Here is Ed Storms' take on the latest info, from an off-line discussion. - - - - - - - - - - - -
The reaction is expected to be self sustaining if it has an over unity value as measured. As I explained previously, the temperature has a natural upper limit that will be reached if no power is removed. As temperature increases, the amount of H or D at the NAE goes down, thereby starving the reaction. They used the same process by removing the H2 pressure or adding N2. Fortunately, Nature has a control built-in to the process making the process safe from explosion. They have discovered that if they balance the small amount of added power to the rate of energy removal, they can keep the temperature under control. This type of control is totally expected and necessary given the variables that determine the energy output. In other words, in spite of the confusion provided by Rossi in his explanation, the system is behaving exactly as expected based on observations in the cold fusion field, which adds one more reason to believe they are seeing what they claim. Ed - - - - - - - - - - - - My response: Ed wrote: > Fortunately, Nature has a control built-in to the process making the process safe from explosion. > They have discovered that if they balance the small amount of added power to the rate of energy > removal, they can keep the temperature under control. This type of control is totally expected > and necessary given the variables that determine the energy output. My point exactly. There is plenty of evidence from previous experiments pointing to two things: 1. The reaction is inherently stable. It has what Pons called a "memory" meaning it tends to go back the same power level after a perturbation, which means it must have a built-in control mechanism. 2. Temperature is a control factor, with things like positive feedback. . . . - Jed
