I uploaded an early paper by Claytor: Claytor, T.N., et al. *Tritium and neutron measurements of a solid state cell*. in *NSF/EPRI Workshop on Anomalous Effects in Deuterated Materials*. 1989. Washington, DC.
https://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/ClaytorTNtritiumand.pdf Abstract A solid state "cold fusion" cell was constructed to test for nonequilibrium D-D fusion in a solid. The stimulus for the design was the hypothesis that the electrochemical surface layer in the Pons -Fleischmann cell could be replaced with a metal- insulator-semiconductor (MIS) barrier. Cells were constructed of alternating layers of palladium and silicon powders pressed into a ceramic form and exposed to deuterium gas at 110 psia , resulting in a D/Pd ratio of 0.7. Pulses of current were passed through the cells to populate nonequilibrium states at the MIS barriers. One cell showed neutron activity and had a large amount of tritium. Other cells have produced tritium at a low rate consistent with neutron emission at or below the threshold of observability. The branching ratio for n/p was about 3 x 10^-9 in all the experiments where a substantial amount of tritium has been found. One of the cells produced a substantial amount of tritium: . . . [T]ritium analysis showed that cell 2 had 1300 times the fill gas concentration of tritium, amounting to 3.5 x 10^15 atoms of tritium. This level, although substantially above background, is equivalent to only 65 ppb. The NSF/EPRI Workshop is described here: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/EPRInsfepriwor.pdf These experiments are also described here: https://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/ClaytorTNtritiumgen.pdf Several other experiments produced large amounts of tritium, such as Bockris, Storms and Will. See: https://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/WillFGtritiumgen.pdf Skeptics ignore the tritium because it is compelling proof that cold fusion is a nuclear reaction. They pretend that heat is not compelling, even though it exceeds the limits of chemistry thousands of times over. They want to claim that cold fusion does not produce clear evidence of a nuclear reaction, even though anyone can see that it does. They mean it does not produce the evidence *they want to see.* They are looking for proof that cold fusion is actually plasma fusion, and it produces a deadly flux of neutrons and no significant heat. They want that because it fits their theories and -- more importantly -- because it means cold fusion has no practical use, and does not threaten plasma fusion funding. Messinger correctly described the infuriating, know-nothing attitude of the skeptics at ARPA-E and elsewhere: The hypothesis is that excess heat is caused by the release of nuclear binding energy through low-energy nuclear reactions. But, as I have written before, and ARPA-E stressed in their funding opportunity announcement, such kind of evidence for LENR is insufficient due to the ambiguous nature of heat . . . I have uploaded a number of new papers lately: https://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/?page_id=3009
