Eric,
Again, I apologize for any inference that this is personal or related precisely to your prior post. My comment was intended to show only that: 1) LENR is NOT a known nuclear fusion reaction since all known fusion reactions produce gamma radiation. 2) Since there is a novel reaction at play, then there is no valid reason to suggest that there is only one novel reaction which is possible in LENR - other than some vague notion of parsimony which is always wrong when it comes to QM. 3) If we admit that QM should in principle allow for novel variants of all rare nuclear reactions, and there are a dozen or more of these novel reactions, then there are at least that many different types of LENR reactions which are possible, and certainly not limited to any constraint based on historical precedence- i.e. Pd-D coming along first historically in the progression towards Ni-H. In short – all of this goes back to the ongoing debate on Vortex: on the question that there is only one basic type of reaction, and that Ni-H is a type of Pd-D. This is complete nonsense IMO especially when we reduce the argument to the fact that even Pd-D is NOT THE KNOWN fusion reaction of nuclear science prior to 1989. With QM in the picture – all bets are off, and instead of parsimony we expect added complexity. QM is anti-Ockham. Most disturbing for the theorist is that in any experiment there could be several if not many types of gainful QM reactions taking place at the same time. From: Eric Walker Does either of these statements contradict anything I've said or assumed? I hope my outlining of my assumptions demonstrates that I do not have the typical fusion branches in mind. I have the general notion of two nucleons combining to create a larger nucleon with less mass and a release of energy. The branches would need to be different. Eric
