Hello Peter,
Here is the citation on the LENR site. The fact that it is an older paper should not diminish the fact that it was in Mills’ interest to ignore both the results and the Lehigh technique. https://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/GernertNnascenthyd.pdf <https://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/GernertNnascenthyd.pdf&sa=U&ei=e0DdUq3AIsTgyQHUyoGIAg&ved=0CAYQFjAA&client=internal-uds-cse&usg=AFQjCNG_00ZwiWP5nfDF2NVjs0l9AOKQmQ> &sa=U&ei=e0DdUq3AIsTgyQHUyoGIAg&ved=0CAYQFjAA&client=internal-uds-cse&usg=AFQjCNG_00ZwiWP5nfDF2NVjs0l9AOKQmQ As Dave immediately recognized – this is the obvious way that one validates a redundant ground state. The reason that Mills does not now do validation in this way could be because he realizes that it does not really validate his contention well enough - that there are various progressive steps in redundancy. Plus the value is not exactly the predicted value, and it is off by a significant fraction (55 eV instead of 54.4 eV). At the time that slight variation seemed to be within acceptable limits, and in fact Thermacore said it was “predicted by Mills” but now, with better testing twenty years later - the truth may be “inconvenient” … and the true value may indeed be the higher energy level number, which is not a Rydberg multiple as Mills’ theory suggests that it should be. Yes – that is an opinion and a reinterpretation - so we can leave it like that for now, and agree to disagree until more is known. Jones
