-----Original Message----- From: Edmund Storms > The Mills effect is a different phenomenon all together. His effect is not nuclear, as he admits.
Yes, but that is not relevant to understanding Rossi. Many other researchers, including Miley have incorporated major parts of Mills theory into a nuclear version for Ni-H - using the important Rydberg energy details - like IRH (inverted Rydberg hydrogen). It is easily possible that Mills' theory, like your own (and everyone else's) is partly correct and partly wrong. It is a major mistake to be ignorant of Mills experiments when analyzing Rossi. > The Rossi effect follows from the cold fusion phenomenon when H is used instead of D. No, it doesn't. Just the opposite, in fact. There is no evidence of any cold fusion effect in the Rossi results. You are intentionally conflating with Piantelli. Bianchini finds zero radiation over hundreds of hours of careful radiation testing. Essen finds no radioactivity in the ash. No excess deuterium or tritium have been documented in Rossi. In short, the Rossi effect looks very much like the Mills effect. > The Rossi effect is claimed to produce a nuclear product. Many inaccurate claims have been made about the Rossi effect, but no nuclear product has been documented by anyone including Focardi, who is responsible for that detail. Testing of the copper showed natural isotope balance, indicating metal migration - not transmutation ash. > In addition, the Ni-H2 system produces radiation that CAN NOT result from a Mills reaction. Piantelli alone has made claim this claim, but we are talking about the Rossi effect and Mills. Piantelli is irrelevant to Rossi. Bianchini finds zero radiation over hundreds of hours of careful radiation testing of Rossi's results on three separate occasions. Celani saw something on startup but nothing at all during operation. Rossi may have used a startup isotope, but there is NO radioactivity at all during operation. Your theory may work for Piantelli's results, which have trade secrets that make it different from Rossi - but your theory is incompatible with Rossi's actual results. Again, Rossi see no radiation during operation and no nuclear ash, like Mills. Rossi uses potassium catalyst, like Mills (this has been documented in the spectrographic data). Rossi see long term gain, like Thermacore. Rossi has no radioactivity in the ash or in the process itself. Once again, the Rossi effect bears every resemblance to Mills, and none to Piantelli at all, or to "cold fusion" or as you chosen to define it. > Apparently you have not read my book, or any of my papers or followed the discussion on Vortex. I have no loyalty to deuterium. I have read your book and other material but continue to reject the notion that it is relevant to Rossi's actual results. You know that I have stated several times that your theory may well apply to Piantelli's results, but not to Rossi's yet you continue to conflate Rossi and Piantelli because your theory falls flat with Rossi. Jones
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
