*I have read all the info on the Ni/H reactor that I can get my hands on, and that all produce transmuted elements, they don't use deuterium, and they don't produce tritium, the hallmark of deuterium fusion.* *The Ni/H reactor does not fuse deuterium to produce heat. Without a doubt, transmutation of elements is the source of excess heat in the Ni/H reactor*
Axil, while I respect your knowledge and enthusiasm for this subject, you seem to be going out on a limb that is bordering on unscientific when you say stuff like *"without a doubt"* based on only a small handful of papers coming from only a small handful of researchers who are almost all involved in proprietary ventures where information is either A) selectively reported or B) not reported at all. You *must* doubt if you wish to label yourself as a scientific-minded person. Who has looked for and reported on tritium findings in NiH systems? Also all light water systems contain some small percentage of deuterium; we don't yet know if that is involved in the excess heat reactions or not. No one has tested for post-reaction deuterium products in NiH reactions either. Even if they have been tested for to a limited extent (do link the papers if you could), there has to be widespread replication for any of this to be relevant. You can't just focus on a small handful of studies and declare some kind of pseudo-victory. Corroborating replication is at the very heart of experimental science.Testing for these things (ash, etc.) is highly non-trivial and takes time to hash out. I contend that we just don't know as much about NiH systems as you are claiming. We have an enigma on our hands; lets exercise some humility. Regards. All the best. On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 8:27 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: > *"The critique is of a Ni bar experiment performed by Focardi, Habel, and > Piantelli."* > > The paper that was critiqued was written in 1998, the paper that I > reference was produced in 2012. > > Maybe things have changed in that 14 year period; ya think? > > I have read all the info on the Ni/H reactor that I can get my hands on, > and that all produce transmuted elements, they don't use deuterium, and > they don't produce tritium, the hallmark of deuterium fusion. > > The Ni/H reactor does not fuse deuterium to produce heat. Without a doubt, > transmutation of elements is the source of excess heat in the Ni/H reactor. > > "*You do not know of everything in the literature, or everything said at > various conferences. Neither do I, but evidently I heard some things you > missed out on. There is no "default" here, and the answer is not an > absolute yes or no. Piantelli is not that well established. He has not been > independently replicated, so strictly speaking, nothing has been > established. When 3 to 5 other researchers have confirmed the heat and the > transmutations, then we will know with confidence the results are real."* > > The default is I choose to accept Piantelli's experimental results over > your opinions because you have not proved your case. > > Deuterium LENR reactions and the Ni/H reaction are two completely > different reactions. Any opinions formed in decades old conversations about > Deuterium Fusion cannot be applied to the current Ni/H reactors. > > No developer of the Ni/H reactor states that deuterium fusion is the > source of their excess heat. They all state that transmutation of elements > are the source of excess heat; this all inclusive list includes Miley. > > You have this religious like fixation on deuterium fusion that cannot be > applied to every LENR system. How can deuterium factor into a system that > does not contain deuterium??? > > > > > On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 4:44 PM, Jed Rothwell <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I don't see a any criticism of Piantelli's experimental procedure in the >>> paper you provided. >>> >> The critique is of a Ni bar experiment performed by Focardi, Habel, and >> Piantelli. The technique is the same. Others including McKubre have >> critiqued the technique for similar reasons, although I do not recall they >> published. >> >> So by default, the proof I provided stands true and conclusive. >>> >> By default? By default you have read every paper in the literature and >> talked to McKubre and every scientist who has discussed this work? How did >> you do that, by ESP? >> >> You do not know of everything in the literature, or everything said at >> various conferences. Neither do I, but evidently I heard some things you >> missed out on. There is no "default" here, and the answer is not an >> absolute yes or no. Piantelli is not that well established. He has not been >> independently replicated, so strictly speaking, nothing has been >> established. When 3 to 5 other researchers have confirmed the heat and the >> transmutations, then we will know with confidence the results are real. >> >> Nobody wins by default in experimental science. Everyone has to play >> through to the end. >> >> - Jed >> >> >
