Jones, it is possible that helium was observed and was originally discounted as error. That happens.
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 11:07 AM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote: > > > Surprise, surprise. > > > > Fresh on the heels of a paper which suggests that lots of helium should > have been found, Rossi suddenly reveals that yes, we found it but are just > now taking the opportunity to reveal that we found it. > > > > http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/04/08/rossi-helium-found-in-e-cat-reaction/ > > > > I not believe this new revelation is credible, based on the appearance of > the paper and the timing, since he has never before said that helium was > discovered. > > > > The guy is desperate for credibility. > > > > > > > > *From:* Bob Higgins > > > > Jones, What is your evidence for your statement: > > > > "The Lugano isotope data, even if it could be believed, completely negates > the entire scenario since Li-7 is NOT depleted according to the Lugano > report - but instead is converted to Li-6. " > > > > First of all, there is a crude assay based on the size of the pure sphere > - and no evidence of large imbalance of Li-7 elsewhere. More importantly, > 85 years of nuclear physics can present no thermal process where the bulk > isotopic distribution varies more than a few percent per stage, yet the > Lugano report, if it can be believed shows extremely pure Li-6 appearing in > what is essentially one stage in one sample – many orders of magnitude > purer than any know process can deliver. > > > > There are three possibilities – either the starting material was enriched > in pure Li-6, which is most likely, or else the process of heat generation > has converted the missing Li-7 into Li-6, which is endothermic, and > unlikely to have happened in a process where excess heat is generated. The > third possibility is that the ash was spiked with pure isotope. > > > > Neither of these possibilities can in any way support a conclusion of > lithium-7 plus proton fusion, especially with the lack of the expected > gamma, and no indication of helium. > > > > To say that Levi’s crew did not test for helium is a complete cop-out and > only indicative of further incompetence on the part of this team. With this > claimed excess heat over 30 days there should have been a large amount of > helium, actual overpressure: that is - if lithium fusion were taking place. > A sample of gas should at least have been stored for later testing. > > > > Most likely conclusion – Rossi understood from the start that lithium-6 is > the active isotope, and he provided fuel which was highly enriched, and at > the same time, provided a different fuel for the testing of the “before” > sample. Only Rossi handled this fuel. He had complete control, and no one > complained. BTW - The cost of that much lithium-6 (about 50 milligrams) > available from several suppliers, is about $10. > > > > Jones > > > > > > What I drew from the report was the only thing that can be concluded was > that the 7Li is more commensurate to the 6Li in the ash as compared to the > fuel. There was no mass assay that determined how much total Li was > present in the ash compared to the fuel. We know that physically, a lot of > the Li will be on the walls of the alumina tube, so we don't have any idea > of the absolute depletion of Li mass in the reaction. > > > > While it is possible that the 7Li is converted to 6Li, it is only one of > the possibilities. The ICP-MS analysis is a full volume analysis and > showed both Li isotopes near equal in percentage in the ash. How these > isotopes became nearly equal is just blind speculation at the moment > without further experimental data. All of the possibilities for the ratio > change from fuel to ash should be laid out and the plausibility of each > examined. > > > > Bob >
