Kevin,
Storm's theory is partly right, but mostly lacking - and he has had
little new to add this century... as is that of Chubb (partly right) and
others including Takahashi, but they are mostly incomplete and let's
face it - the field is dying.
Your balloon analogy is helpful as well but much more is needed. The
theorists are mostly wrong because they have not given us a clue which
leads to a robust experiment to scientifically prove the effect.
Here is the best experiment, sad to say.
http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RouletteTresultsofi.pdf
The intractable problem in cold fusion is that this "hero effort" - the
very best result to have occurred in 28 years was itself little more
than a yawner. People tend to forget that this result (almost 300 MJ of
gain) was statistically very close to a null result in total (as an
average) and it did not point the way to a useful device. The "Roulette"
paper covers seven simultaneous runs of which 5 failed completely. They
ran for a long time – up to 152 days… and the one with biggest net gain
(the hero effort) did not see any excess energy at all for the first 60
days! No wonder funding dried up.
Fig. 7 of that paper shows that the average gain of the effort at about
one watt (low average due to the failed runs).
So there you have it - the field of LENR is a dying angel... in need of
a tourniquet, as they say.
Kevin O'Malley wrote:
> Anyways, at the time I did not have access to Chubb's theory but now
Jed has uploaded his Ion Band State Theory (IBST) paper onto Lenr-Canr.org
