Jones, there is no ash because no one has looked for deuterium.
Everyone who might find enough deuterium to detect is focused on
transmutation. If they now find deuterium, their favorite explanation
will go up in smoke and the patents that claim to need nickel will be
useless. I'm trying to get someone to look for deuterium and report
the results. So far, no luck. Until this test is made, no conclusion
is worth accepting.
Ed Storms
On May 21, 2013, at 3:33 PM, Jones Beene wrote:
From: Bob Higgins
I don't understand why 62Ni would make a difference in the
reaction. Are we now seriously considering that the Ni nucleus
participates in the nuclear reaction that causes the heat
IMO this is a “Mills type” reaction (BLP), involving deep hydrogen
redundancy - and the Ni does not transmute into another element.
This particular isotope is simply a much better catalyst for deep
redundancy at the 300 eV level. This mechanism goes beyond Randell
Mills theory into QM and wave function collapse, which Mills rejects.
Rossi and Focardi apparently believe that nickel transmutes to
copper, but the proof offered indicates otherwise. Others believe
that protons fuse to deuterium. There is no proof of that.
Many qualified observers, at this stage, have markedly different
opinions.
However, it is worth repeating that if it is a nuclear reaction –
there should be gamma radiation and/or radioactive ash. There is none.
Jones
