https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B6id5Hf-xMWOYXVjekJCN1ZkQk0/edit?pli=1
Results from Piantelli On Sun, May 5, 2013 at 7:23 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: > I recently posted to Ed Storms this opinion of LENR experimentation which > show results consistent with what DGT is seeing. > > https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2013/04/08/isotope-table-lenr-tool/ > > Several medium and heavy elements like calcium, titanium, chromium, > manganese, iron, cobalt, copper and zinc have been reported as detected by > several researchers, like Tadahiko Mizuno or George Miley. > 1. lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MizunoTnucleartra.pdf > Did you forget about this one in your library? > > “Recently, Mizuno, Bockris and others have increasingly focused on > so-called “host metal transmutations,” that is, nuclear reactions of the > cathode metal itself. The cathode metal was inexplicably neglected for many > years. The term “host metal” is misleading. It was an unfortunate choice of > words. It implies that the metal acts as a passive structure, holding the > hydrogen in place, cramming the deuterons or protons together. The metal is > a host, not a participant. The hydrogen does the work. Now, it appears the > metal itself is as active as the hydrogen. The metal apparently fissions > and fusions in complex reactions. Now the task is to think about the metal, > and not just the hydrogen. Theory must explain how palladium can turn part > of itself into copper and other elements with peculiar isotopes.” > > > http://news.newenergytimes.net/2013/02/26/lenr-archives-illuminate-scientific-mystery-of-century-part-2/ > > I consider the fusion/fission idea well justified and on track having been > supported by many results. > > I will document them in detail from your own library if you persist. > > How about the fission/fusion results from Rossi and Piantelli, especially > from Piantelli because of his very good reputation. > > > > > On Sun, May 5, 2013 at 6:39 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> If this theory from Ed Storms is to be considered universally applicable, >>> experimental results from DGT cannot be ignored. >>> >> >> These results have to be published in detail and then independently >> replicated before we can have confidence they are real. There are many cold >> fusion claims. Some were never replicated and I think most people have >> concluded they were experimental errors. DGT's results may also be >> experimental error, in which case it makes no sense take them into account. >> The theory will be nonsense. >> >> >> >>> DGT has published their ash assays from their reaction test. They see >>> both fission and fusion reactions in these results. >>> >> >> Again, we have to know in detail who performed this assay, what >> instruments they used, and exactly what results they got. Then these >> results must also be independently replicated. >> >> As far as I know, DGT has only sketched out their results, in nothing >> more substantial than a sales presentation. No details have been provided, >> such as calibrations. So it is impossible for anyone to take into account >> their claims in a theory. You cannot develop a theory based on a few >> details from a sales brochure. You can only speculate, and it is probably a >> waste of time even doing that. >> >> This is also largely true of Rossi. >> >> - Jed >> >> >
