Question for You.
How does Rossi’s technology differ from the Blacklight technology. Are they basically the same or are they completely different.
I’m still skeptical about this, but I do have an open mind about it.
Always felt Pons and Fleischmann were on to something and I did not like the way the mainstream physics community treated them.
According to BLP's Mills himself, they are totally different. CF is (or are) nuclear reactions, BLP's (according to Mills theory) involves electron transitions to "lower than ground state".
Which, if correct, says that Rossi's system should give much higher power density, when fully perfected.
How does Rossi’s technology differ from the Blacklight technology.
***I’m not all that sure. I have been mostly ignoring Blacklight because he’s been selling vaporware for 2 decades. Randell Mills is a tricky one because he’s a brilliant theorist with a Harvard MD background. Significantly, he made progress in the 1990’s in Nickel/Hydrogen.
Rossi got ahead of everyone else because he split H2 gas into monoatomic hydrogen before loading up his Nickel lattice, and that led to far more replications than anyone else prior to him. So he’s a tinkerer. And he’s had time to tinker more than anyone else.
Mills has a published theory; Rossi doesn’t. But Mills’s theory has a self-defeating problem. The place to look where the rubber meets the road for BlackLight Power is to find nuclear ash.
————————www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg89246.html——————
Finding even tiny amounts of radioactive ash is absolutely devastating to
Mills in the IP arena. It can, and will, cost him millions, possibly
billions . and he has dug himself into a hole on the issue - since it keeps
him from actual 3rd party independent testing without incredible NDAs. There
is not a single true replication of his work without these restrictions.
———————www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg89304.html-———————