In Ruby's fine interview of Ed Storms, Ed mentioned his work on Carbon Nanotubes. In fact, there was a picture of a landscape of open top Carbnon nanotubes - i.e., Carbon nanohorns. He said that those tests were unsuccessful. This was essentially what he told me the last time I asked him about CNTs.
Now that I've had a chance to refine my thinking, I think Ed's CNT structures were missing a few things, ergo, it failed. 1. Ed seems to have MWNTs. I think Metallic Armchair SWNTs are what is required to achieve the full effective electron screening Metallic Armchair SWNTs are also required for "Superconductive" behavior which seems to be a critical ingredient. 2. Ed did not fire an electric spark along his CNTs. I think this is required to increase the amount of electrons on the SWNTs to produce huge charge accumulation via long coherence length, i.e., a single electron quantum wave. A BEC formation of electrons on the SWNTs. 3. In Ed's cracks, the hydrogen H+ ions can freely diffuse into the metal lattice and escape the confinement of the crack. I think the NAE structure needs to confine the H+ ions to allow them time to collide and fuse. If they esacpe, chances of fusion is drastically lowered. CNTs have been known to confine H+ ions. The interaction of H+ ions on a CNT is via the mechanism of Physisorption and Chemisorption, both of which "locks" the H+ ions on the CNT walls and not allow it to permeate and diffuse thru the CNT walls. I think this confinement is the critical ingredient that metal lattice can not provide, hence, a good explanation of why fusion on such NAEs are very low. Jojo PS: On a different note, what would a p + p fusion reaction look like. I have designed a new reactor with a view sight glass, hopefully, I'll see some fusion reactions taking place.
