I haven't followed this thread for lack of understanding of most of the concepts, is this a new explanation for CF you are proposing Horace? A short summary for dummies would be most welcome, it might help others too.
FWIW I agree dg is not a good abbreviation for degenerate electron, whatever that is. Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Horace Heffner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 7:20 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: Degenerate electrons, electron fugacity, and cold fusion > > On Jul 24, 2007, at 5:28 AM, Jones Beene wrote: > >> Horace is way ahead of most of us on the subject of degenerate >> electrons (dg). But very few observers have covered all the bases >> of how they and overpotential in general, relate to LENR... > > I'm not "way ahead" on the topic of degenerate electrons. I created > the concept of applying electron fugacity to cold fusion. AFAIK no > one has applied the concept of electron fugacity or degenerate > electrons to cold fusion prior to the initial post in this thread. > > If you insist on abbreviating degenerate electrons how about using a > normal method of abbreviation, like D.E., or DE, or DgE, or even the > barely recognizable de or dge. > > > Horace Heffner > http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/ > > >
