From: Bob Higgins Bob Cook wrote: One interesting item that Piantelli noted was important in the 90’s was the existence of a H(-1) ion.… BH: Piantelli believes that the hydrogen anion is complicit in Ni-H LENR. He believes that the anion on the surface of his Ni rod is absorbed into a metal grain acting as a condensate when stimulated by a shock of various types. The anion, thus absorbed, enters a Ni atom as though it were a muon. ---------------------------------------------------------- Bob/Bob – As we have mentioned here for many years, the H anion explanation works far better if it is merged with Mills-inspired f/H- (which is a dense but stable negative ion, in contrast to the normal H- anion of Piantelli, which is extraordinarily unstable).
CQM from the beginning envisions a stable anion which RM calls hydrino-hydride™. Due to trademark issues with that term, and the fact that the general concept works much better theoretically in the context of a single dense state (as opposed to the 137 steps of Mills) and the fact Mills persists in denying the nuclear origin of the gain, we find that a hybrid explanation is called for. We can combine Piantelli with Mills and Holmlid into the most succinct and instructive depiction of this anion – which is a dense stable negative ion, requiring charge neutralization (in the form of an alkali or s-block cation). Of course, there are the expected vanity impediments in promoting such a hybrid viewpoint. The composite explanation alienates purists in both the Mills and LENR camps (Holmlid doesn’t even have a camp yet) and pleases mainly those who are seeking the most accurate description, regardless of the twisted history. Jones
