Harry, what I meant is that _existing_ SPAWAR effect observations, being limited to tracks in areas of the chip close to the cathode, can't prove my assertion that the observation is creating the effect. My suggestion is that the higher electrolyte resistance areas where the cathode touches the plastic promote simultaneous deloading and incident deuteron fluxes, and thus hypothetical Desorbing vs Incident Excess Surface Electron Catalyzed Fusion. IOW I suggest there might have been be no significant nuclear activity if the chip hadn't been there, touching the cathode.
Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Harry Veeder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2007 6:29 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: NET Scratches? > the DIESECF hypothesis predicts much > more nuclear activity where the Pd > cathode lightly touches the insulator (bottom of wire and tips of > those of the codeposited PdDx > dendrites that touch the plastic) than where the electrolyte gap > is larger (sides and top of wire). > > Unfortunately I don't see how this can be proved, as any particles > having gone through a large water > gap wouldn't have enough energy left to make a track anyway, > whether they exist or not.... :( Maybe Bubble Technology Industries can help? ...
