Actually I have said it very often however that it is disaster not an error, it is more historical misfortune than error of judgment.Let's e realist, we live in memecracies and the meme of palladium-the cradle, the origin, the magic is still too powerful. Technological progress will solve this problem- not with/for palladium. May I take this opportunity to thank Jed for the excellent starting message of this thread. As a constant reader of the Platinum Metals Review, I appreciate it much Peter
On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 4:56 PM, Jed Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote: > James Bowery <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> Is there much on-going LENR work in Pd? >> > > I think most research is still with Pd. Most people who tried Ni could not > make it work. Perhaps because they were not using nanoparticles. > > > >> It would certainly make sense for there to be since we are still in an >> empirical regime -- attempting to get reliable reproduction -- and there >> have been far more experiments conducted to explore the Pd space than Ni. >> > > I agree. That is assuming lessons learned from Pd will be applicable to > Ni. That may not be true for all the lessons. Loading is a big issue with > Pd but it may not be with Ni. > > Some people feel that the continued focus on Pd is a mistake. I think > Peter Gluck has often said that. > > Perhaps Pd will become a practical source of cold fusion heat for a while, > and then it will be supplanted or replaced with Ni. That would be similar > to the role that germanium played in transistors before researchers found > ways to make silicon work, by purifying it and then doping it. > > - Jed > > -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
