From: Jed Rothwell

➢ I assume there is one fundamental cause of cold fusion in all systems. It is 
the same thing in all cases. This is similar to saying that fission is the same 
in reactors and bombs, although it looks and acts quite different.

This “one fundamental cause” could be the problem – you are tied to an 
assumption which is not proved. The fission analogy is not useful.

Of course such a basic logical error would hinder anyone’s ability to look 
beyond the limitations of the P&F effect – aka “cold fusion”. In fact in the 
earlier Mizuno work with nickel at higher pressure - cited in an older thread 
here -  where Mizuno  uses both protium and deuterium in different comparative 
runs at higher pressure  -  he gets actually better results (more excess heat) 
from  protium than with deuterium. You cannot deny this result.

To me this is solid evidence direct from Mizuno that there is more than “one 
fundamental cause” to excess heat – one being fusion and the other being very 
different; and thus all future devices must recognize that nuclear fusion is 
not required for excess heat. This is actually highly  desirable as "fusion” 
alone opens the regulatory doors for all kinds of unnecessary government 
intrusion.

Bottom line is that at least two fundamental causes of excess heat exist.  
Possibly more. One is nuclear fusion seen in electrolysis where typically 
lithium and high loading play a role.  Another cause is a non-fusion reaction 
with nickel as the reactant, low loading is desirable, and no lithium is needed.

A third possible reaction also acknowledged by Mizuno (and by Ed Storms) is 
sequential cluster formation with its signature radiation of 630 eV. That third 
one alone could be used for excess heat without the other two.

 The nickel reaction works with either hydrogen or deuterium and to confuse 
things it is probably based on a “nuclear coupling” of some kind - (mass 
converted into energy) but it is not “nuclear fusion.”

 It is pretty clear that both or all three fundamental causes for gain are 
valid over a thirty year history, and very different from each other - and no 
one knows this more clearly than Mizuno as it stands out prominently from his 
earlier papers.

Jones






Reply via email to