From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]
> For Ni to be a Mills catalyst it needs to lose at least 5 electrons in one > hit. Five ?? No, not really... Ni+++ can lose one more and express a hole at 54.9 eV ... or else, resonant UV photons could knock out the single IP4 electron ... or else, in the same way as with K, where the 'hole' is the difference between IP1 and IP2, with Ni the difference between IP3 and IP1 is 27.55 eV It is true that in neither case is the fit extremely close (to 27.2 or 54.4 eV respectively) but in both cases the fit is considerably better than with palladium, which as far back as 1993 Mills claimed was catalytic for hydrinos (deuterinos) as he does in my version of CQM - since the sum of IP1 and IP2 is 27.77 eV for Pd. This was his alternative explanation for the excess heat seen in cold fusion in an early article in Fusion Technology. Apparently, if we can believe him, a range of more than .5 eV above 27.2 works under his theory, but he did come under lots of criticism for the suggestion and the sloppy fit. And given that there are three other deeper levels for nickel, it would seem to be a rather active (holy? ;-) electrode .... perhaps the most active for deep shrinkage of any element - perhaps that is why it works best with a first level catalyst like K. Otherwise you could use palladium.
