On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 10:43 AM, Craig Haynie <[email protected]> wrote: > . > > I can't help but think back to the idea that it's not heat which > triggers the reaction, but rather an event which causes the molecules to > vibrate at a certain frequency. I think Znidarsic holds this view and, > if correct, can identify the frequency needed from the work he's done. > > If so, then we would see a need for heat to start the reaction, and heat > could then also be used to kill the reaction. If the molecules were > vibrating faster than an optimum reaction would require, then shutting > power down would increase the reaction as the temperature fell to the > optimum point, killed only then by the lack of hydrogen. If this idea is > correct, then the reaction should be stable and sustainable at a certain > temperature and power spikes would be rare and short lived. This might > also explain Rossi's 'frequency generator' that appears to be a mystery > in this experiment.
How does the reaction increase (after turning off the input power) without causing an increase in temperature? It sounds like the reaction creates heat by absorbing cold. (seriously, I do not restrict myself to the modern conception of cold as the mere absence of heat). Harry
