From: Jed Rothwell...

➢ This is just my opinion but . . . I suspect Pd is the active material in 
these experiments, and it always has been. Both Pd and Ni were sputtered all 
over the place in the old reactor, with glow discharge. It has a large display 
of plasma, which I suppose is sputtering metal all around… With the latest 
technique described in Appendix A, the Pd is deliberately rubbed or plated on 
to the Ni mesh. 

➢ I still wonder if Ni cold fusion even exists. 



I fully agree that Ni “cold fusion” is extremely unlikely – since there is no 
gainful pathway in theory or in experiment for real fusion without the extreme 
gravity of the solar model … BUT … this observation is narrow and does not 
apply to “excess heat” using nickel to catalyze hydrogen reactions in other 
ways… such as those which Mills and Holmlid have described, if not proved. 

The proof for anomalous heat from hydrogen without fusion is as strong or 
stronger than that for cold fusion using deuterium and palladium. In fact, no 
one in cold fusion has come close to Thermacore’s year long results with Ni-H - 
and that includes the P&F hero results in France - which are far short of 
Thermacore. 

Plus… Mizuno’s most shocking results have been with hydrogen, not deuterium – 
and but with phenanthrene as catalyst -  where he found that hydrogen with 
palladium was no-gain unless phenanthrene was added. He considers this NOT to 
be fusion of two protons but with ash consisting of carbon-13.

In short, there are several avenues for anomalous heat – probably many avenues 
- where the source of gain is NOT nuclear fusion of deuterium.

Reply via email to