Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <[email protected]> wrote: Well, Rich, your underpants are showing. >
For which you can be thrown off an airplane. > Rossi, if nothing else and even if he turns out to be as phony as a > three-dollar bill, may have gotten us off our collective duffs. I think that > the lackadaisical attitude toward NiH has been the theoretical difficulties, > and we really ought to know better than that! > I think the impediment has been the practical difficulties. Srinivasan and others tried to replicate and failed. The power density always seemed far too low for it to be practical, except for Piantelli. Others could not replicate Piantelli, and it wasn't for lack of trying. I think everyone understood all along that Pd is probably too expensive. It is so rare it can only produce ~1/3rd of the energy we need (Fleischmann's estimate circa 1990). The plan was to find out how the reaction works in Pd. That is, to work out a theory. Then, the plan was to apply that theory to Ti or Ni or some other cheaper material. The advantage of Pd was that when you make it work, power density is sometimes high and the reaction can be measured with absolute confidence, *pace* Rich Murray. - Jed
