Steven Krivit wrote: Why? Nuclear track counts in a _dry_ SSNTD as in the 2009 SPAWAR >>> paper http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MosierBosscharacteri.pdf , and >>> >> as Abd is planning now following Horace's advice, are much easier to >>> measure, much more sensitive, and much less disputable proofs of LENRs >>> than calorimetry aren't they? >>> >> > Jed wrote: > > Not in my opinion. >> > > > Jed, > > From what do you base your opinion that excess heat is a more convincing > proof of a LENR reaction than "Nuclear track counts in a _dry_ SSNTD as in > the 2009 SPAWAR > paper"? >
I did not say "less convincing," although as far as I know, so far fewer people are convinced by the SPAWAR experiment than the excess heat experiments. However, as you see in the text you quoted, I said that in my opinion CR-39 is not "more sensitive" or "less disputable." That is not quite the same as "less convincing." SENSITIVITY Good calorimetry is more sensitive because cold fusion produces more heat than neutrons (and sometimes, probably, no neutrons), and because a calorimeter surrounds the whole cell captures all the heat, indisputably, whereas as far as I know neutron detectors miss a lot. DISPUTABLE Given all the disputation it seems self evident that CR-39 is disputable. People argue about "hamburger" versus actual tracks, about problems with etching, and tracks induced by cosmic rays and so on, whereas there are no serious, published, sane arguments claiming that calorimetry does not work (except Shanahan). After the conference in Italy several people expressed admiration of the expertise of the people using CR-39, but remarked that the stuff is a nightmare compared to more modern electronic methods of detecting neutrons. At a high enough s/n ratio, neutrons, tritium or any nuclear signal is totally convincing. It goes without saying that the heat Mizuno measured by evaporating water from buckets during the heat after death event is totally convincing. That is either a lie or indisputable proof of a non-chemical reaction. I cannot imagine how anyone argues with tritium at 50 times background. Ed Storms pointed out that the SPAWAR CR-39 sometimes has millions of holes that are obviously not "hamburger" and that originate from the cathode (you can tell from the direction of the holes) and that is indisputably a nuclear effect. I agree of course, but heat is more reliable, easier to detect and a better place to start, in my opinion. Especially heat with no input power. I suppose even Shanahan and Garwin cannot argue with that . . . but you never know with those two. - Jed
