Jones,
Nice argument regarding fusion - I thought a relativistic
interpretation had to leave the possibility of fusion open but you are correct
in citing the lack of nuclear ash to rule out fusion. I know there are some
claims of transmuted elements being detected - Were you implying the amounts
are too small to describe the reported excess heat or just that the specific
isotopes were not from fusion but decay paths instead?
I also agree with your statement [snip] The conclusion: we must seek to
identify, or in today's early stage: to suggest - the kind of reactions where
the expected energy spectrum is at least in below beta decay range but with NO
expected transmutation product. Thus the Mills' reaction is a candidate.
[/snip] As I have posited before, the Lyne and Moller model of endless
chemical-zero point reactions is also at work in the "Mill's" reaction and the
hydride paths are only poor cousin's to this relativistically warped
oscillation between h1 and h2. Locally these gas atoms are unaware of any
Rydberg, fractional, hydrino or other monikers. It is my belief that any
nuclear reactions, be they fusion, decays or other are all dependent upon this
initial process to occur -I'm not saying which is the primary contributor, only
that the Moller type reaction has to come first.
I disagree however with the logic of one of your supporting arguments [snip]The
Reifenschweiler effect is a good example of the problem of suggesting that
radiation can be substantially blocked. In fact in Reifenschweiler only about
25% of the expected radiation from tritium seems to be missing, and the rest is
still evident, yet we suspect the same kind of confinement dynamics are at
work. [/snip] Your argument pre-supposes
A radioactive gas is "loaded" into confinement which we know only occurs to a
certain percentage of the gas that actually migrates into confinement while the
rest of the population continues to produce radiation at the normal rate. My
posit as I mentioned in a previous thread is that the environment that allows
these unlikely nuclear events, be it fusion or decay or other also results in
"warped" radiation that is downshifted before we can detect it - I'm not
disagreeing with your conclusion based on the lack of ash but just saying this
sub argument wasn't a fair comparison.
Regards
Fran
-----Original Message-----
From: Roarty, Francis X
> I have to consider a reaction that only occurs in extreme relativistic warp
> induced by suppression of larger virtual particles - the resulting radiation
> would have to likewise translate from this extreme warp back to normal space
> before we could detect it and therefore be downshifted.
Fran
OK - but go deeper: even if that happens, there should exist remnant transmuted
products of the reaction (isotopic ash) which is still radioactive for an
extended period. None has been documented. At the very least there should be a
shift in isotope ratio - none has been documented.
The Reifenschweiler effect is a good example of the problem of suggesting that
radiation can be substantially blocked. In fact in Reifenschweiler only about
25% of the expected radiation from tritium seems to be missing, and the rest is
still evident, yet we suspect the same kind of confinement dynamics are at work.
How could Rossi be completely different in "shieldability", especially using a
reaction that should have higher energy spectrum than tritium (if real fusion
is the source)? Let's go back to the conservation of miracles. We do not want
to be required to justify one miracle with another, and especially not if the
second miracle is more difficult to defend.
The implication of Reifenschweiler for Rossi is most likely that there CANNOT
exist the kind of nuclear reaction (fusion or even beta decay) that produces
significant gammas (primary, secondary or bremsstrahlung) since a substantial
percentage would be documented. Remember that tritium has about the lowest
energy spectrum of any radioactive isotope and still 3/4 of it shows up,
despite the cavity confinement. Yes, it could be shielded by lead, but where is
the proof of unshielded radiation in Rossi? Ask Bianchini - there is none.
The conclusion: we must seek to identify, or in today's early stage: to suggest
- the kind of reactions where the expected energy spectrum is at least in below
beta decay range but with NO expected transmutation product. Thus the Mills'
reaction is a candidate.
All that I am seeking to do this year is to put another candidate reaction into
the record. Perhaps by early next year, funding will allow researchers to
eliminate the candidates- one-by-one.
To be honest, a version of Mills' miracle (redundant ground states) may be more
likely to be the best bet for now, especially with the addition of Casimir
confinement - and with less down-side baggage than the one I am suggesting
(tapping into non-quark nuclear mass) but the problem with Mills, for
explaining Rossi's results, is that it seems to be not energetic enough.
Mills specifically claims about a 200:1 ratio of usable excess energy per atom,
compared to combustion of hydrogen. Rossi is an order of magnitude higher (at
least).
Jones
