidentally, it's now fall 2009 – where is the demonstration unit?????

By: Tom Krawietz, Fort Walton Beach, FL

Tom Krawietz, Fort Walton Beach, FL — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 01:35:26 +0000

I have met Dr. Mills. I witnessed a 30 minute briefing turn into a 3 hour train wreck. His math regarding "interesting" quantum mechanical findings was ripped apart by two Ph.D. physicists. I'm not talking ideas or concepts, but the complex math and the transforms that "supported" his "findings" were rubbish. After this meeting almost ten years ago, he drove away in his $100K shiny black luxury, sports car supported by venture capital and the desire of energy companies to believe (Pascal's paradox).

By: Barrie Bentley, Henderson Nevada

Barrie Bentley, Henderson Nevada — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 19:24:54 +0000

I have been in hydrogen technology for 30+ years and I don't believe in fairies!!!!!

By: Mudge, Westport MA

Mudge, Westport MA — Thu, 28 May 2009 01:36:24 +0000

Thats the dumbest analogy I have ever heard….. Ben Franklin used candles, Tom Edison used kerosene lamps.

I bet you get stuck all day on the question; what came first the chicken or the egg?

By: Rajen, London UK.

Rajen, London UK. — Thu, 07 May 2009 11:58:48 +0000

Everything bizzare appears to have the same connections, e.g Boyd bushman's disclosure of black projects at Lockheed Martin, building now occupied by BLP, Bob Lazar's salary paid by the navy, four of BLP directors have navy connections. Of course the BLP reactor works, but was not invented by Dr Mills, where did the technology come from?

By: Sid, Colorado

Sid, Colorado — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 16:23:48 +0000

Whenever I hear of someone with a working model like this, my question is always: Where does he get the power to run his lab?

If it's not powered by his device, and with the efficiency claimed, it's phony. If it is, I want one.

By: lebirchan, Birmingham, UK

lebirchan, Birmingham, UK — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 23:07:11 +0000

Have a look at the abstact from the book by Nicholas Moller "Irving Langmuir and Atomic Hydrogen". Langmuir a senior scientist at General Electric achieved similar results using tungsten as a catalyst as those using the BlackLight power catalyst. Langmuir received the Nobel Prize in 1932.

It would be interesting to have someone with access to experimental facilities to reproduce the two different but similar methods and compare the results. Forget for the moment about the theory but only look at the experimental results. If they are correct and similar then this would be more important wheter or not the BlackLight Power theory is correct.

By: John,Pensacola,Florida

John,Pensacola,Florida — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 17:21:56 +0000

The first step in showing anyone a thing is telling them about it. Sticking your nose out and not being afraid to have it lopped off by assailing opponent of your works. Once done in the open arena of the media and market place you fight the battle till you overcome. No great achievements are made in secret.

"I would be willing to be a fair number of the believers in this mystery machine also believe in a sinister conspiracy behind vapor contrails. lol

It would be great if this gizmo actually worked, but the lack of serious evidence combined with it’s history suggests it is just a bunch of horse hockey. If it works, don’t just tell us – show us!
Posted By Joe, Charlotte, NC : October 22, 2008 6:02 am "

By: Joe, Santa Cruz, CA

Joe, Santa Cruz, CA — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 21:59:35 +0000

Well can we at least all agree that Mercy Vetsel from New York, NY is a fraud. Mercy claims to have a functioning prototype using a similar blacklight process, only to reveal in the very same sentence confusion between neutrinos and the "hydrino." A neutrino is a fundamental particle that may well be massless, interacts exceedingly weakly with other matter and carries zero electric charge. The "hydrino" may sound similar but, but that's where the similarities end. The so-called hydrino is supposed to be a hydrogen atom in a different energy state. A hydrogen atom bears no relation to a neutrino whatsoever, consisting in a positively-charged proton (not a fundamental particle) and a negatively-charged electron.

By: Thomas Campbell,Normal, Illinois

Thomas Campbell,Normal, Illinois — Wed, 17 Dec 2008 17:50:46 +0000

Hay guys check out this web site which Ruggero Santilli of http://www.magnegas.com is doing with hydrogen which is also The Blacklight process too into a torch that sublimates tungsten on contact so yes they do have it for real !!! And also check out how hydrogen is being done inside your own car by Stan Meyer's dune buggy but The O2 Sensor is the problem here with the newer cars is why it will not work out in your newer cars unless you take the O2 Sensor out all together !! Randell Mills does not care to know this information whatsoever shame shame Randell

By: Joseph Adan, Ph.D.

Joseph Adan, Ph.D. — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 02:37:09 +0000

I would like to know in what way the black light theory contradicts quantum mechanics.

By: Dwight Roberts Houston, Tx

Dwight Roberts Houston, Tx — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 23:08:51 +0000

Yes I think the idea will work, because that's the way all new ideas start. Just think how this idea can help in space travel. If this concept works, might it help in harden metals that can take high amounts stress. Metals are currently heat treated to create strength.

By: Darius, Vilnius, Lithuania

Darius, Vilnius, Lithuania — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 09:10:18 +0000

Scientific means experimentally approved. If it will be experimental evidence theory and explanations shall be created. It sometimes happens in opposite way but the greatest invention normally is made this way.

By: Joe, Charlotte, NC

Joe, Charlotte, NC — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 10:02:35 +0000

I would be willing to be a fair number of the believers in this mystery machine also believe in a sinister conspiracy behind vapor contrails. lol

It would be great if this gizmo actually worked, but the lack of serious evidence combined with it's history suggests it is just a bunch of horse hockey. If it works, don't just tell us – show us!

By: Ava Odoemena, Berlin, Germany

Ava Odoemena, Berlin, Germany — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 16:35:22 +0000

"nothing but a theory"

This meme irritates me, because it's transported by people who mistake scientific theory as an informed guess or mix up theory with hypothesis.

Please people, at least understand what scientific theory *actually* means and that it's based on *facts*. Scientific theory is a wrapper for a collection of facts. These facts are REAL, however the interpretation of the collection of facts may change with the arrival of new facts. For example the bumble bee.

There is no magic. The models were wrong, the models claiming that bumble bees can't fly were based on fixed wings…

Just because there is a flexibility in scientific theory and the theory may expand, change or contract, does not mean it's all just fantasies or religion. It's based on facts.

By: Bob, dallas, Tx

Bob, dallas, Tx — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 21:52:13 +0000

The Laws of Quantum mechanics have been tested millions of times over the past century. In fact, most of the stuff you probably use in everyday life would not work if Quantum Mechanics were not true.

By: Matt - Charlotte,NC

Matt - Charlotte,NC — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 15:20:09 +0000

Like SCHRODINGER'S CAT – Blacklight is in an undefined state of exististence until it is observed to be alive (a functioning prototype) or dead (a fraud).