On Feb 8, 2014, at 12:26 PM, Eric Walker wrote:
On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Jones Beene <[email protected]>
wrote:
No, I provide two facts from the Rossi experiments. No gamma. No
tritium. ... These are facts, not assertions.
Jones, your analysis is often insightful. But here you're stating
facts, and then implying assumptions on the basis of those facts as
facts as well. You assume that d+d fusion will result in a gamma,
and then when no gamma is seen, you assume that d+d fusion in NiH is
not possible. You have assumed away some mechanism that might be
fractionating the gamma. And then later you draw upon related
arguments to support this assumption. In repeating this line of
reasoning, you are as guilty of simple, repetitive assertion of your
assumptions as Ed is of his. Simply asserting an assumption to be
true, or drawing upon such an assumption implicitly to reason about
other things, does not make the assumption true.
I suspect d+d fusion is not going on in Rossi's reactor either, but
for reasons other than a missing gamma. We have no evidence one way
or another about tritium, but no specific reason to believe it is
there either.
Eric, no one believes d+d fusion occurs in the Rossi reactor. The d
we are discussing results from p-e-p fusion only. I agree with the
other comments you make.
Ed Storms
In fact, all the important evidence shows the two cannot be similar
in any meaningful way.
This is an overstatement. Can we all adopt a more measured tone?
There is no high energy event in the Rossi effect, or it would have
been seen in the Bianchini radiation monitoring.
Can you provide a link to the Bianchini report? For some reason I'm
having trouble finding it. I assume that this was the appendix
provided in connection with the Elforsk test? The only report I'm
finding deals with a different subject relating to the E-Cat, in
2010 [1].
In the Elforsk test, no radiation was seen. There were obviously
working parameters for the radiation monitor and an upper and lower
threshold beyond which it would not have been effective. I do not
know what type of monitor was used or what these thresholds were.
But what we can deduce from this situation is that no penetrating
radiation was escaping the system. It is a nonsequitor to conclude
anything about the amount of energy being dissipated, let alone to
conclude something about spin coupling as a possible mechanism.
Spin coupling does not apply to the fusion of deuterium into helium.
You are intentionally conflating two unrelated effects.
This is a simple assertion. Can we lay off of these a little?
Eric
[1] http://e-cataustralia.com/pdf/Levi_Bianchini_and_Villa_Reports.pdf
