Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> The operative word is “proof”. Since even Focardi himself admits that he is > not permitted to see inside the reactor, and since chemical reactions could > provide this level of excess for a few hours . . . > I have heard from reliable sources that the thing has been run for much longer, well past the limits of chemistry. Obviously this particular press conference test proves nothing! I find it very disturbing that Focardi, Levi and the others have not been permitted to see inside the reactor, but not because I think it calls the results into question. I could see right into Patterson's experiment, but he hid the most essential aspect of it, which was how to make the beads. He and Reding told me their goal was to prevent others from replicating even though they had a patent. They succeeded all too well: they took the secret of the experiment and any hope of replicating it with them to the grave. I fear that Rossi will do the same thing. He is no spring chicken. Let us not underestimate Focardi, Levi, Celani and the others. They are not fools. If this thing could be explained as a chemical reaction -- that is, if it had only been run for a short time -- they would know that as well as you or I. In another message here, someone suggested it is odd that the reaction stopped as soon as the hydrogen was shut off. Not necessarily. Clearly the hydrogen could not all have been consumed, but perhaps the pressure is a control factor. It is in other experiments. Actually, that is very good news, since it means they can control the reaction. That is another important point that could not have escaped the attention of Focardi et al. - Jed
