Here is a way to test my guess.
One indicator that the alpha particles come from fusion is a lack of light nuclear transmutation products; products with an atomic number less than the cathode material. >From the begining, the assumption has always been that helium is a product of deuterium fusion. This assumption may not be true. If helium is found in H/Ni ash, how could that helium be produce? An alternative to fusion is the lowering of the coulomb barrier which increases the probability of alpha particle emissions from the heavy element nucleus. If light element ash is present, this tends to suggest that the cause of the alpha partial emissions from the cathode is a result of a fission process of the cathode material and a partial lowering in the coulomb barrier. Rossi explained the appearance of light element ash in his used powder as a fission process back in 2011. If true, how could fission be happening? Keep up the good work and your excelent posts; Kine regards: Axil On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 4:17 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <[email protected]>wrote: > At 03:07 PM 7/11/2012, Axil Axil wrote: > > Could this be an indication of the establishment of entangled electron >> states resulting in mass increase related to heavy electrons? Recently, >> heavy electrons have been shown to be an indicator of an onset of >> superconductive conditions. >> >> Axil >> > > Gee, how could I say? > > Could it be the first indication of Higgs Boson effects at low energies? > > Gee, how could I say? > > Doorbell rings. Could it be some million-dollar giveaway? > > How could I say? Maybe I'll just answer the door and see who is there. > > *What is this effect? Under what conditions does it happen? What can be > seen to be consistent about it? Anything?* > > What torpedoed the discovery of the FPHE in the first place was > speculation about the cause, with most of the physics community imagining > that if it was real, it must be X, and X wouldn't look like this, therefore > it wasn't real. And most of the few others imagining that it was Y, which > was preposterous and with very little foundation and certainly no proof. > > And only a few actually persisting with the question, "How does this > behave? What actually happens?" > > As evidence from these few accumulated, we came to the point where we can > actually say a little that is solid. > > We still don't know what the hell is going on, really, but we can now say > that the probability is very high that the FPHE is a result of deuterium > being transmuted to helium. How? We don't know. Lots of people have lots of > guesses. > > In order to discriminate between these guesses, we need a lot more data. > We do not collect data sitting at a computer screen typing out our > opinions, fantasies, nor even what we know. I am, with this request for > information, beginning the process of gathering what is actually known, as > to a detail that might have some significance. > > When what is known has been collected and collated, further experiment may > be suggested. That's how science actually works, other than through sheer > luck. > > We do know, now, that Pons and Fleischmann were very lucky, If their batch > of palladium had been ordinary, they would probably have seen nothing. >
