The key point for me to understand in the workings of the Rossi type reactor is the ways and means of how heat is central to the reaction.
Important mysteries to get our arms around are as follows: What is the exact relationship between heat and the nuclear reaction? How does self-sustain mode work without any input other than self-generated reaction heat? How does melt down of the reactor happen as a result of a positive feedback loop with heat as the only driver? If our theory cannot answer these simple questions, it is not the beginnings of a valid reaction explanation. On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> wrote: > I wrote: > > What I would love to see are some (very) simple statements that all can >> agree on that, if tested and found conclusively true or false to everyone's >> satisfaction, would help to sift between the competing explanations. >> > > I offer one such possible statement as an example: > > - Ionization of the atomic hydrogen or deuterium required for a > LENR-type reaction to proceed. > > This seems like something that could be tested with one or more clever > experiments and found to be false. It would probably be harder to prove > that it is true, but that's generally the case with any proposition, so I > don't think it should be a problem here. > > Storms mentions four proposed limitations to any theory: > > - Neutrons do not initiate cold fusion reactions. > - Spontaneous local concentration of energy cannot be the cause of > nuclear reactions. > - Compact clusters of deuterons cannot form spontaneously simply by > occupying sites in palladium that are too small to permit normal bond > lengths. > - For energy to be released from a nuclear reaction, at least two > products must be produced. > > I like these proposed limitations, since they can all be true or false, > but a reservation I have is that some or all of them are quite general and > possibly hard to test. What would be nice is a set of statements that are > very concrete and testable. > > Eric > >
