In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Tue, 21 May 2013 20:51:20 -0600: Hi Ed, [snip]
You may be right. Time will tell. >Robin, you are making an assumption here. You are assuming that no >energy has been lost before the neutrino is emitted and the electron >is absorbed. Suppose, as I have proposed, the energy is lost as a >series of photons before the electron is added so that no energy >remains to be carried by the neutrino. Cold fusion is unique because >it requires this kind of process, i.e. the energy must be lost before >the fusion process is complete. In contrast, hot fission occurs when >all energy is lost at the time fusion is complete. That is the >essential difference between the two phenomenon. You need to read my >papers to see how CF must work to be consistent with what has been >observed. The process can only be properly understood by considering >all aspects of the process, not just this one event. > >Ed Storms > > > >On May 21, 2013, at 8:30 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: > >> In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Tue, 21 May 2013 18:28:19 >> -0600: >> Hi, >> [snip] >>>>> However, if protium was fusing into deuterium, which is an >>>>> extremely rare reaction to begin with, there should be gamma >>>>> radiation. >> >> There is no gamma radiation from the p-e-p reaction (as distinct >> from the p-p >> reaction). The energy disappears with the neutrino. Therefore >> *effectively* this >> reaction produces no energy. >> However useful energy would be released from subsequent fusion >> reactions >> involving the D formed in the p-e-p reaction. >> >> Regards, >> >> Robin van Spaandonk >> >> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html >> Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
