The table is for a few particles, how many and is a view of a thin surface of these particles no?. The pictures I was mentioning was from another anlysis (X rays) that I think looks deeper inside the particles no? and they seam to indicate another picture to my mind, it is really messy and I would not try to draw to much conclusions from this. To my mind there is to many options for natural conclusions to draw. Anyway would be good to see this result discussed officially by expert in a good way in stead of the usual mud throwing activity that is torning the academics, at least officially. Anyhow I'm a noob when it comes to these matters so take all this with a grain of natrium cloride.
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 10:50 PM, Jones Beene <[email protected]> wrote: > Stefan, > > > > Go to page 42 Appendix 1 Table one > > > > It would not matter is this sample is the one and only particle in the > entire sample which looked like this, the probability of this happening > even once is astronomical. > > > > There are only two possibilities within the realm of reason > > 1) A false sample of the fuel was provided, which was not really what > was in the working reactor, or > > 2) The ash was spiked after the reaction had been run. > > > > In both cases Rossi handled the operation. > > > > The authors state specifically that Rossi intervened to load the fuel and > to remove the fuel sample at the end of the run. > > > > If there is a lot of excess heat, then Rossi may have submitted a starting > fuel sample which was faked. Which means that his secret sauce actually > includes 6Li. > > > > He would have done this to confuse the situation so that his secret was > seen to be the ash, and not the other way around. But it could have > happened either way. > > > > *From:* Stefan Israelsson Tampe > > > > Im staring at p 45, fig 4b / ash and is comparing with p 44, fig 3b, So is > it that much difference? > > I don't understand that we can argue about data, we really shouled have > pictures from at least 20 randomly selected particles to say anything, it > is suggested that Rossi have bought the isotope 62 as Jones mentioned, but > it was all in the fuel as well no? enlighten me becasue you couied get > 100:s of different variations on the theme, at least I don't get it why we > can do science on that scarce amount of data. >
