On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 8:37 AM, Jones Beene <[email protected]> wrote:
Actually – if you remember from TP1, the Swedes did test the powder with > XRF. ... They did not report any UV signature. They should have if Mills > reaction is involved as you seem to be suggesting. Personally, I would not suggest that Mills's reaction is involved in this instance, or in any other instance. I'm all but convinced against it. I only refrain from saying it's nonsense out of an appreciation that I do not have the background, training or understanding of the relevant physics to say something like that. (The "you" above must be referring to Bob Cook.) The x-rays and UV/EUV I had in mind would have been emitted from the core of the device while in operation. I assume there would have had to have been an open section in the wall of the E-Cat along with a windowless detector in order to detect something in the range of tens of eVs, as Bob Higgins has been describing, or even soft x-rays. Rossi was not pleased- as the Swedes were not supposed to report this test. About the XRF I assume. I'm curious where this detail is documented. I do not recall Mats Lewans mentioning it, but I might have missed it. Eric
