Why would you believe DGT could create such a field in the apparatus they have shown?
Because both Ken Sholders and proton-21 produced cold fusion and monopole fields using sparks. On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 11:30 PM, Edmund Storms <stor...@ix.netcom.com>wrote: > > On Feb 3, 2014, at 8:42 PM, Eric Walker wrote: > > Ed: "the Rossi claim for transmutation producing energy is simply WRONG." > > Jones: "Note that of late, Rossi's own comments (to JoNP) show that he is > no longer pushing the transmutation of nickel to copper, and has doubts > about any theory. In fact, we know that Ni -> Cu cannot be the prime > reaction for the reasons which have been hashed and rehashed- particularly, > the lack of radioactive ash." > > Ed: "the claim for intense magnetic fields by DGT are so implausible and > unsupported by any evidence they can be safely ignored." > > The confidence with which these statements are made seems misplaced. > > > Why do you say this, Eric? Do you have evidence I do not know about? Can > you give a reason why the statements are not correct? On the other hand, I > can give reasons why I think the statements are correct. If I were > uncertain, I would say so. However, I think my reasons are strong enough to > give confidence. What are your reasons for not agreeing? Science is based > on choices, not on accepting every claim. The choices are based on > knowledge. Sometimes they are wrong, but at least the reasons are clear. > What are your reasons for believing Rossi and DGT? > > As for transmutation producing energy, if the rate is great enough, > transmutation will produce detectable power. The problem is getting > sufficient rate. No measurement shows a sufficient rate can be produced. > In addition, the huge Coulomb barrier stops the reaction, which eliminates > the claim unless a method to overcome it is identified. I have suggested a > method, but the rate would nevertheless be small. > > As for the magnetic field, this is based on a statement by DGT without any > evidence being published. This is hearsay evidence. It has no value even in > law, much less in science. Of course, a small magnetic effect might occur > or a small magnetic field might alter the rate. However, no magnetic field > can be created at the atomic level that is known to cause a nuclear > reaction. Some very intense magnetic fields have been generated without > producing fusion, which is the process we are discussing. Why would you > believe DGT could create such a field in the apparatus they have shown? > > Ed Storms > > > Eric > > >
