Mark Gibbs <[email protected]> wrote: Yes, I meant not significant ... that was what I took away from Bob > Higgins' comment: >
> On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 9:53 AM, Bob Higgins <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> >> >> From a product perspective, don’t forget that CRT’s produce X-rays in >> this energy range. The CRTs were later designed to have leaded glass to >> minimize the emissions, but they first shipped with the emissions. Even >> many of the older high voltage rectifier tubes produced X-rays. So, there >> is nothing about having a primary reaction channel yielding low energy >> gamma that would prevent a shipping product. >> > Not to put words in Bob's mouth . . . I think he meant that many devices produce gamma rays, so this would not preclude the commercial use of a cold fusion reactor that produces gammas. The reactor would not be dangerous, as long as it is properly shielded. However, this does not imply that the gamma rays are not "significant" from physics point of view. They are significant, meaning "important" or "compelling, convincing." Coming from a cold fusion reactor, these gamma rays definitely prove that a nuclear reaction is occurring. They could not be produced by a mechanism similar to the one in a CRT or an x-ray machine. They are "significant" in the mathematical sense as well. Meaning well above the noise. They are not surprising. Not to me, anyway. - Jed
