About this Author
DBL%20Hendrix%20small.png College chemistry, 1983

Derek Lowe The 2002 Model

Dbl%20new%20portrait%20B%26W.png After 10 years of blogging. . .

Derek Lowe, an Arkansan by birth, got his BA from Hendrix College and his PhD in organic chemistry from Duke before spending time in Germany on a Humboldt Fellowship on his post-doc. He's worked for several major pharmaceutical companies since 1989 on drug discovery projects against schizophrenia, Alzheimer's, diabetes, osteoporosis and other diseases. To contact Derek email him directly: Twitter: Dereklowe

Chemistry and Drug Data: Drugbank
Chempedia Lab
Synthetic Pages
Organic Chemistry Portal
Not Voodoo

Chemistry and Pharma Blogs:
Org Prep Daily
The Haystack
A New Merck, Reviewed
Liberal Arts Chemistry
Electron Pusher
All Things Metathesis
C&E News Blogs
Chemiotics II
Chemical Space
Noel O'Blog
In Vivo Blog
Terra Sigilatta
BBSRC/Douglas Kell
Realizations in Biostatistics
ChemSpider Blog
Organic Chem - Education & Industry
Pharma Strategy Blog
No Name No Slogan
Practical Fragments
The Curious Wavefunction
Natural Product Man
Fragment Literature
Chemistry World Blog
Synthetic Nature
Chemistry Blog
Synthesizing Ideas
Eye on FDA
Chemical Forums
Symyx Blog
Sceptical Chymist
Lamentations on Chemistry
Computational Organic Chemistry
Mining Drugs
Henry Rzepa

Science Blogs and News:
Bad Science
The Loom
Uncertain Principles
Fierce Biotech
Blogs for Industry
Omics! Omics!
Young Female Scientist
Notional Slurry
Nobel Intent
SciTech Daily
Science Blog
Gene Expression (I)
Gene Expression (II)
Adventures in Ethics and Science
Transterrestrial Musings
Slashdot Science
Cosmic Variance
Biology News Net

Medical Blogs
DB's Medical Rants
Science-Based Medicine
Respectful Insolence
Diabetes Mine

Economics and Business
Marginal Revolution
The Volokh Conspiracy
Knowledge Problem

Politics / Current Events
Virginia Postrel
Belmont Club
Mickey Kaus

Belles Lettres
Uncouth Reflections
Arts and Letters Daily
In the Pipeline: Don't miss Derek Lowe's excellent commentary on drug discovery and the pharma industry in general at In the Pipeline

In the Pipeline

« Things I Won't Work With: Triazadienyl Fluoride | Main | Merck Cuts Back (Again) »

October 22, 2008

Blacklight Power: What on Earth?

Email This Entry

Posted by Derek

Today, thanks to a story in the New York Times, we take up the unusual case of Blacklight Power. You may have heard of them before - I had, and I didn't realize that they were still around. Their founder, Randell Mills, has been telling people for years now that there is another energetic state of hydrogen, which he calls the “hydrino”, and that transitions to and from this state can be used to generate power.

My competence in physics isn’t sufficient to wade through Blacklight’s thicket of equations – but what competence I have in the subject strongly suggests that the company is very likely delusional (or, less charitably, hoping to delude others). A “state below the ground state” for hydrogen atoms, based on fractional Rydberg coefficients, seems. . . highly unlikely, to put it mildly. This is a perfect example of extraordinary claims that call for extraordinary evidence.

And that’s where the Times article comes in. According to it, the company has send samples of Raney nickel, apparently enriched in their putative hydrinos, to Rowan University down the road from them in New Jersey. When reacted with water, calorimetry of this system appears to show a release of heat “far beyond anything anticipated”. (It should be noted that this is a burst of heat when the water is added, as you’d expect, not some sort of sustained reaction. Its application to electric power generation is unclear). Update: Blacklight has responded, pointing out that I have several details of this experiment wrong - see this later post.

I know, I know – we’ve been down this road before, and more than once. Breeding even more skepticism is Blacklight’s history (link thanks to Glenn Reynolds at Instapundit). The company has been around since at least the early 1990s, and appears to have been promising various breakthroughs Real Soon Now the whole time. The timing of these announcements would seem to correlate more closely to the company’s financial demands than to their scientific accomplishments. Update: Blacklight disputes this statement, too, saying that they're not raising money This is not a totally unfamiliar business model in the drug industry, to be sure, but neither are most drug companies proposing revolutions at the level of the hydrogen atom. No, Occam’s Razor doesn’t leave much stubble behind when you run it over Blacklight Power.

But when people start talking Raney nickel, they’re heading into my territory, and the territory of many of this site’s readers. The Times names associate professor Peter Jansson at Rowan as the faculty member who’s conducting the tests, and I’ve written him this morning, as one scientist to another, to ask for more details and comment, if possible. We’ll see what can be learned.

Blacklight, for their part, have this PDF available. This part would appear to be what’s being tested at Rowan:

”To achieve high power, R-Ni having a surface area of about 100 m2/g was surface-coated with NaOH and reacted with Na metal to form NaH. Using water-flow, batch calorimetry, the measured power from 15g of R-Ni was about 0.5 kW with an energy balance of delta-H = -36 kJ compared to delta-H of roughly 0 kJ from the R-Ni starting material, R-NiAl alloy, when reacted with Na metal. The observed energy balance of the NaH reaction was -1.6 x 10 to the 4th kJ/mole H2, over 66 times the -241.8 kJ/mole H2 enthalpy of combustion.”

I'll wait for more details before commenting on this, but it's clearly rather odd. Also in the rather-odd category are some of the figures in the Blacklight PDF - take a look at Figure 58, for example, which is labeled "MAS NMR spectra relative to external TMS Of NaCl, KCl, and CsCl showing the expected trend of increasing intensity of H2 (1/4) at 1.1 ppm relative to the H2 at 4.3 ppm down the column of the Group I elements."

Well, fine - but hold on a minute. MAS is "magic angle spinning", which is a solid-state NMR technique - and that NMR spectrum is clearly taken with a lot of DMF around. The dimethylformamide peaks are labeled as such, and it looks like a solution spectrum, not a solid-state one. Second, where's the trend? I see no series presented, just a single spectrum of something, with no labels to suggest various alkali metals. What's more, although I can't find a value for the NMR chemical shift of hydrogen gas in DMF, it's known to be 4.5 in deuterochloroform, so their 4.3 ppm is reasonable. But there's no peak at 4.3 to compare that big 1.1 ppm peak to - what am I looking at here? Update: Blacklight has informed me that this figure was mislabled, and that they're correcting the error

We shall see - maybe. I'll report back if I hear from the group at Rowan. For now, I remain skeptical. I would truly enjoy the discovery a new energy source, but the history of this field does not inspire confidence.

Comments (45) + TrackBacks (0) | Category: Current Events


1. cookingwithsolvents on October 22, 2008 8:57 AM writes...

Back in the late 90's when pchem (and diffeq/lin alg, etc) was fresh in my mind I waded through the math and didn't find anything "wrong" with the derivations. However, there also isn't really much support for 1/n quantum states in the experimental evidence. It *does* make some sort of intuitive sense that, say, quantum states 2 (n+1) and 1/2 [ 1/(n+1)] should be higher in energy than state 1. That isn't what is claimed, since going from n=1 --> n=1/2 emits energy in this theory.

I don't have time or energy to read the PDF right now, but on a hunch the word "solvation" does not appear in the document. I'm guessing the heat spike is due to (e.g.) NaOH ---> Na(aq) OH(aq). Just a guess.

Also, anyone who has played with DMF a lot knows that lots of weird stuff *can* happen 'cause, well, DMF is decomposed by acid, base, etc.. Isn't Raney Ni typically used in alcoholic solvents, not DMF?

All that being said, I've seen Mills present some interesting hydride chemistry at ACS meetings (think thursday afternoon, last talk....) . Other than the introduction consisting of this 1/n quantum state stuff the rest of the talk had interesting hydride chemistry. All the questions had to do with the implications of 1/n quantum states (and the potential financial implications), though.

One last thought: couldn't some qualified theoretical chemists just CALCULATE these molecules (especially the H(1/n) in a crystal lattice) pretty simply to see if the binding energies, etc correspond to the observed XPS, etc. 'cause if n = 1/2, what do l, ml and ms look like? Damn, now I'm going to have to break out matlab later today and plot the functions. . . somebody else with more time please do this and post the results!

rambling post, sorry.....

Permalink to Comment

2. cookcingwithsolvents on October 22, 2008 9:10 AM writes...

p.s. on pg 8 and in general: isn't the *paramagnetic* contribution to chemical shifts (from perturbation of virtual orbitals) the larger component of chemical shift ( delta = diag + para )? e.g. that's why CI4 is at like -250 or something for 13C, it's why paramagnetic compounds often WAYYY outside the typical regions...etc.

Permalink to Comment

3. Anonymous on October 22, 2008 9:28 AM writes...

Hey Derek - any thoughts about the Merck layoffs?


Permalink to Comment

4. Kevin L on October 22, 2008 9:58 AM writes...

I guess, Mr DL's strategy of 'trickle down economics', support management at any cost didn't work for the workers at Merck or Pfizer or any one of the many hundreds of chem companies laying off workers.

You know, this story sounds familiar.




Permalink to Comment

5. Hap on October 22, 2008 10:23 AM writes...

Are they using the correct standard for the first quoted experiment? They coat the RaNi with NaOH, and then react it with Na to get NaH - their comparison doesn't seem to use NaOH. Also, do they compare it to NaH hydrolyzed on its own? That would give them an idea of how much energy comes from their NaH vs. standard, and how much comes from reactions of the RaNi. (It seems like comparing NaH hydrolysis enthalpies on RaNi is like trying to determine the heat of combustion of a styrofoam cup by measuring the heat output of a bonfire into which you've thrown it.)

Permalink to Comment

6. cookingwithsolvents on October 22, 2008 10:56 AM writes...

ok, ok...i couldn't resist looking at their data.

the MAS nmr....wth is the peak @ ~13ppm? Why doesn't LiH*F have H-F coupling?

Why in the soln NMR are many of the peaks of interest have an intensity ~13C satellites of DMF? Why didn't they add 18-C-6 or ~whatever~ to get a higher concentration of whatever it is they have? Plus the linewidth of the "H2" is HUGE compared to "traditonal" H2 @ ~4.5, which is usually razor thin. Conversely, pg 85's nmr @ -3.85 is so thin it looks like an artifact. H2O in DMF w/ H- assignment floating around seems a bit off to me. What is KOH in DMF's resonance? A lot of Ni-H's resonate at -4 to -7 (DOI: 10.1021/ja056000m . ..good paper w/ some nice info on super-hydride/B-hydrides in with the Ni stuff).... Heating SiO2 to 700 in vacuo isn't the best way to clean it (UV-ozone, anyone? take clean OH-terminated and *THEN* anneal if you need O-bridged)

My initial opinion of their data: A lot of this reads/looks like someone whom has read a lot of literature but not actually an expert in the techniques utilized; adequate controls are not explicitly discussed (i'm not saying they weren't performed).

ok, i have to stop or I'll end up reviewing the article!

Permalink to Comment

7. FormerMolecModeler on October 22, 2008 1:27 PM writes...

Guys, c'mon, it's BS. First, look at the Times section that it's in: VentureBeat. He needs VC funding. Now he can claim NYT story on his PP presentation!

He appears to be alleging that the ground state of hydrogen atoms in the universe is NOT the ground state. He claims there is a lower energy level for the electron in a hydrogen atom. If that is so, why has this transition never been observed spectroscopically on Earth or in outer space?

He is just arguing that there is this huge source of untapped energy, and if we can induce the transition, we will have lots of free energy! It's nothing more than atomic-level perpetual motion quackery.

Permalink to Comment

8. Sili on October 22, 2008 1:43 PM writes...

Pons and Fleischman wannabee.

If there really was a lower energylevel for hydrogen, that would be the kinda thing to blow up the universe. If people can go batshit crazy over the LHC, they should be trying to draw and quarter this guy!

Of course, it's far more likely that the LHC produces miniature black holes than that this guy is on to anything. Heck, it's more likely that it's producing them now!

Why do they have an electrical engineer doing chemistry?

Permalink to Comment

9. eternalcarrot on October 22, 2008 1:53 PM writes...

No, no no! Reality isn't constrained by theory or by your imagination. Check and double check the power outputs and any trickery. Then change the theory.

"This is a perfect example of extraordinary claims that call for extraordinary evidence."

Of course his theory might be far off the mark, but if this is occurring something must be wrong with the current theory too.

Permalink to Comment

10. anonymous on October 22, 2008 3:38 PM writes...

Point of order: I believe the Raney nickel was not etched with hydrinos, per se, but with ordinary NaH. Hydrinos were supposedly formed from the H by catalytic reaction after heating. I think Mills' point is that anyone can create this reaction simply by doping with regular NaH.

Permalink to Comment

11. satan on October 22, 2008 3:49 PM writes...

I have to agree with eternal carrot- controlled fission of heavy elements was not considered respectable science till 1939.

Permalink to Comment

12. eugene on October 22, 2008 5:25 PM writes...

One thing that I don't get after reading the first paragraph of their PDF (didn't get much further than the first two pages) is that they measure power output in Watts, but calculate the theoretical energy that should be produced based on heats of formation.

What kind of heats of formation did they use for lithium and sodium (gas/solid)? Even if they used 0kcal/mol, in the real world, it takes energy to make your lithium or sodium metal. Probably a lot more energy than what they measure out after they mix it with water. Did they take that into account or am I missing something here?

But yes, eternalcarrot and satan would claim that I didn't read the entire PDF and I'm missing something basic and that this a great result and the theory is just wrong.

But at least my theory for discounting this stuff is probably not as BS as the 'hydrino' theory. Therefore, I'm more right.

Permalink to Comment

13. Mack on October 22, 2008 5:54 PM writes...

"He appears to be alleging that the ground state of hydrogen atoms in the universe is NOT the ground state. He claims there is a lower energy level for the electron in a hydrogen atom. If that is so, why has this transition never been observed spectroscopically on Earth or in outer space?"

He claims it has - we just didn't recognise what they were. He claims his theory predicts spectral lines from the corona from hydrino transitions that match observed lines and is the reason for the massive temperature difference in the corona.

He also claims that hydrinos and the di-hydrino molecule fit the bill for "dark matter" since they don't absorb and emit light like normal hydrogen.

Has anyone looked at his molecular modelling software yet (Millsian) that is also based on his theory? He is claiming extremely accurate and simplified equations based on his theory to model molecules of any size (including dna). His most recent paper does a comparison of results between a QM based program and his own. Interested in the considered comments of experts on this. If he can accurately model and create "physical" atomic molecules with simple formulas that can be run on the average pc it will greatly accelerate drug design and disease research.

Permalink to Comment

14. anonymous on October 22, 2008 7:52 PM writes...

I tried to look at the software but I don't think it's ready for prime time yet.

However, I've spent some time looking at a spreadsheet that purportedly implements the same models for atoms with 1 - 20 electrons. The numbers seem to line up both with his theory as well as experimental results. Have a look yourself and let me know what you think.

Permalink to Comment

15. eternalcarrot on October 22, 2008 8:09 PM writes...

@ mack:

I guess we should focus on verifying one claim at a time.

I am posting here because I am fascinated by the result and hope their is a theoretical chemist who also happens to love matlab and can verify his software. It's been free for many months now. OF course theory and reality should be very tightly coupled, so it is relevant.


Permalink to Comment

16. satan on October 22, 2008 8:29 PM writes...

Look.. they could be a fraudulent group. But the history of science is littered with things that were once considered improbable by the "experts" of the day.

Read about what many doctors thought about sulfonamide antibacterials when they were introduced. Or what people thought about supersonic flight, space travel, high speed computers etc..

Remember that quantum mechanics and relativity were once considered heresy. How many anticipated superconductivity or the photoelectric effect?

Permalink to Comment

17. Neil Ferguson on October 22, 2008 8:31 PM writes...

Don't quote me on this, but I think they say the reason hydrogen atoms don't normally devolve into hydrino atoms is that they can't give up a photon. Hydrino formation generates heat by transferring momentum to nearby atoms.

Permalink to Comment

18. edward peschko on October 22, 2008 11:12 PM writes...


call me a skeptic as well -

If this is a chemical process, ie - if the electron is in fact going down one orbital to release energy - why is the power released two orders of magnitude greater than corresponding chemical reactions?

I mean shouldn't the magnitude of energy released be at least the same order as other chemical reactions?

also, if indeed it was a catalyst causing a hydrino reaction, why just the one spike? Shouldn't it be possible to rig it so that there are multiple spikes of energy? And couldn't blacklight simply show Rowan how to manually configure it so that the same sample would give multiple spikes of energy, as needed in a full reactor? And why the secrecy around the fuel handoff?

Not that I'm completely convinced this is a fraud, but in my mind even if it was successful, it might turn out to be from a totally different, unknown mechanism. In my mind some sort of microsocopic amounts of fusion being the cause - which mind you is just as impressive - is more likely than hydrinos.

Anyways, I'm going to watch this one closely.. I've got quite a bit of nuclear stocks, and if indeed this turns out to be real, I'm probably going to be selling them in a hurry..

Permalink to Comment

19. LiqC on October 23, 2008 8:36 AM writes...

Where did 137 come up from? (states from 1/2 to 1/137).

Sure, neutrons are metastable, too. But... seriously, what the hell?..

Permalink to Comment

20. Derek Lowe on October 23, 2008 9:22 AM writes...

The only 137 that I know of is the fine structure constant (pretty close to 1/137). You wonder. . .

Permalink to Comment

21. SteveM on October 23, 2008 11:26 AM writes...

Regardless of the mechanism involved, what is the value of BlackLight Power even if it is legitimate?

The real question is not the existence of hydrinos. But rather simple thermodynamics. I.e., the energy to charge the system has to come from somewhere.

And if that somewhere is a conventional source then ho-hum.

Permalink to Comment

22. Anonymous on October 23, 2008 11:47 AM writes...

@SteveM: er, not exactly. BLP claims that converting a hydrogen atom to a hydrino is an exothermic reaction (really exothermic, 2 orders of magnitude more than chemical reactions). The Raney nickel isn't 'charged', but rather etched with plain old NaH. The Na isn't consumed, and can be used to create more NaH with the hydrogen in, say, water. Mills has stated that anyone should be able to replicate this experiment by following this procedure.

The hydrino by-products are supposedly very stable and non-polluting.

Permalink to Comment

23. Hap on October 23, 2008 12:20 PM writes...

Then how do you get energy out of the hydrinos? How are they converted back to hydrogen (or are they converted to subatomic particles, which would make them a particle physics issue rather than a chemical one)?

Between hydrinos and the modeling program, it seems like there is an awful lot promised. If it seems to good to be true it probably is, and if it is actually true I have a hard time imagining why he's looking for VC funding.

Permalink to Comment

24. Anonymous on October 23, 2008 12:53 PM writes...

According to Mills, there are lots of things you can do with hydrinos. They can be converted to an even lower state (up to 137 I believe), combine it chemically with another atom to form a hydrino compound, or even combine it with another hydrino to make di-hydrino gas. Apparently hydrino compounds have all sorts of novel characteristics, such as the magnetized plastic described above, make pure blue lasers for underwater communications, etc.

The next obvious question is why don't we see these in nature. Well, Mills answer to that is that we do. The solar corona, for instance, displays spectra in the EUV range characteristic of hydrino transitions, which might also explain why the corona is so much hotter than the surface of the sun. We supposedly find them only rarely under terresterial conditions because hydrinos require special conditions to generate, di-hydrino gas is lighter than air and is difficult to contain.

Mills has quite a story, which I suppose he would have to have in order to get $60M in funding. Whether it's true or not we shall see.

Permalink to Comment

25. Anonymous on October 23, 2008 2:47 PM writes...


If you look at the BLP theory, you will see that as the electron shrinks to lower and lower orbitals round the nucleus, the rotational velocity of the electron shell around the nucleus increases.

The limitation of the 1/137 state is derived by the limiting factor that the instantaneous linear velocity of the surface of the electron shell cannot surpass the speed of light. The 1/137 state is this limit. If the 1/138 state could exist, the instanteous linear velocity of the surface of the rotating electron would surpass the speed of light--which is a big no-no in physics.


According to previous press releases, they are no longer looking for VC.

Permalink to Comment

26. innocent bystander on October 23, 2008 5:51 PM writes...

I am a lurker who happened on this site while checking out the latest news on BLP. I have been following BLP's work for more than 10 years and have been to their facility several times. During those visits, I have had the opportunity to meet with Randy and several of the scientists on his staff. On one of my visits, I spoke with Peter Jansson and others from Rowan Univ who happened to be there at the same time. While I am hopeful that something very significant will emerge from BLP's work, at this point the jury is still out. I can assure you, however, that these people are not crackpots. There are numerous other eminently qualified people such as Jonathon Phillips, National lab professor at Univ of New Mexico, John Sharar, director of the plasma institute at the Univ of Wisc, Gerrit Kroesen at the Univ of Eidenhoven in the Netherlands and several more who are taking a serious look at BLP's work.
I am posting here because there seems to be some pretty sharp people on this forum with expertise who can help understand what is going on in the BLP experiments. That being said, there are some posts that reflect fundamental misconceptions as to the BLP theory. If you want a better understanding of the overall theory and some of the evidence that has been developed to support it, I suggest that you start with the following paper:

For those interested in learning more about the history and controversy, here is a link to German publication that provides a fairly objective overview:

Permalink to Comment

27. SteveM on October 23, 2008 8:33 PM writes...

Re: @SteveM: er, not exactly. BLP claims that converting a hydrogen atom to a hydrino is an exothermic reaction (really exothermic, 2 orders of magnitude more than chemical reactions). The Raney nickel isn't 'charged', but rather etched with plain old NaH. The Na isn't consumed, and can be used to create more NaH with the hydrogen in, say, water.

I don't even have to read the technical papers. That's a thermodynamic perpetual motion machine.

If energy is released, energy has to be injected into the system to recharge it. Where does that come from?

What am I missing here?

Permalink to Comment

28. Mack on October 23, 2008 8:57 PM writes...

Innocent bystander:

Very much skimmed everyting as there is so much but essentially is the following a correct understanding?

Mills believes all physical laws can be adequately explained by classical physics (ie the "spooky" QM interpretation of all experiments to date has arisen from an incomplete understanding and categorisation of the underlying classical physics. Absolutely huge repercussions if he can prove this is true.

Mills believes the electron is a classical construct being a dynamic two dimensional spinning disc of charge. In free space it is a disc. Under the influence of the proton it changes shape to a sphere that fully encloses the proton. It has motion but not in the same way as a solid sphere revolves with some form of complex non-interacting current pattern (he gives the example of a soap bubble)

If the motion of the current on this sphere is synchronous with waves travelling at the speed of light it radiates. If it isn't, it is stable. For normal photon absorption/emission, the sphere acts as a kind of perfect conducting atomic resonator cavity. The components of the photon within the sphere change the central charge of the proton, enlarging the sphere and also the current pattern of the sphere, causing lightlight behavior and it radiates.

Now for the fun hydrino energy questions:

Why are integer multiples of 27.2 required to destabilise the sphere? Is it because this is the potential energy of H? But under this model the potential energy must be much greater than 27.2 because it extracts much greater amounts of energy than this per each hydrino transition.

Where does the huge amount of energy come from? If I apply his formulas to a change from the ground state to the H1/137 state, I think the total energy release would be about 258,985ev? Is this correct? Does the electron lose any mass to provide this energy? If not how come there is so much energy contained within the sphere? (Not saying there isn't- just want to understand)

Sorry to ask so many questions but it is fascinating. I note he also challenges the traditional model of superconductivity (no cooper pairs - utilises some kind of 2D electron sheet or ribbon within the superconducting lattice and, here's a doozy- also claims a means and method of generating an anti-gravitational electron based on distorting it into "negative curvature. He even has an experimental setup to produce and detect this anti-gravitational hyperbolic electrons. I would love for someone to verify that!

Permalink to Comment

29. Anonymous on October 23, 2008 9:43 PM writes...


I think what you're missing is that the transition from hydrogen to hydrino is one-way. The Rowan test converted 0.5g of hydrogen into hydrinos and extracted 1MJ. To 'recharge' the system, you need to boil about 4ml of sea water to get another 0.5g of elemental H.

Mills claims that his process will power a medium-size city with the water from a garden hose.

Permalink to Comment

30. Jack Bauer on October 25, 2008 12:37 AM writes...

If this had any chance of being real, we would already be using this "technology".

Permalink to Comment

31. Arethusa on November 12, 2008 9:31 PM writes...

Jack Bauer: The microchip is "real", but it took several decades to arrive at a viable prototype.

Steve: As I understand the theory, the energy supposedly comes from hydrogen atoms that are being continuously fed into the system and converted to hydrino atoms which then leave the system, so it's not a matter of "recharging" anything.

Permalink to Comment

32. DavidInRichmond on November 18, 2008 5:46 AM writes...

The dihydrino end product of this reaction would be exceedingly stable after such a large release of energy. Why does Mills not simply collect a few kilos of it and show it to the world?

Permalink to Comment

33. JohnB on November 19, 2008 2:39 PM writes...

Dr. Mills Classical Physics takes up where the Old Masters left off. Let's take a look at the physics of the old masters; Einstein, Hilbert, Mie, Born, Lorentz, Abraham, etc.

Permalink to Comment

34. Joseph Hunkins on December 11, 2008 2:54 PM writes...

Thanks for an excellent post. CNN has picked up this story thanks to some investment in Blacklight and unfortunately did little homework. Sure, anything is possible but it appears those who *believe in this* tend to have a *huge financial stake* in this. That does not indicate fraud here but clearly we are not dealing with objective scientific inquiry. I'm torn between the what I see as following likelihoods:

33.33% Fraud. He knows this is bogus but has too much into the project to bail out now.

66.66% Sincerely held false beliefs. Optimism and profit clouds your ability to do good science. It probably has done so here. Best evidence for that? Nobody else is doing this.

.01% It's real. Sure, there is chance this is a real innovation that will rewrite laws of physics. Possible, but not a good bet.

Permalink to Comment

35. Kahuna on December 11, 2008 10:58 PM writes...

Well JH, I don't know iof this changes your odds at all, but today BLP annouced the licensing of their technology to a NM power company:

Many have said the best way for Randy Mills to shut up his critics and get the academic attention he seems to want is to just put his stuff to work in a commercial environment. It appears he is doing just that.

I'm not confident his theory is right, but if the results are forthcoming, there may finally be some credible academics to give it a hard look. BTW, I did take a look at the credentials of the Rowan University guy (Jannson) who did the BLP validation tests. Even tho Rowan is not MIT, Jannson is an MIT undergrad and a Cambridge PhD (not bad).

I think this is at least worth watching with such a big upside if it happens to be true.

Permalink to Comment

36. John Mudge on December 20, 2008 5:15 PM writes...

I agree with Joseph Hunkins (post #34) that there is only a very tiny probability that he is right (although, given the caliber of people he works with, the probability that this is a knowing fraud is much less than the 33% he mentions)

I have spent an embarrassing amount of time reading whatever I could find regarding Blacklight. The pro's and con's (not counting the many people who have failed to do their homework prior to pontificating!) about cancel each other out.

The proof is in the pudding. If it's a good pudding, I say, "More please!". I anxiously await news from the Estacado commercial prototype sometime next year.

Permalink to Comment

37. Stuart on December 26, 2008 2:18 AM writes...

not anti-gravity but a fifth force with instructions as to how to duplcate the experiments. blue water based lasers (again with instructions on how to build). a new class of chemical compounds and a new form of energy generation (demonstrated and verified).
Hold your naysaying for fear that this guy will get multiple nobel prizes and turn physics around from the acts of faith now required.
I'm saving some eggs for the faces of the skeptics. This is real and wonderful.

Permalink to Comment

38. fred on January 28, 2009 9:37 PM writes...

Are they dumping water in this thing or pure hydrogen ?

Permalink to Comment

39. shenanigans on February 9, 2009 6:28 AM writes...


What is the value of that licensing deal, what is that power cooperative going to build, and when?

Just try to find out information about the licensing entity, and let me know what you come up with, because I came up with nothing.

I'll make a licensing deal with you right now. I have a magic genie in my pocket that craps gold bars. I will make an agreement with you that says, "If you ever decide you want to rent my genie for $100,000 per month, with a year paid in advance, you can keep the gold bars."

Now, I realize you don't have the 1.2M on hand, so we'll just ink and announce the deal now, and you come back to me when you have your 1.2M.

Permalink to Comment

40. Anonymous on February 28, 2009 10:53 PM writes...

I hope there is something to blacklight power. I stil can't get my head around the fact that there is any existence at all, like, where did everything come from in the first place?? Don't be in such a hurry to tar and feather Mills. If his work is not valid that will ultimately pan out. But, what if there is something to it. Are there some who are afraid he could be on to something?

Permalink to Comment

41. lebirchan on April 9, 2009 4:50 PM writes...

Please read the abstract from Nicholas Moller's book"Irving Langmuir and The Atomic Hydrogen" and then compare his experimental results with those reported by BlackLight Power Inc. Langmuir used Tungsten as the catalyst in his experiments.

Permalink to Comment

42. Stuart on July 10, 2009 7:15 AM writes...

I would like more news from Blacklight Power and I understand the Energy generation system may be demonstrated around October 2009 and further independent research verification about the same time. Meanwhile any experimentalists that want to test for a fifth force(anti-gravity) can find details including more drawings in this patent.

The reasoning and math is impressive.

Permalink to Comment

43. Stuart on August 18, 2009 8:48 AM writes...

More commercial deals and independent replication from base materials with and get this ... a simple method of near closed loop cycling. Check the black light power website for latest updates.

Recent press release is amazing ...

Permalink to Comment

44. CuriousChemist on December 28, 2009 3:42 PM writes...

Strikes me as cold fusion all over again. Have any of his theories and or experimental results been published in a reputable journal? If not, they've probably been rejected and for good reason.

Permalink to Comment

45. Dave on January 24, 2011 3:00 AM writes...

I see this thread died way back on Dec, 28, 2009 and I don't know if anybody's still interested but I was motivated to comment because so many people had similar thoughts to my own on this. Especially Joseph Hunkins with his estimates of the various probabilities. I had it to be more like a .1% instead of .01% chance that some part of the hydrino idea was right, but my skill set is not sufficicient to completely understand the issues and my estimate is based on reading what credible sounding people have to say about this. If I was as knowledgeable as the credible commenters on this, I could easily imagine forming an opinion that the possibility that the hydrino theory was correct was indistinguishable from zero.

I thought Shenanigans completely nailed what is going on with the commercial licenses. This looks like complete BS to me.

I noticed that John Mudge was "anxiously await[ing] news from the Estacado commercial prototype sometime next year" on December 20,2008. I wonder how that worked out for him. :)

Permalink to Comment


Remember Me?


Email this entry to:

Your email address:

Message (optional):

The Last Post
The GSK Layoffs Continue, By Proxy
The Move is Nigh
Another Alzheimer's IPO
Cutbacks at C&E News
Sanofi Pays to Get Back Into Oncology
An Irresponsible Statement About Curing Cancer
Oliver Sacks on Turning Back to Chemistry