On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 7:14 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <[email protected]>wrote:
Kowalski does not "believe" that the tracks he found were caused by > electrolysis. He considers that one possible explanation. Kowalski is quite > careful. He is looking at clusters. Oriani reported some clusters, but > clusters aren't Oriani's claim. Kowalski's paper cannot be considered to be > a confirmation of Oriani's claims, beyond a finding that some unusual and > difficult-to-explain phenomena occur. > Just to pin things down, we should try to agree on a few basic facts. The first proposed fact is that Kowalski, in [1], favors an explanation that involves electrolysis for the clusters he identifies in the two successful trials. "Numerous tracks of charged nuclear particles, emitted during electrolysis, were discovered by Oriani and Fisher ... Arguments are presented against prosaic explanations for the clusters, such as natural radioactivity or cosmic rays." (p. 1.) "This study, prompted by recent reports ..., confirms that an unexpected nuclear process seems to be occasionally triggered by a chemical process." (p. 2.) "In this section [sec. 4] I hope to show that neither contamination nor cosmic rays can be responsible for the clusters shown in Figures 1 and 4." (p. 9.) "I am not going to elaborate on this [the behavior of neutral particles] because my goal, at this stage, is to convince myself (and others) that Oriani-type clusters are due to electrolysis." (p. 9.) I should ask at this point if have I misunderstood anything. Eric [1] http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/KowalskiLonemission.pdf
