Hello Jones Helium was also measured in the experiment done by A. de Ninno e.a published in 2002.
http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/DeNinnoAexperiment.pdf Unfortunately after the publication only silence was the result. The youtube video about what happened before and after the publication has unfortunately been removed. Peter v Noorden From: Jones Beene Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2014 3:24 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:A Stake in the Heart - a stunning revelation Well, Ruby I hope Miles is correct (from the standpoint of strong LENR advocacy on my part) and I thank you for following up with the proper question. All of us here should only be concerned with the science – not promoting one theory or another. Most of us do want to promote a proper understanding of what makes LENR work, however and sometimes that goes against the grain. Funny thing, however, in trying to move in that direction. What is more basic and fundamental as a measurement value which needs to be known - than the mass of the proton? Let’s focus on that simple item - wrt the broad claim of accuracy at the ppb range. Let me say that as a personal interest, since this is somewhat related but not exactly - I have a collection of mass measurements of the proton, from different Labs around the world, over different time frames. Conveniently, for this discussion - the mass variation in these measurements goes down to around the 9-10 significant digits, but that is where the fun starts. In this case we are not talking about dilution of helium in a mixed gas, but the claim that 1 ppb mass variation with good accuracy is possible. Yes, I realize this is not apples-to-apples, but I think it makes the point that Miles claim is not believable as a practical matter, when it comes down to real-world applicability. The CODATA “recommended” value for proton mass is 1.672 621 777(74) x 10-27 kg Where 74 ppb is the supposed error range – which would be mean that top labs should all come in with something similar – correct? Even so, this error range is well over 1 ppb and it represents the best effort, Worldwide - for a most important value. Variation is actual measurements, however, as published over the years is huge - especially in countries which may not have wanted to follow the Western lead, and especially back in the nineties. Even Jefferson Lab, no slouch when it comes to measurement - reports a value that diverges way back at the ppm range, as do dozens if not hundreds of other measurements, and most of them were back when Miles work was being done. If the experts cannot get their act together - at greater than ppm on the mass of the proton, given its importance to physics, then I’m simply far from confident that one can accurately discriminate in a situation where there is claimed to be a few ppb of an atom of helium in a mix, the other components of which are so close. Of course, I have never claimed to be an expert on this, only a collector of information from various sources - but I have talked to several experts who agree that this talk about accuracy in the ppb range is closer to wishful thinking than something which can be taken as fact. For me, and despite what Miles has told you today - the lack of gammas overwhelms any claim that I have seen of helium in proportion to heat. But again, all it takes is an experiment where ppm of helium is being made, and we should have that report in a matter of months. The think I find most alarming is the “circle the wagons” mentality that seems to be happening in certain cliques against Mizuno’s work. It is anti-scientific and counter-productive. From: Ruby >From Dr. Melvin Miles: "Jones Beene is simply wrong about the accuracy of helium-4 measurements. The laboratories that I used for my samples specialized in highly accurate helium measurements. The DOI lab in Texas could easily measure 1 ppb. The Rockwell lab with Dr.Brian Oliver was even better with an accuracy of 0.1 ppb." Ruby
