In reply to Brian Ahern's message of Tue, 30 Jan 2018 22:54:07 +0000:
There is another point here too. IIRC a mass spec works by ionizing a particle
then measuring the mass to charge ratio. A deep level D2* molecule has an
ionization potential in the tens of kV, so is unlikely to be detected by a mass
spec. at all.
>Good point! Thanks for the clarification of my mis-calculation.
>From: mix...@bigpond.com <mix...@bigpond.com>
>Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2018 2:58 PM
>Subject: Re: CMNS: Re: [Vo]:Science does sometimes reject valid discoveries
>In reply to Brian Ahern's message of Tue, 30 Jan 2018 12:24:09 +0000:
>>I did not mean to discredit Mel's work. I am sure it was well done, but it is
>>difficult to measure 100mWatts of excess energy when Gerald Pollack says that
>>amount of energy can simply be stored in the water from background
>>The lack of ionizing radiation is a great hurdle to advancing CF in light of
>>Mills. Mills says that the mass spec data for He-4 could just as well be D2*
>>(deep Dirac level ) That would have a reduced mass over D2.
>The difference between D2 and He4 is 23.8 MeV. The difference between D2 & D2*
>is less than 1 MeV (?). I'm not sure a mass spec would even be able to detect
>the difference between the latter two, considering that it takes quite a
>sensitive one to detect the difference between the former two.
>Robin van Spaandonk
>local asymmetry = temporary success
Robin van Spaandonk
local asymmetry = temporary success