On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 9:25 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:
There must be an underlying psychological reason for thinking this way > because it is not based on logic or experience; a prejudice in judgment or > a unfounded distaste may be at play. Both Rossi and Defkalion have released > this isotopic dependency in their technical papers and patents. > > > > What basic can support as judgment of "red herring." Clearly it is not a > scientific or logical one. > > > > Can you explain the reasoning behind this surprising pronouncement? > > I think this is a valid request. I will try my best. Hopefully you will do the same for my questions. The reason I suspect that it is a red herring (which is different than pronouncing it a red herring) is that to the best of my knowledge different isotopes of nickel have the same charge and electron densities. I suspect that electron screening may be at play in increasing the rate of p+d tunneling. Different numbers of neutrons would have no effect in this instance, to my knowledge. This huch may well be incorrect. But it is logical, in the sense that it uses logical reasoning to connect the topic of "isotopes of nickel" back to other things that have been discussed, by saying that the the topic may be irrelevant to what we're looking at here for reasons A an B. That there were details about isotopes mentioned in patents doesn't mean much to me, because I've seen some weird patents, and people seem to be willing to drop all kinds of details into them. On the other hand, the question of nickel isotopes may be relevant. The reason I say I doubt there is an isotope effect is because I don't know for sure and don't have a strong opinion. Eric
