Mills' Results Not Reproduced by Independent Laboratory
Date: Monday, August 02, 2004 @ 19:50:30 GMT
Topic: Science


In the hydrino yahoo group Mike Carrell (MC) writes: Woogie wrote: There is a new paper in the Journal of Applied Physics [v. 95, pp 24-29, (2004)] which reproduces the experiments of Mills, et al. which claimed the production of very hot H atoms in a microwave plasma. These atoms were thought to be hot because of the very broad linewidth -- attributed to Doppler broadening by Mills. Mills claimed that these broad line profiles were proof that the Hydrino-izing process was taking place.
------
MC: Being diligent, I downloaded the paper by Jovicevic et.al. and read through it, looking for significant differences between what they did and BLP did. I then asked Mills for an explanation. His reply:

Mike,

We didn't see any effect with wave-guided pulsed cells either. Jovicevic et. al. do mention a small hot population, but basically they report no broadening with pulsed microwaves.

There are many reports in the literature regarding line broadening including independent results from Jonathan Phillips at LANL. There is no question that there is Doppler line broadening of only the H lines in specific H-mixed gas plasmas. There is a debate as to its origin. All of the nonBLP explanations depend on field acceleration of positive H ions. We have disproved this explanation by observing time-dependent broadening in regions were there is no field. This result has been confirmed:

http://www.blacklightpower.com/pdf/technical/HotAtomicHydrogen092603.pdf

Randy
---------

Jovicicevic et.al. used pulses "between 3 and 6 ms with a repetition rate of 60 pps", a duty cycle of 18 to 36% .

BLP uses an Opthos MPG-4M generator which can function in a CW and pulsed mode. The ouput power can be continuously varied from 0-120 watts, apparently with what appears as a Variac knob on the front panel.

So Jovicevic et.al. violated the cardinal rule about duplicating an experiment, which is to duplicate the actual experiment and not do something else which only seems like the experiment in question. Woogie, with his eye to the spectroscope, missed the difference, as I did.

Why would this be important? In many respects Jovicevic et. al. made an honest effort to duplicate the BLP experiment using equipment at hand, not realizing that the excitation duty cycle would be important.

The pressure and gas mixtures used were within the range that BLP used, but the flow rate through the cell is not reported, or is there any indication that it was measured. Three milliseconds is long on the time scale of most plasma phenomena.

Consider that the BLP catalytic reaction is rare but very energetic among competing reactions in the H2-Ar plasma. The mean free path is of the order of a millimeter at the pressures BLP uses. Pulsing allows all atoms to revert to a neutral state between pulses.

At present, I don't have a good answer to reconcile the many experiments where substantial line broadening is reported in steady state experiments with the failure in pulsed experiments. In one conversation, Mills remarked that the gas kinetics in the cells has a lot to do with whether the BLP reaction turns on strongly or not.

For now, however, the Jovicevic et.al. paper stands as an experiment which did not actually duplicate the BLP reaction conditions as reported in a previous paper by Mills et.al. in JAP. It is therefore not a refutation of Mills claims.

Mike Carrell





This article comes from ZPEnergy.com
http://www.zpenergy.com

The URL for this story is:
http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=866