-
Website
http://nextbigfuture.com -
Original page
http://nextbigfuture.com/2009/01/blacklight-power-response-to-eli-rabett.html -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
All Comments
All I can say is that you're going to look pretty stupid in 2000 and 2001 if it turns out that Mills is right:
(Nov 11, 1999) http://web.archive.org/web/19991116122703/http:...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BLP's electrolytic cells have produced 30-1000% excess power or greater for extended periods of time; some have been in operation for more than 1 year. The prototype cells created by BLP produce thermal energy immediately, continuously and consistently.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm actually most excited about their 22 pound battery that will allow a car to run for 1000 miles. I'd guess that's probably a few years away from being commercialized, but I don't mind waiting until 2004 or 2005 for a battery with over 100 times the energy density of lithium ion:
(Aug 18, 2000) http://web.archive.org/web/20000819135135/www.b...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For example, the company has identified a compound with ionization properties that would enable a 10-kg battery to supply up to 150 horsepower and run 1000 miles before recharging. A battery of this type would allow automobile manufacturers to offer electric vehicles with superior performance to conventional automobiles with zero emissions. The impact of such vehicles on the automobile industry would be transformational.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, it would be transformational indeed. To quote the 1999 BLP website, just "imagine the possibilities": if you put such a battery in a Moller Skycar (which has been on the cusp of commercialization for my entire life), you could drive-fly from NY to Chicago in three hours on a single charge.
BLP is like a religion: it can never be disproven or discredited. Nothing that happens in 2009 or 2010 can possibly bolster the case for skeptics beyond what has already happened: huge claims followed up by years and years without anything substantial, but plenty of similar claims.
-Mercy
We will not settle this now. But I am willing to put $100 on a bet of some BLP product release by the end of 2010. At least 1 MW by the end of 2010. Apparently this would be easy money for a skeptic to scoop. Could also arrange to set something up for the minimum bet on the Long Now Bets. That money goes to charity instead of the winner.
You don't need to understand physics to recognize a scam. It's a bit like evaluating people with psychic powers. It should be very easy to prove positively that one has psychic power, but it's pretty hard to prove that someone doesn't, especially if one of the qualities of powers is that they defy systematic measurement and observation. If a psychic offers a 100 page book of equations and physics jargon to explain his abilities, I'm going to be even more skeptical.
The claims BLP makes on their website describe a product worth over $1 trillion. Why aren't any venture capital firms publicly backing BLP? Is it because they're motivated by secrecy or is it because no smart money is interested and venture capital firms aren't biting?
The claim is that BLP doesn't need to prove anything because they will deliver a working product and presumably desire secrecy, but if that's the case, why all of the media coverage? Why list out all of the potential uses, no matter how remote?
All of the details match perfectly with the explanation that Mills is a fraud and not the pattern of companies developing real products or even companies doing real research. Boeing has been making machines that fly for decades and genuine research firms tend to make very specific claims.
The fact that BLP is offering eternal salvation makes their claims less credible. If they really had something, they wouldn't need to oversell the potential.
And then there is this aspect of him selling his physics theories to lay audiences. That's what separates Einstein from the quacks. Einstein's target audience was the group of scientists capable of evaluating his theories.
Einstein was born in the 19th century. How many amateur physicists have there been in the 20th century who have gone on to have their work confirmed and accepted? I count zero.
Mills is applying the time-tested principle of technology fraudsters: "if you can't blind them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit".
-Mercy
In particular the provability and evidence necessary for commercial sales. There could be aspects about the business model chosen (still unknown) which could raise questions. There also needs to be a third party designated as the adjudicator in the event of dispute. there may also be details in regards to settlement.
There is a lot of media coverage now. CNN Money, NY Times, Venture Beat. We could allow a publishing of sales initiated by those media outlets to determine the status of the bet. The assumption being that clear success or failure would be published or announced in a very public way.
Another aspect will be that I will formulate a posting announcing the bets sometime this month and then will post sometime late in 2009 or in 2010 to cover the status and especially a conclusion and settlement.
Obviously, this would be big news and I will need other reliable media sources to report on the commercial availability and technical capabilities. If we use a third party, that person would have to collect the money in advance. That's too much hassle to win 10 bucks, so for me this is a point of pride rather than a way to win a pair of Starbucks coffees
My email account is at the big internet firm that starts with Y.
-Mercy
I think Mills may have started out really believing his theories. But it probably dawned on him at some point that it wasnt working. His MD degree is now all but worthless, so the only way he can make a living is to peddle BLP stock to gullible investors.
OK, why is the 10x claim any more juicy than the existing technology? Is it not likely that the existing NaOH doped Ni(R) 'reactant' could actually be cast into a continuous or larger batch venture? Or is this the classic, "we're actively researching version 2.0" ... where 1.0 never quite got to market! Or maybe verion 7.0, where 1,2,3,4,5 & 6 never made it.
Chasing rainbows: how appropriately said. Go check out www.steorn.com - for a mirror example of dead tech. Its a pretty site, it is austere, yet convincing. Note though that it was last updated in 2007 ... when the big pitch fell apart.
Mills is just way more clever at marketing his oil than McCarthy of Steorn. It may well be that Mills is the ultimate innocent: suffering from self-delusion, and working furiously to prove that the delusion is true, while carefully not stepping into those Missouri Cow Pies: "SHOW ME".
GoatGuy