I've been accused of making false comments about the early nickel hydrogen work of Focardi, Piantelli, and several other scientists. In particular, the whole concept of how abnormally large quantities or fast rates of hydrogen absorption into nickel can produce an "excited" state of fuel is said to be bunk that I've made up out of thin air.
Here is a thread where the early excess heat, particle emissions, and other results of NiH is being debated between, ironically, someone I dare not mention his name, Jed Rothwell, and a number of other users. The researcher arguing in support of Focardi and Piantelli's work
http://www.mail-archive.com/vo…@eskimo.com/msg33306.html
One contributor in the discussion above even provided the following link which details how Focardi and Piantelli modified their experiment to refute the claims of another party that tried to claim their own test dismissed the NiH technology. Please note you have to scroll down a good ways on this page.
http://www.newenergytimes.com/…2008/NET29-8dd54geg.shtml
A large number of links to papers can be found at those two links. More can be found in Jed Rothwell's online library.
If someone is willing to do the research, they will see that I'm not making up fictitious imaginary concepts when I talk about thermal shocks, pressure shocks, excitation of fuel, nickel pre-processing, (annealing, vacuum degassing, heating in hydrogen, acid etching, etc), and levels of hydrogen absorption BEYOND WHAT MAINSTREAM PHYSICS EXPECTS that seems to result -- according to the authors of these papers -- a wide range of anomalous effects.
If they are right or wrong (take my opinion of their results seeming solid and real with a grain of salt if you wish since I'm not an engineer/scientist) or somewhere in between, I didn't make up these concepts or "invent" them to spread disinformation. These were the basic concepts that Me356 described using (sometimes with slightly different terminology) to produce fuel that could "breathe" -- absorb or desorb high quantities of hydrogen -- and produce excess heat.
If you take Piantelli and Focardi's results and extend them to a system that doesn't use bulk nickel wire or rods -- so more than perhaps only .1% of the mass of the nickel samples could participate in the reaction -- the so called Rossi Effect seems like an obvious result.
So call Piantelli and Focardi and the other scientists who worked with them hoaxers or fakers or deluded individuals. But, for the record, I didn't make up stuff up out of thin air. You have access to the source papers that are available on various internet websites AND the descriptions from Me356 ON THIS VERY FORUM.
But if you want to continue describing me as someone making up stuff out of thin air, feel free to do so. You're absolutely free to insult me in anyway you so desire: that's crystal clear to me now. With this post anyone who is honest and sincere can do a little research and see that all these concepts originated a long time ago, even if they are described using slightly different terminology today.