In reply to Jones Beene's message of Thu, 4 Dec 2008 14:11:30 -0800 (PST): Hi, [snip] >Secondly - as posted several times by the renegade observers who are trying to >merge CQM and CF into a coherent single theory - and who believe that Mills >got "much of it right", and either missed some of it, or got some of it wrong >-- there is no convincing evidence that has ever appeared in the spectroscopy >on the BLP site that proves the shrinkage reaction is not endothermic, since >he has never shown a clear and unambiguous peak at 27.2 eV AFAIK. [snip] His theory doesn't predict a 27.2 eV peak. It does predict one at 13.6 eV and others at 40.8 eV and higher, though it's possible that it doesn't directly produce any UV at all, just kinetic energy, and that any UV present comes only from recombination reactions (i.e. positive ions capturing free electrons). Regards,
Robin van Spaandonk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
