Jones Beene <[email protected]> wrote: You could not be more wrong – at least if you are classifying Ni-H as > “cold fusion” which it isn’t. >
Are you suggesting that Pd-D is fusion and Ni-H is not? Or that they both are not fusion? I do not see how Pd-D can produce helium at the same ratio to the heat as plasma fusion does if it is not fusion. If you are saying they are different phenomena, I am not aware of any experimental evidence for that. I do not know of any theory papers that say that. As far as I know, the researchers all assume that the Pd and Ni effects are the same, if for no other reason then for what McKubre calls the "conservation of miracles." What makes you think they are different? Or that both are not fusion? > There is zero evidence of any self-running system – albeit lots of > unsubstantiated talk. > No, there are many papers from Fleischmann, McKubre, Mizuno and others describing heat after death, which is to say self-running. This is not unsubstantiated talk. If you think it is, you have not read the literature carefully. Or you are ignoring replicated experimental data, which is to say, you are engaged in a form of faith-based religion, rather than science. The first and most fundamental rule of science is that you must believe experimental evidence. It overrules everything else. Thus far, there is no evidence of a self-running system. Celani, at one of > his demos, spoke as if he had accomplished this, but later retracted . . . > No, he did not claim that. Not in discussions with me, anyway. He said he will increase insulation and he hopes to reduce input to zero. He has reduced input from 48 W to around 10 W. I hope that he will soon reduce it to zero. In any case, many other Ni systems have been run with zero input power after initial heating. - Jed
