There might well be a LENR reaction strength component to this even isotope issue.
The DGT reactor might well produce a stronger reaction intensity that can crack upon open the Ni58 and Ni60 isotopes that the weaker Rossi reaction cannot do. If a reactor with a stronger reaction is invented, the isotope question may not be relevant because a strong LENR reaction may affect all matter equally. If the LENR reaction is variable based on strength level, basing a patent on isotope activity may not be smart. On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 12:39 PM, Jones Beene <[email protected]> wrote: > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > > >Brad Lowe: It was reported that the nickel isotopes all react, except that > >Ni 61 does not react. (Ideas why this would be?) > > 61Ni is the only naturally occurring NI isotope with odd spin (and hence a > nuclear magnetic moment). > > > The more logical explanation is that that DGT is trying to distance > themselves from the Claims of Rossi patent application, in the event it > will > be granted. > > If you accept the validity of the DGT demo, and it looks damn good to me > despite a few problems, then Rossi's demo should be accepted also, and the > Patent Law under section 713.98 permits the demonstration of a working > device. So we pretty much have to assume that the Rossi IP will be granted > eventually - since he can actually demonstrate the effect. We know that he > has claimed that Ni-62 is the active isotope and if true, it would keep DGT > out of the game. > > Anyway - it is extremely doubtful, given the expense of pure isotopes and > Defkalion's lack of capital, that they have done the correct testing to > back > such a self-serving statement. Rossi has been much better funded. > > Therefore DGT has every incentive, in seeking investors - to insert that > kind of comment about not having the same technology as Rossi, even if > untrue. They cannot afford to be seen as having copied Rossi's technology - > when his patent is eventually granted; but everyone on this forum knows the > history going back a few years; and that DGT actually admitted to copying > the formula at the University of Sienna. > > IOW - If they - DGT are to attract sufficient outside funding, and they > badly need it - then they essentially "have to" invent something like this > story to overcome due diligence objections. > > In spite of the successful demo, the statement about isotope activity from > DGT is almost certainly self-serving and bogus. > > Jones > > > >
