Brilliant Light Power has prepared an arsenal of proofs of hydrino for 20y+.   You can see their latest powerpoint on their analytical tests here.  

 

You’d think that petroleum catalyst engineer would be the last person to admit that hydrinos are real.  On January 15, 2019 we talked to a WR Grace chemical engineer – they verified hydrinos in their own labs.  At the bottom of the page we give more details about their tests from a 2001 paper.  There are at least 100 journal articles on this subject.

“Mills sent us samples so we did three or four types of
tests on the samples and we found the same types
of anamolies – that are not textbook material signatures.
…I was convinced at that point.”

January 15, 2019 WR Grace Chemical Engineer (NDA for details) 

 

Hydrino Compounds Tested at WR Grace

by Grace Chemical Engineer talks with Navid Sadikali | January 15, 2019

Hydrinos – A Reminder

Dr. Randell Mills has solved the electron.  It is a superconducting sphere of charge that is fully described by Maxwell’s equations. Although a point electron is inherently unstable, a continuous ring of charge *is* stable. They all knew this,  Dirac in 1925 modelled electrons were rings in circular orbits. Schrodinger tried the electron as a toroidal 3D structure.  But nobody took the sensible step: model two rings… Then three…all over the sphere etc.   The atomic electron is a super conducting sphere of charge.   

When you do it this way you find the solution implies the electron has spin  – which the quantum mechanics point-wave model lacks completely.  But electrons spin in all experiments!  Points cannot spin.  Waves cannot spin.   You will wonder how the scientists of the world can be so wrong, and so resistant.  For that we need history – Thomas Kuhn from the “Structure of Scientific Revolutions” says:

Normal science is a strenuous and devoted attempt to force nature into the conceptual boxes supplied by professional education. Because that education is both rigorous and rigid, these answers come to exert a deep hold on the scientific mind… 

Maxwell’s equations were as revolutionary as Einstein’s, and they were resisted accordingly. The invention of other new theories regularly, and appropriately, evokes the same response from some of the specialists on whose area of special competence they impinge. For these men the new theory implies a change in the rules governing the prior practice of normal science. Inevitably, therefore, it reflects upon much scientific work they have already successfully completed.

That is why a new theory, however special its range of application, is seldom or never just an increment to what is already known. Its assimilation requires the reconstruction of prior theory and the re-evaluation of prior fact, an intrinsically revolutionary process that is seldom completed by a single man and never overnight.

Much more to say about  that.

So the hydrino is a simple thing. But you can’t predict it is there till you know what an atom is, and for that you need the right model of the electron. The hydrino is a hydrogen atom with the electron at a closer position to the nucleus.  

How do you  analyze hydrinos via NMR? 
 

We know a lot about hydrogen compounds. Hydrino compounds would have different properties.

Quick review of NMR.  In NMR we hit a sample with a magnetic field and see what signal “comes from the nucleus.” What would make the nucleus feel less magnetic field?  An opposing magnetic field.  This is called shielding.  Electrons generate a magnetic field that shields the nucleus. 

  
A hydrino will have a smaller electron radius.  This closer electron will shield the nucleus more and cause a shift in the NMR signal (to the right, aka “upfield”). BINGO.  See potassium hydride (KH) vs potassium hydrino hydride (KH*) in Fig 14.  
The KH* signature is not in any text book. There are many new compounds generated that were also tested such KH*CL (see Table 1).    You can download the paper here -but  please purchase your own copy.
A widely understood measure is line broadening. This broadening shows a 8.7 million kW per square metre at peak. (from a different paper).

Ok fine, you say hydrinos exist.  What about power?   The reports of the validators are on BLP’s website.  In our experience, many don’t want to read anything – we have short summaries – contact us.  As a start watch this video by the validators from October 2016.  In 2mins you will see megawatt (MW) power from reactants that can only generate 20 watts by conventional chemistry.  Meaning unless the hydrino reaction exists, no other known chemical reaction can generate more than 20watts.  If you want to know the credentials of the validators rewind to the beginning.

“One of my jobs at the utility was to go out and look at everyone who came up with the next perpetual motion machine and show them their measurement errors and how they weren’t using real science.  Once I met Randy and Bill and saw their outstanding science it became impossible to debunk,..and led to an investment by Atlantic Energy.”  Dr. Peter Jannsson (2:20), Professor of Electrical Engineering, Bucknell University (Ph.D. Cambridge)

Power Publication

This immense power result is now published in the August 2018 Chinese Journal of Physics. (see link).   For a free copy click here.  We have an entire website dedicated to scientific details. However, here are the earth-shattering highlights.

The calorimetrically measured power of a typical 80 mg, 10 microliter shot shot ignition released by the nascent HOH catalyzed transition of H to hydrino state H2(1/4) was 400,000 W. The catalysis reaction product H2(1/4) was identified by Raman spectroscopy, photoluminescence emission spectroscopy, X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, and MAS 1H NMR. Water impregnated in a conductive silver matrix was found to detonate under application of a very low voltage, high current to produce a shockwave that is about equivalent to an order of magnitude more than gunpowder.

 

Power determination and hydrino product characterization of ultra-low field ignition of hydrated silver shots”    Mills, Lu, Frazier  in Chinese Journal Of Physics,  Volume 56, Issue 4, August 2018 pages 1667-1717

Overview: Mills figured out that the electron is a charged membrane.  It isn’t a point hiding out in weird orbital shapes (we still teach to students in quantum mechanics).  The orbitals are spherical (in atoms) because the charge wants to be equally close to the proton.  Key insight: quantum mechanics uses spherical harmonics to model probability spaes, where point electrons can be.  In reality, electrons are not points but charge membraes (duh) – we use spherical harmonics to describe how they come together on a sphere. Electrons are real..  

 

Mills has an exact solution – like an engineer knows a bridge – to molecules. His closed form equatiosn match molecular properties of NIST data perfectly.    Quantum Mechanics never got beyond the hydrogen atom (if you don’t know that you are in for a rude awakening- they use actual data to approximate results for anything in nature – a curve fit).