-----Original Message----- From: Stephen A. Lawrence > That juxtaposition of "fusion", "generate energy", and "rubidium 85" doesn't sound right.
That's quite true - including the little problem of rubidium not being a boson. OTOH - many things that don't sound right today are merely awaiting a better explanation... to wit, when I got the Storms and Scanlan paper a while back, I was pondering the specific mention of "10 deuterons" as a potentially active species ... why 10? Well, there are a number of implications of this, but given that neon is 10Ne20, mostly, then one might suspect that if 10 happened to be a special combination of deuts, then some neon might turn up as ash in experiment ... hmmm ... To make a short story longer, a quick look turns up the curious factoid that between 1910 and 1930, many experimenters (some rather well respected) reported the mysterious appearance of hydrogen, helium and neon appearing in electrical discharge tubes after operation for a while, when none was there initially. This was long before LENR, but many believed it had something to do with nitrogen being transmuted somehow. And there are a number of other mentions of neon in LENR as well, in more recent times. Quite a few, really. Now getting 10 deuterons together at one time to fuse into neon in a gas discharge tube, to the standard thinking of fizzix perfess'nals is beyond being wrong ... not even wrong ... ... yet Sir J.J. Thomson, no slouch in the lab and who was awarded the Nobel Prize in physics and is best known as the discoverer of the electron - described the production of helium and neon during the bombardment of various chemicals with these same "cathode rays". As far as I know this finding was never retracted. Go figure. Jones
