Page 28: *The ash has a different texture than the powder-like fuel by having grains of different sizes, probably developed from the heat. The grains differ in element composition, and we would certainly have liked to analyze several more grains with SIMS, but the limited amount of ash being available to us didn’t make that possible. The main result from our sample is nevertheless clear, that the isotopic composition deviates dramatically from the natural composition for both Li and Ni. *
It is hard to accept the necessity that just a handful of particles were provided for isotopic analysis. Just two or three of these grains were nickel particles. It is unwise to draw any type of pattern from such a small sample. The testers got everything that they could from industrial heat and that wasn't near enough for a decent scientific report. The audience that the testers were aiming their spin at was Elforsk and their CEO. Why, they want to get up to their ears in well funded LENR research. Their presentation of data was not for Rossi's benefit or that of industrial heat; it was for their own benefit and the good of LENR as they view it through their own interests. For this game of the century, everybody wants their seat at the table. On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 12:19 AM, H Veeder <hveeder...@gmail.com> wrote: > Can this be used to challenge Pomp's claim that the ash was faked by > commercially available enriched isotopes? > > Most people on this list seem to be very good about raising technical > objections to criticisms of the calorimetry, but they counter Pomp's claim > with non-technical arguments about how it would be irrational of Rossi to > fake the ash. > > Harry > > On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 7:50 PM, Robert Ellefson <vortex-h...@e2ke.com> > wrote: > >> Recall that the bulk results show 57% Li-6 enrichment, vs. 92% surface >> enrichment. I believe the higher fraction of Li-6 on the surface is the >> result of starvation of the reaction cycle resulting in an excess of Li-6 >> as >> compared to the steady-state balance during operation, which is reflected >> in >> the bulk composition. >> >> Read these messages for further details: >> http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg98020.html (msg has >> an >> error, should read ni62, not ni68) >> http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg98350.html >> http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg98422.html >> >> -Bob >> >> >> _____________________________________________ >> From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] >> Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2014 4:35 PM >> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com >> Subject: RE: Isotope conversion completeness, was RE: >> [Vo]:Pomp weighs in >> >> >> Ok - I can buy the cyclic reaction, but how do you explain >> the great preponderance of Li-6 in the ash, compared to all other >> isotopes? >> That does not indicate a cycle so much as a major shift... and where are >> the >> intermediaries in the nearly pure sample - which would indicate one >> neutron >> at a time? Surely you are not suggesting multi-body? >> >> _____________________________________________ >> From: Robert Ellefson >> >> Jones, >> >> I can only give you the assurances that I >> received from the report itself. All of the claims I am making are coming >> from there. Pages 28 and 53 describe the ICP methods as involving the >> entire sample mass. >> >> I do not believe this is indicative of >> fraud. I believe this indicates a cyclic reaction is occurring that >> results >> in a steady-state heat-generating reaction that cycles between Li-7 and >> Li-6 >> and results in Ni-62 enrichment. I put some more thoughts into this >> message: >> >> http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg98422.html >> >> >> -Bob >> >> >> >> _____________________________________________ >> From: Jones Beene >> [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] >> Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2014 4:16 PM >> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com >> <mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com> >> Subject: RE: Isotope conversion >> completeness, was RE: [Vo]:Pomp weighs in >> >> Let me put it this way, if what you say is >> true - that the sample tested to 99.3% purity of Ni-62, then we have a >> major >> problem. Are you certain? >> >> ...this information is very important, so >> please assure us that is true. >> >> Jones >> >> From: Robert Ellefson >> First, as I explain in this >> (rather-long-winded) mail from yesterday, the ENTIRE ASH SAMPLE BULK was >> analyzed by ICP-MS as consisting of 99.3% enriched Ni-62. >> >> ( see: >> http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg98350.html ) >> >> Allow me to repeat this >> crucially-important >> point: The 2.13mg ash sample contained 2.12mg of PURE Nickel-62. >> >> Only the SEM/EDS and ToF-SIMS methods are >> restricted to analyzing the surface-layer composition. >> >> >
