I recently posted to Ed Storms this opinion of LENR experimentation which show results consistent with what DGT is seeing.
https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2013/04/08/isotope-table-lenr-tool/ Several medium and heavy elements like calcium, titanium, chromium, manganese, iron, cobalt, copper and zinc have been reported as detected by several researchers, like Tadahiko Mizuno or George Miley. 1. lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MizunoTnucleartra.pdf Did you forget about this one in your library? “Recently, Mizuno, Bockris and others have increasingly focused on so-called “host metal transmutations,” that is, nuclear reactions of the cathode metal itself. The cathode metal was inexplicably neglected for many years. The term “host metal” is misleading. It was an unfortunate choice of words. It implies that the metal acts as a passive structure, holding the hydrogen in place, cramming the deuterons or protons together. The metal is a host, not a participant. The hydrogen does the work. Now, it appears the metal itself is as active as the hydrogen. The metal apparently fissions and fusions in complex reactions. Now the task is to think about the metal, and not just the hydrogen. Theory must explain how palladium can turn part of itself into copper and other elements with peculiar isotopes.” http://news.newenergytimes.net/2013/02/26/lenr-archives-illuminate-scientific-mystery-of-century-part-2/ I consider the fusion/fission idea well justified and on track having been supported by many results. I will document them in detail from your own library if you persist. How about the fission/fusion results from Rossi and Piantelli, especially from Piantelli because of his very good reputation. On Sun, May 5, 2013 at 6:39 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote: > Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: > > If this theory from Ed Storms is to be considered universally applicable, >> experimental results from DGT cannot be ignored. >> > > These results have to be published in detail and then independently > replicated before we can have confidence they are real. There are many cold > fusion claims. Some were never replicated and I think most people have > concluded they were experimental errors. DGT's results may also be > experimental error, in which case it makes no sense take them into account. > The theory will be nonsense. > > > >> DGT has published their ash assays from their reaction test. They see >> both fission and fusion reactions in these results. >> > > Again, we have to know in detail who performed this assay, what > instruments they used, and exactly what results they got. Then these > results must also be independently replicated. > > As far as I know, DGT has only sketched out their results, in nothing more > substantial than a sales presentation. No details have been provided, such > as calibrations. So it is impossible for anyone to take into account their > claims in a theory. You cannot develop a theory based on a few details from > a sales brochure. You can only speculate, and it is probably a waste of > time even doing that. > > This is also largely true of Rossi. > > - Jed > >
