This may be too open-ended and nebulous to present at this juncture - but the evidence for small amounts of tritium in Ni-H LERN is substantial. Thanks to Ed Storms and Jed Rothwell from bringing this detail clearly into focus recently - because for one overriding consideration- given the rarity of background 3H - this occurrence of it where it should not be seen ABSOLUTELY GUARANTEES THE REALITY OF LENR.
But all of us knew that, and need no reminder... at least on this forum. Should we attempt to "rub it in" elsewhere? As mentioned, this is partly a function of being able to locate and precisely identify extremely small amounts of the isotope - but that is not a minus... if it were not being made in some quantity, it would not show up at all. What are the implications of the following ? 1) Tritium appearance is absolutely not in question in the reaction, but does not always occur, so what is the key to it being there? 2) No necessity for excess heat to find tritium. In fact many reports find T with no heat. 3) In some cases, what can be called "anomalous cooling" is seen (as in Ahern's experiments) 4) When excess heat is clearly present, tritium formation can be somewhere around 10^5 times too low to account for it. What is the highest correlation? 5) Claytor sees tritium with lithium, which is easier to explain but most reports are with potassium carbonate. Why K2CO3 instead of KOH? 6) No public evidence that the rate of tritium production can be commercialized, even if a price of $1000,000 per gram is guaranteed. Your input on other implications of this will be duly noted - and reported in a separate post. We can pretty much state that the main common denominator for all of the above is Quantum Mechanics - in the sense of low probability tunneling. Which means that QM tunneling has allowed some small amount of tritium to form but is it new physics? IOW - There is no guarantee that it is not a new kind of tritium reaction (not necessarily D+D -> T+p). Jones
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
