I would like to reset the tenor of this recent discussion - back towards our jointly shared goal on this forum of finding the truth about this important breakthrough of A. Rossi.
I have come down too hard on Jed, who we all know is articulate and bright and seldom this wrong. However, there comes a point in any give-and-take when things can get out hand and it leaves a deep scar on the record, as preserved in the archives. None of us come away as victors in such a debate. For this I am as guilty as anyone by not being more moderate in framing the argument and the response. In this recent flare-up, being on the correct side of a debate, which is not always the case by any means, has no rewards. As we all know, to be human is to be imperfect; and all of us post in haste and wish we had spent more time with reading the literature, or in the underlying assumptions; or in my case most recently - conflating power vs energy. Mea Culpa. "None of us is as smart as all of us" is my credo for participation in these debates - and we all are seeking the same kind of clearer understanding in the end. So please - let's drop the contention on this particular point, with all (or most) of us agreeing (or at least acknowledging the overwhelming probability) that the natural ratio of isotopes as seen on earth CANNOT be a universal ratio. That is simply not the way that cosmology works; even if we want it to be different, for the purpose of Rossi's credibility. Furthermore, if and when a natural ratio is seen in nuclear debris, the most likely conclusion to be derived from that is that this particular isotope was NOT involved in whatever reaction created the anomaly. My apologies to other vorticians for the wasted bandwidth, and the edginess of the heated exchanges. This is crucible from which understanding emerges (we hope). Jones
