Hi Peter, Those slides and also their paper presented on ICCF 17, which is also available, are sadly inconclusive. They just add confusion to the mass.
I asked someone to ask defkalion people if they had done isotope analysis and to ask what were the light elements. They said they did no isotope analysis, yet they said there was no transmutation of Ni. I don't know how could they conclude that. Also, they did not find Triton, He3 or He4 among the light elements. They found lithium, beryllium and boron, though. So, they claim things completely different from any group before them. They are sloppy and illogical . I am completely confused. Maybe they do not have good intentions, after all? Considering only the paper presented in the conference, it is not clear to me if they used isotopic ratio mass spectroscopy, which means, it seems did not try to determine the isotopes, they just plotted the variation of the mass of the samples with great accuracy. It's not possible to figure out if the samples were contaminated. It seems they used this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inductively_coupled_plasma_mass_spectrometry When they should have also used: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotope-ratio_mass_spectrometry Their data on small mass elements is still crazy, just with the crude method. This is unlike anything that was seen before, as far as I know. 2012/8/14 Peter Gluck <peter.gl...@gmail.com> > Dear Friends, > > I have just published a paper inspired by Defkalion's recent publications. > It is about LENR definition and theory and its *SPECIAL TARGET IS THE > PARTICIPNTS* > *OF THE THEORY PANEL AT ICCF 17.* > > > http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2012/08/defkalion-big-bad-problem-is-definition.html > > Best wishes to you all, > > Peter > -- > Dr. Peter Gluck > Cluj, Romania > http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com > > -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
