On Jan 19, 2009, at 6:06 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Horace Heffner wrote:
If this experiment is repeatable then this of utmost significance.
How could this be overlooked? Perhaps there was no follow-up, or
the results could not be repeated?
It wasn't overlooked! It was repeated. Will's people got better and
better at it, as did Bockris. Ed and Carol Storms got very
significant tritium results, although I do not think they got a
chance to improve their technique much. See:
http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/StormsEelectrolyt.pdf
Tom Claytor, also at LANL, got great tritium results with spark
discharge.
http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/ClaytorTNtritiumprob.pdf
These experiments stopped is because opponents ignored the results
and closed down the NCFI, Bockris retired, and others were never
funded properly.
This is old news. I am a little surprised that people here are
unaware of the fact that cold fusion produces tritium, and this has
been proved decisively hundreds of times. (Bockris used to run 100
cells at a time, and as I recall, sometimes 30 to 50 would produce
tritium.)
We were talking about Szpak, not Will. Experiments not 100 percent
reproducible have already been clearly demonstrated to not be of
much use. The advantages of the Szpak experiments have been the high
degree of reproducibility, low cost, and quick startup time. It
should be possible to put a Szpak type experiment in every high
school physics class, provided the reproducibility is there and the
results unambiguous.
I would suggest that a good way to spend government money on CF
initially and in part might be to provide free HTO testing, i.e.
small quantity scintillation counting, for schools and CF
experimenters.
There is absolutely, positively, no doubt about it, and there is
also no doubt that this is definitive proof of a nuclear reaction.
Where do you people get your information from, anyway, Wikipedia?
<trap drum sound: szzz, boom bah!>
I must admit that Claytor's results are unambiguous and should be
much replicated, though his method is in an intermediate regime, and
should be called "warm fusion" rather than than "cold fusion". His
experiments are expensive and difficult to replicate, and not ideal
to disseminate the fact cold fusion is real.
There is no need to speculate about why this research has not been
funded, or why it has not been reported in the pages of the
Washington Post or Sci. Am. It has nothing to do with the fact that
tritium is used in fusion bombs. The reason is prosaic, and well
known to me and others. This information is not published and it is
erased from Wikipedia and elsewhere because if it were to become
generally known, Robert Park, the editors at Sci. Am. and Nature,
and the skeptics at the DoE and APS would all look like idiots.
They understand as well as you do that this is proof of a nuclear
reaction!
- Jed
The same can be said for Wikipedia blacklisting LENR-CANR.org. That
site makes the wiki CF denier cult look foolish.
There will be a new US administration tomorrow. Maybe they will take
a more progressive view of a field that might solve the energy
problem. However, it seems to me the CF community needs to home in
on one, just one, highly repeatable, unambiguous, cheap and easy
experiment to demonstrate that CF is real. So far we've not done a
good job of that.
Best regards,
Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
