On Dec 8, 2009, at 6:47 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
What I'm doing is trying to create a standard experiment. It would
then be simple to add some tritium, and that resistance, to the
extent that it remained, would be obvious foolishness. If I expect
a result to be negative, I'm not motivated to set up a complex
experiment to test it, unless I'm funded to do replication work,
normally that's the job of academic and pure science institutions,
that's an appropriate job for public funding, because venture
capital isn't interested in boring replications, it wants to see
improvement of quantitative outcomes.
But if it's cheap and easy, buy a kit for under $100, add some
tritium, connect it to a power supply, run it for a couple of
weeks, then develop the CR-39 -- and run another cell for another
$100 in series so that the current profile, everything is identical
except for that tritium doping, that's peanuts. The only difficult
and unique thing there is having enough tritium. However, it might
only need to be a little?
I need to be more clear about the fact my article is *not* suggesting
amateurs use trace tritium doping. It explicitly states: "Though the
use of tritium can only be done in the US by licensed labs, and
practical devices would preferably be deuterium only, trace tritium
doping experiments may provide a necessary step in the progress
toward practical devices." I guess that wasn't enough, so I added:
"Amateur experimenters should of course avoid the use of tritium." to
draft #22.
Best regards,
Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
