This time next year - if a delayed Rossi demo has finally taken place by then (amidst all of the predictable angst from the LENR continent). then . in addition to the "me-too" group, who claim to be co-inventors, and the other pretenders who come crawling out of the woodwork like Bob Park and his pet simian 'Randi' . saying "told you so" . <g> . there will be a further contingent of highly credentialed PhDs looking at past work, and slapping themselves on their collective foreheads.
These Peter-Principled geniuses will be the "hydrogen storage" folks. They had a huge missed opportunity. Lest I be misunderstood please realize this preface: Chemistry is fully conservative. However, that is not the end of story. Best I can tell, DoE and Universities have sunk half a billion into hydrogen storage since the Arab Oil embargo 40 years ago - and without much real success. These experiments probably missed something very important in the process, since they "knew" deep down in their hearts at the start, that LENR was "pathological science" and all of their background teaches that extra energy cannot be involved in low energy processes, so why look for it ... !?! The reversible process of storing and retrieving hydrogen from proton conductors, at least from a few materials which are thought to be extremely efficient anyway - is indeed overunity IF (big if) you can provide a way (even an inadvertent way) to replenish the local zero point field via a non-chemical process, when doing this load/unload process sequentially and rapidly. IOW the process seems to be at least 99% efficient with no extra effort - and that is because it is really 120% when optimized via such a back door route (to non-chemical gain). Essentially this is what the new Mills' BLP paper boils down to, once you can muster the courage to read it several times in order to be able to summarize what "Mills is really saying." Once again: chemistry is fully conservative. We must always preface these remarks with that. Valence electron manipulation can provide no long term gain via reversible chemistry. but . catch-22, a hybrid process can provide gain at the expense of the zero point field IF (big if) you provide any way (even an inadvertent way) to replenish the local zero point field via a non-chemical process. Redundant ground states may be one of the non-chemical ways to do it - and others ways, which involve the nucleus or quark manipulation - are definitely in that category. Is there an echo in here? Jones
