Dear Peter, I do not expect any theory to be simple. I think, as we discussed another time, something multistage like photosynthesis. But I cannot think about the if they do not release data with better accuracy! Given that there are many stages, I have to separate what comes in different stages and processes. Without more data, I cannot do that!
2012/8/14 Peter Gluck <peter.gl...@gmail.com> > Dear Daniel, > > you well know that they are using some additives to enhance the process; > Rossi has named these the Catalyst. The opinions inside the company nd for > their friends are divided some say they are telling too much ( I am on this > side too). > Please focus on what is most valuable in what they say is that in order to > get enrgy you maust work ahrd both on hydrogen and on Ni, otherwise itt > does not work. They have found a way but I believe there are other ways > too- all bassed on radica changes of the nature of H and Ni > > And do not wait simple theories tio be good, in your own intellectual > interest > > Best wishes to you Daniel > > Peter > > > Peter > > > On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 8:46 PM, Daniel Rocha <danieldi...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> 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 >> >> > > > -- > Dr. Peter Gluck > Cluj, Romania > http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com > > -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
