Biberian's results seem iffy to you, though they came within 48 hours of the gamma ray finding of MFMP. And then MFMP just dropped the inquiry due to some personal constraints rather than the lack of promise in the inquiry. You essentially admit to not clicking on the link due to a typo. MFMP got to within an inch of the holy grail and then went off to chase white rabbits down their holes, and you criticize... me? No wonder interest in LENR is at an alltime low.
There is no known chemical interaction that leads to hydrogen/deuterium generating gammas when mixed with nickel/palladium. Even if there is no excess heat, it MUST be a nuclear phenomena. Even the skeptopath Kirk Shanahan acknowledges this, and he is one to throw out all 153 of those peer reviewed replication papers that you published. On 7/14/17, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote: > Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> > What leads you to doubt Hans Biberian's "replication" of finding the >> >> gamma rays within 48 hours? >> > > There is no one by the name "Hans Biberian." That's why I did not recall > any details. I guess you mean Jean-Paul Biberian. J-P. Biberian's results > seem iffy to me. > > > >> > Not familiar with that. >> ***You didn't even click on the link that we're discussing? >> > > I discussed Celani's report with him in detail, and published accounts of > it. So I know about that one. He did not have an opportunity to repeat it > so I wouldn't draw any conclusions. Most of the others are iffy, in my > opinion, but I don't know much about gamma detection. > > - Jed >
