That's the mini supernova argument. We don't know what's inside the reactor, but we know it doesn't resemble a supernova, so we are obliged to assume that any copper found is just regular copper that migrated. It's way too fanciful to assume otherwise at this point.
Sent from my iPhone. On May 3, 2011, at 9:47, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson <svj.orionwo...@gmail.com> wrote: > Correct me if I have misunderstood the most important relevant facts > being debated here, but I believe Jones is making a strong claim that > the percentages of isotopes allegedly found distributed throughout the > copper found within one of Rossi's used e-cats clearly indicates that > the "Rossi-effect" cannot be nuclear in origin. > > I've thought about this claim for a spell, but for now the only > conclusion I can come up with is: > > Why not? What do any of us really know about how Mother Nature chooses > to go about rearranging isotopes such as those belonging to copper. > For all we know the speculated Rossi-Effect may exploit "natural > environmental conditions" that tend to encourage a natural > distribution of copper isotopes, such as what we tend to find in the > ground. Seems to me that at this stage of the game we just don't have > enough facts at hand to warrant any kind of a definitive conclusion > about what is considered a "nuclear" effect and what isn't. > > Yeah, yeah, we know what the nuclear fizicists will say on the matter. > What do they know. ;-) > > Regards > Steven Vincent Johnson > www.OrionWorks.com > www.zazzle.com/orionworks >
