From: Bob Higgins
Jones, I agree that there are many tantalizing characteristics of Zn as a
possible catalyst material….My point is only that based on other measurements
of AP's fuel, it is not plausible that 64Zn can be responsible for for the high
ICP-MS reading for 64Ni in his Sochi reported analyses.
Bob,
There are few possibilities to explain mass-64 other than zinc, or the
intentional adding of 64Ni… or the natural enrichment via ore from Kamacite
meteorite – which was the start of this thread.
The Ni isotope is prohibitively expensive, and Parkhomov had no reason not to
admit to its presence, if it was there. Instead he says it was 64Zn.
That seems logical to me. Sherlock’s old adage is “eliminate all other factors,
and the one which remains must be the truth.”
The 66Zn which “should have been seen” but wasn’t is not evidence that 64Zn was
also absent, when the person with the most knowledge about the testing thinks
it explains things. The presumed error then becomes overlooking 66Zn.
