I have no problem with Storms’ theory as it relates to Pd-D. He is the leading expert on that field - and we can completely ignore Pd-D in the rest of this discussion, insofar as it relates to my criticism of this book.
OK. Fair enough. I do think a number of people don't make that distinction. They are worlds apart in almost every physical property, especially magnetic and nuclear properties. You should look at protium as being a completely different *element* insofar as LENR is concerned. I can offer you dozens if not hundreds of physical and QM properties that are vastly different between the two. Please take the time to appreciate how profound are these differences. Yes, fair enough. But in many cases, under the umbrella of a general process, such as traditional nuclear reactions, despite the difference, the different isotopes all tend to follow the same general script in terms of how a reaction path progresses and generates effects. Even though fracto-fusion and plasma fusion occur in much different ways for example, in both cases we still follow the script kinetically-imposed collisions of hydrogen or deuterium and achieving nuclear products. I therefore don't think its lunacy at all to propose that a common mechanism works across all LENR systems. I also don't think your position is crazy, that each system behaves differently, and in one sense that may be true, but I believe that is as much a speculative claim as Ed's. Are we all not on thin ice? My only question is: Who's on the thinnest ice? All of this s a gambling proposition at this point, and nothing is certain, so I don't think repeating it "ad nauseum" is annoying or pointless, because it draws the distinction between two philosophical points of view when it comes to the effect. On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 3:38 PM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote: > *From:* Foks0904 > > > > As you're alluding to, the tritium production is miniscule. Tritium is > produced in an alternative reaction pathway in Ed's model, not the main, > and it can't be produced by the same reaction producing neutrons (which Ed > thinks are being produced by a separate fracto-fusion phenomenon). The main > pathway (d+d in a resonating cluster), in agreement with the many who have > found approximate commensuration between heat/helium, produces heat, > helium, and ~ 24 MeV. What's the problem exactly? Maybe I'm > misunderstanding. > > > > Yes! You are completely misunderstanding, so let me try to clarify this > issue once again. > > > > I have no problem with Storms’ theory as it relates to Pd-D. He is the > leading expert on that field - and we can completely ignore Pd-D in the > rest of this discussion, insofar as it relates to my criticism of this book. > > > > However having said that loud and clear, there is no evidence whatsoever > that Ni-H is the same or even a similar mechanism to Pd-D. All the best > evidence indicates that it is a far different beast. These two isotopes are > as different as night and day or as different as any two elements in the > rest of the Periodic Table. The mass alone is 2:1. > > > > They are worlds apart in almost every physical property, especially > magnetic and nuclear properties. You should look at protium as being a > completely different *element* insofar as LENR is concerned. I can offer > you dozens if not hundreds of physical and QM properties that are vastly > different between the two. Please take the time to appreciate how profound > are these differences. > > > > If anyone continues to profess that Ni-H is almost the same reaction as > Pd-D, then they have a very steep path to climb for credibility. There is > no data supporting relevant LENR connections between the two, yet Ed has > chosen to treat them as the nearly same so as to bolster the hydroton > theory. > > > > That is a terrible choice, and I would be remiss in not continuing to > emphasize this point *ad nauseum* apparently, since it never seems to > sink in that we have two different fields of inquiry here, based on what > looks like two different elements, except they are isotopes of the same > element. > > > > Jones >
