Jones Beene wrote:
> Mizuno is only vaguely aware of Mills and has not read any of his
work as far as I know.
Then he has regrettably put himself at great disadvantage- given the
obvious similarities ...
That would only be true if the theory is correct and if it makes
useful predictions. (I have no idea whether it makes useful
predictions in this case or not.)
but ... since he surely does have graduate assistants, then at least
one of them should be able to read English, and know how to Google, no?
His students are all doing conventional electrochemistry. They have
no time to read obscure, disputed physics theories in English.
One can only hope this is not some kind of "professional jealousy"
situation, since it makes little logical sense otherwise.
How can someone be professionally jealous of an author he knows
nothing about? This makes no logical sense.
Mizuno is an experimentalist and Mills is a theoretician. In my
experience the two groups seldom communicate. Experimentalists want
specific suggestions to guide their work, which theoretician seldom
offer, so most experimentalists I know ignore theory.
It probably amounts to nothing, but we cannot know unless the
experimenter is fully aware of CQM and the implications of the hydrino.
I am sure Mizuno (and I) are fully unaware of the implications of
hydrinos. They don't even exist as far as we know! If they do exist
but theories about them offer no practical guidance to
experimentalists, they might as well not exist.
Here is a hypothetical situation to ponder. Suppose Mizuno uses
conventional nuclear theory as a working model for his experiments.
Suppose this "works" in the sense that he makes progress toward
better control of the excess heat and higher power levels. Later on
it is shown that this conventional theory is wrong and hydrinos are
right. I submit that that would make no difference, unless it can be
shown that with hydrino theory progress would have been faster, and
the results better. Progress in early steam engines was made using
premodern caloric heat theory. It worked well enough for a while, and
progress in heat engines eventually gave rise to modern thermodynamics.
IOW there could easily be an alternative explanation for what is
seen and reported by Mizuno as true isotope shifting - IF - and only
if, one understands hydrino technology - which as Jed admits, Mizuno does not.
I do not "admit" it, I state it as a fact -- to the best of my
knowledge, anyway. Neither of us understands hydrino technology and
until hydrino technology is independently replicated and thereby
proved genuine, I expect neither of us will give a fig about
it. There are many claims in cold fusion such as those made by Mills
and Swartz which have not been independently replicated yet as far as
I know. I give no credence to such claims. I have no interest in
them. I will be very interested the moment I learn they have been
replicated! (From time to time Mills and Swartz say they have been
replicated, but I have yet to see a paper from an independent source.
This could be my fault; I may have misunderstood or failed to notice
a paper. I am not omniscient.)
Mizuno's own claims are an independent replication of work done in
the 1930s, as noted. If he were the only one ever to see this, I
would be extremely wary of believing it. I certainly do not fully
believe it now!
Arata's previous work was independently replicated at SRI, and I
consider his present work similar enough that I would classify it as
partially, somewhat, sorta replicated, but there are so many
problems with his technique that I have little confidence in the
result, as I said in the paper by Rothwell & Storms. I have seen many
dramatic claims of success which turned out to be nothing more than
bad calorimetry, and Arata's calorimetry is about the worst I have
seen in a peer-reviewed journal. The very worst was Caltech (wrong)
and MIT (fake).
Mizuno may not care what the rest of the world thinks about him or
his work . . .
He does care but he has no control over that.
. . . but if this experiment were to be replicated, then it could be
of the very highest importance in opening up a new era in Physics . . .
That's true. (It has nothing to do with hydrinos, but it is true.)
Mizuno has been working on this for eight years and he has made
efforts to have the experiment replicated elsewhere, but the
experiment is difficult, expensive, and somewhat dangerous, so he is
not making much progress in that.
We need full clarification before a skeptic who does know about the
hydrino can say that what Mizuno was really measuring in the ICP
mass spectroscopy (Finnigan Mat Element: outsourced) . . .
Mizuno himself did not perform the measurement. As noted it was
outsourced. I do not know who did it. I can probably find out more if
anyone is interested.
And least of all, the full realization of these spectacular results
should never fall victim to the lame excuse of not understanding
another language very well. There is too much at stake.
Get back to me on that "lame excuse" line when you learn to read
Japanese fluently.
- Jed
