This makes no sense. All tritium is radioactive.
Where does the hypothetical tritium in the Rossi reactor come from? You seem to be confusing tritium with the hydrino. You do understand the Mills' hydrino theory, no? It does not involve tritium and neither does Rossi's reaction. The only recent mention of tritium is that this particular isotope, because of its low beta decay energy - *would be the only one in nature* that V&B could possibly have not seen with their setup. That does not mean it is actually there, by any means. Did you jump to the conclusion that it had to be there - and thereby assume that it was present by default, since it is the only one which could have been missed in their fine analysis? I do not think that conclusion is warranted in any way. It is far more likely that there is no radioactivity at all, and that this Reactor is based on some other modality which can include either Mills, or Fran Roarty's version of Mills, etc. or "new physics" . but tritium would have stood out like a sore thumb when they sent the sample to Uppsala, since the nickel was not shielded then - and it wasn't there or it would have been in Essen's report. Jones From: Axil Axil If there is no tritium, then there is no need for tritium regulation. If the Rossi reactor does not produce tritium, then it does not require regulation. If its does not produce tritium then the Rossi reaction would be a different type of reaction manifest than other cold fusion reactions. Non radioactive tritium would be something new, something never seen before, and something to contend with. This new isotope might start a new field of material science in its own right. IMHO,the gaseous isotope production of the Rossi reactor has not yet been determined. Until these gas isotope products are established, commercialization of the Rossi reactor cannot proceed. On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 6:26 PM, Jones Beene <[email protected]> wrote: You are completely off base, Axil. Do you not know Mills' work at all? It is NOT nuclear. There is NO tritium. There is NO problem with any regulation. Please - for you own edification, do your homework and read and learn CQM before making silly comments like this. Jones From: Axil Axil Your caviler attitude toward conforming to the world wide nuclear regulatory infrastructure is counterproductive to the commercialization of cold fusion. This attitude worries and saddens me.
