Let me refine this slightly:

> But you are missing the main point. If gammas are seen at all, and
especially at the low levels you mention - then it proves without question
that deuterium is active for nuclear reactions at low energy.

>Gammas are not seen with hydrogen. Hydrogen is not active for LENR. 


Yet we do agree that Hydrogen is active for excess heat in the same way that
deuterium is active, so it is easy to miss the precise point. 

Hydrogen may be even more active for heat than deuterium, which essentially
is the Rossi breakthrough, but the M.O. - the way the excess heat turns up
is not the same. Before Rossi - we all thought deuterium was more active
because helium was seen. 

Hydrogen does not produce noticeable radioactivity in the short term nor
helium. 

Which is part of the premise behind the original posting. Now, the reaction
which produces the excess heat with hydrogen could involve quarks (among
many possibilities) and quarks are found in the nucleus, but that does not
necessarily equate with a nuclear reaction because the IRH (inverted Rydberg
hydrogen) state, which would permit can be characterized as much as a mass
of quarks (quark soup) as a mass of protons. 

That is my interpretation of Miley/Holmlid and the dense hydrogen state. I
don't think the average vortician appreciates how dense a 2D state can be. 

Which brings up another point - does anyone know Miley's take on Rossi???

Jones


Reply via email to