From: Peter Gluck
Ø And it is ignored totally by those colleagues of our community who still are convinced that the PdD ssytem is the key of understanding all LENRs including those potentially useful. One point that cannot be overlooked is that in the Lalik paper, when considered in the context of cold fusion, has this major significant difference: the locus of gain shifts away from the cathode to the recombiner. This begs the question of whether both locations can utilized for gain, and presents the obvious inference that there are two distinct forms of gain in normal Pd-D. SIDE NOTE. It is also very evident that “nano” has been overlooked in the older Pd-D systems going back to P&F, whereas the recombiner fully implements nano on a ceramic support (see the specs for the commercial devices). This is very reminiscent of Arata-Zhang, Ahern, Takahashi which fully implement nano and see gain which can be explained simply as free catalytic action on the H2 molecule followed by recombination. The authors allude to a partial explanation – which is both obvious and confusing. When you look at burning hydrogen in oxygen – the reaction is actually fairly complex and will only net about 2.3-2.6 eV in mass-energy. This is mainly because the two gases are already combined into stable molecules which must first be dealt with using up most of what could have been over 10 eV had they been monatomic at the start. Using a catalyst to split H2 into monatomic species is not supposed to be gainful in itself. In fact catalysis is often mentioned as the prime example of how the 2nd LoT operates. Yet, it turns out that the entirety of the energy gain which is seen in this work can be explained by a catalyst which indeed splits H2 at no net energy cost, prior to combustion – so that the gain is all due to monatomic hydrogen reactions, which will return about 7 eV or more – which is the COP of nearly 3. This is not a coincidence. In short – all of the net gain in can be accounted for IF catalysis of hydrogen can be accomplished with little or no energy expenditure – which is deeply disturbing to the mainstream of physics – perhaps even more so than cold fusion itself.
