On ECW, David Linebarger asked the following question,
-------------------------------------
"Hey Bob, how does ENG8 company stack up to brilliant light power in your opinion? I see some similarities actually.
These two make the similarities stick out a lot to me compared to other companies.
1. They both rely off of hydrogen as energy.
2. They both produce a lot of light and at least some heat.
3. Both have claimed a cop or Q factor of 5.
Differences
1. ENG8 transmutes elements, BrLP makes dark matter from hydrogen.
2. ENG8 has a version that creates electricity.
What do you think about the evidence side between these two companies?
Actually, now that I think about it Aureon Energy probably has more similarities to ENG8. Though AE is not really known for producing brilliant light."
-------------------------------------
to which I replied:
This is a good question. As you know, in my view they are all working off the same effect. I have made clear that an impact of >5eV "realeases the hidden energy within matter" and it is 2000 - 4000 times easier to do with Hydrogen isotopes than with elements beyond Li. This is effectively the Aetheric matter of Tesla and is proposed by Shishkin, Kuroles and Dubovik - the latter being the discoverer of the Toroidal moment and complex multi-order clusters thereof. This Aetheric matter is perhaps a cluster of relic/cold/background/ULM Neutrinos (Magneto-Toro Electrical Radiation equivalent to a black EVO) and Shishkin states that it is its own baryon. It and its substructures can be neutral and can form arrangements that have no external EM fields. Therefore it is de-facto "Dark Matter".
All of these systems will produce this matter, if it exists, even if they do not want to.
At the base level, it explains the Langmuir energy anomaly when creating mono-atomic Hydrogen and re-forming H2 - since the proton re-assembles the Cluster on re-formation of the atom/molecule from the environment and the original cluster itself can impart energy into surrounding materials. This energy yield is likely well beyond Chemical but NOT NUCLEAR. The released clusters can bind to Oxygen and other paramagnetic materials, likely accounting for threads observed by Bogdanovich and other researchers.
In the case of BrLP (r) (tm), they use liquid Silver or Gallium as the high dI/dT disruptive electrodes - liquid mercury electrodes were used by Tesla in his "electrical particles of matter gun" in the 1930s and by Shoulders in his 1980s awarded patents. As per my proposed theory, Silver, Gallium and Mercury are all diamagnetic, so whilst ions of them can be carried by the clusters, they resist the clusters going into them, and therefore, are resistant to transmutation / "LENR".
In contrast, following my suggestions and discussions with Dr. Egely, he elected to use Aluminium, this is PARAMAGNETIC and highly conductive and does not bulk oxidise in air unlike Mg, Ca. The only other elements that are similarly optimally placed are Mo and W - but these are expensive relative to Al. NOTE: BrLP had Mo / W "Vapourise" in their systems and incorrectly in my view ascribed this to heat their reactor rather than to the susceptibility of these highly conductive elements to the MTER/EVOs. It is, in my expressed and detailed view, high conductivity, paramagnetic nature and spin, with ideally a single isotope, that makes something a good fuel Al is perfect and is 3rd most abundant element in the Earths crust. It is the right fuel and fuses to Fe and other elements.
Despite Al melting point lying comfortably between Gallium and Silver and far cheaper and more abundant that either, BrLP (r) (TM) do not use it - I would state that if they did, they would see very high levels of transmutation with Si and Fe present in every experiment. The yield would far surpass their observed output, but their system would rapidly get clogged up with Fe and Si.
I DARE them to use a Silver reactor with Al instead - of course, with all appropriate safety precautions, I expect it would last a very short time.
We produced a lot of "Brilliant Light" using HHO on W, Ti and even INDIUM (mp 156.6ºC) - the latter being Diamagnetic was more resistant to transmutation despite being only 75um thick. On might thing it suitable in a BrLP (r) (TM) system as it is low melting point and diamagnetic, but it is spin AND mostly beta isotope so it i susceptible to transmutation.
The Hydrogen / discharges produce the clusters. The Clusters can aggregate in and bind to Magnetic (below curie point) and paramagnetic (such as O, O2, Mg, Al, Mo, W) nuclei/molecules.
Al for me is the perfect combination of cost, availability, fusion potential, conductivity, melting point, single isotope, paramagnetic nature, spin etc. It is the most affected element in Hutchison Effect I believe for these + reasons.
Awesome look forward to the video I could not download the slides as my iPad says to larges I noticed you mentioned friends Tom bearden , Ken shouiders , dr puthoff great scientists who knew there stuff I met Tom in 1983 Hal puthoff in 1993 and 1994 he stayed fir a few days I meet Ken in 1995 he stayed a week in Canada and later many times at his various homes thanks Bob what sample did you show ?
On ECW, David Linebarger asked the following question,
-------------------------------------
"Hey Bob, how does ENG8 company stack up to brilliant light power in your opinion? I see some similarities actually.
These two make the similarities stick out a lot to me compared to other companies.
1. They both rely off of hydrogen as energy.
2. They both produce a lot of light and at least some heat.
3. Both have claimed a cop or Q factor of 5.
Differences
1. ENG8 transmutes elements, BrLP makes dark matter from hydrogen.
2. ENG8 has a version that creates electricity.
What do you think about the evidence side between these two companies?
Actually, now that I think about it Aureon Energy probably has more similarities to ENG8. Though AE is not really known for producing brilliant light."
-------------------------------------
to which I replied:
This is a good question. As you know, in my view they are all working off the same effect. I have made clear that an impact of >5eV "realeases the hidden energy within matter" and it is 2000 - 4000 times easier to do with Hydrogen isotopes than with elements beyond Li. This is effectively the Aetheric matter of Tesla and is proposed by Shishkin, Kuroles and Dubovik - the latter being the discoverer of the Toroidal moment and complex multi-order clusters thereof. This Aetheric matter is perhaps a cluster of relic/cold/background/ULM Neutrinos (Magneto-Toro Electrical Radiation equivalent to a black EVO) and Shishkin states that it is its own baryon. It and its substructures can be neutral and can form arrangements that have no external EM fields. Therefore it is de-facto "Dark Matter".
All of these systems will produce this matter, if it exists, even if they do not want to.
At the base level, it explains the Langmuir energy anomaly when creating mono-atomic Hydrogen and re-forming H2 - since the proton re-assembles the Cluster on re-formation of the atom/molecule from the environment and the original cluster itself can impart energy into surrounding materials. This energy yield is likely well beyond Chemical but NOT NUCLEAR. The released clusters can bind to Oxygen and other paramagnetic materials, likely accounting for threads observed by Bogdanovich and other researchers.
In the case of BrLP (r) (tm), they use liquid Silver or Gallium as the high dI/dT disruptive electrodes - liquid mercury electrodes were used by Tesla in his "electrical particles of matter gun" in the 1930s and by Shoulders in his 1980s awarded patents. As per my proposed theory, Silver, Gallium and Mercury are all diamagnetic, so whilst ions of them can be carried by the clusters, they resist the clusters going into them, and therefore, are resistant to transmutation / "LENR".
In contrast, following my suggestions and discussions with Dr. Egely, he elected to use Aluminium, this is PARAMAGNETIC and highly conductive and does not bulk oxidise in air unlike Mg, Ca. The only other elements that are similarly optimally placed are Mo and W - but these are expensive relative to Al. NOTE: BrLP had Mo / W "Vapourise" in their systems and incorrectly in my view ascribed this to heat their reactor rather than to the susceptibility of these highly conductive elements to the MTER/EVOs. It is, in my expressed and detailed view, high conductivity, paramagnetic nature and spin, with ideally a single isotope, that makes something a good fuel Al is perfect and is 3rd most abundant element in the Earths crust. It is the right fuel and fuses to Fe and other elements.
Despite Al melting point lying comfortably between Gallium and Silver and far cheaper and more abundant that either, BrLP (r) (TM) do not use it - I would state that if they did, they would see very high levels of transmutation with Si and Fe present in every experiment. The yield would far surpass their observed output, but their system would rapidly get clogged up with Fe and Si.
I DARE them to use a Silver reactor with Al instead - of course, with all appropriate safety precautions, I expect it would last a very short time.
We produced a lot of "Brilliant Light" using HHO on W, Ti and even INDIUM (mp 156.6ºC) - the latter being Diamagnetic was more resistant to transmutation despite being only 75um thick. On might thing it suitable in a BrLP (r) (TM) system as it is low melting point and diamagnetic, but it is spin AND mostly beta isotope so it i susceptible to transmutation.
The Hydrogen / discharges produce the clusters. The Clusters can aggregate in and bind to Magnetic (below curie point) and paramagnetic (such as O, O2, Mg, Al, Mo, W) nuclei/molecules.
Al for me is the perfect combination of cost, availability, fusion potential, conductivity, melting point, single isotope, paramagnetic nature, spin etc. It is the most affected element in Hutchison Effect I believe for these + reasons.
Awesome look forward to the video I could not download the slides as my iPad says to larges I noticed you mentioned friends Tom bearden , Ken shouiders , dr puthoff great scientists who knew there stuff I met Tom in 1983 Hal puthoff in 1993 and 1994 he stayed fir a few days I meet Ken in 1995 he stayed a week in Canada and later many times at his various homes thanks Bob what sample did you show ?