Jones, You are making specious arguments that are below the quality level of your posts.
Yes, you are correct and Jed is correct in the arguments that the diffusion of He and Argon in Miles' experiments are essentially constants - note the (s)! When the amount on the inside and outside are far from equilibrium, each gas will diffuse with its own constant (actually it is an exponential constant for each). Jed is correct that diffusion from the outside would provide a clear set of constant rates in the blind experiments and the ones with excess heat. This constant rate signature will not correlate with excess heat. These arguments have been made ad nauseam in peer review of Miles' work. Nothing that was said in the Miles communique that you posted upsets that peered review result at all; in fact, it clearly points out that Miles knew well what he was up against when he designed the experiment. The Miles data stands. At the moment, the small stones you are throwing at it are futile strikes with blinders on. Your attempt to dismiss the Claytor tritium results as being "high voltage" is again specious. The voltages being used are not capable of producing hot fusion. In the dense plasma created, the mean free path of the electrons is very short and electrons or protons never attain anywhere near the energy that the source *could* provide in a high vacuum. Why do you think that x-ray tubes need really high vacuum?... to prevent these collisions that slow down the electrons. Again, you think a single specious sentence can wipe away real, peer reviewed experimental results. You are so determined that your theory of no fusion is correct that you will make up stories in your mind to wash away the good data taken by truly competent experimentalists. You have lost your open mind. Ni-H could well be different. We will just have to wait for more data. Mizuno is just a good data point with its own flaws and insights. Bob Higgins On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 1:34 PM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote: > I’m sorry but that is not what Miles seems to be saying now. You are > putting words in his mouth. In any event, the rate measured is incredibly > low – well below any confidence level and well below atmospheric levels - > so it is of negligible value. It is milliwatt level, in a world begging for > kilowatts. > > > > IMO - the only result that matters to most of Science, going forward, will > be the result of experiments of greater than 10 watts, and hopefully 100 > watts or more. > > > > AFAIK – Mizuno is the only player in this game in 2014, insofar as the > putative fusion of deuterium at the 100 watt level is concerned. His > results on this issue of helium, or lack thereof, will stand out as of > highest importance - since it could well be the case that QM allows a small > level of fusion at extremely low levels but with a reverse economy of scale > that prevents it above the watt level. > > > > > > *From:* Jed Rothwell > > > > Jones Beene wrote: > > > > For the collection flasks he could have used anything. It was too late. > > Helium diffuses into the electrolysis cell itself during the operation. > > > > Yes, some does come in. This amount can be measured in a null experiment. > It is the background amount. As it happens, Miles had many null experiments > with no heat. > > > > > > Diffusion is based on amu. Argon is 10 times heaver than helium and it > diffuses much more slowly through a material - when both can be diffused. > However, argon does not diffuse into Pyrex at all and helium does. > > > > As I said, he looked for other gasses as well, and he looked for the > overall amount of helium, which is to say the amount that diffuses in when > you do nothing (let the cell sit there), or when you conduct electrolysis > but there is no excess heat. When there is no excess heat the amount that > diffuses in is always much less than what is measured after there is excess > heat. In other words excess heat produces significantly more than the > background from diffusion, but much less than the atmospheric background. > > > > Other objections have been raised and met. For example, some people said > that perhaps the excess heat changed conditions and allowed more helium to > defuse in. As Miles pointed out, and as I repeated in my report, this > cannot be the case because in some tests with no excess heat the overall > input power was greater than the positive tests, and the cell was hotter. > > > > - Jed > > >
