Storms’ response echoes perfectly my own feelings as I wrote previously. There is a massive a priori assumption built in to their hypothesis. This is not science. We have 30 years’ of data with by far the XSH being the most reliable measure of nuclear mechanisms. Different types of calorimetry? Yes. Bring it on. We are building the ones we spoke about at iccf24.
These will be scrutinized by a very credible advisor. I wish Duncan, and other experts would all chime in to our calorimeter design, physics, instrumentation and uncertainty budget. I fully intend to open source the calorimetry part of our research as we wish it to be as robust as is possible.
Note my day job is calorimetry, although in much different types of systems. There is significant cross over from this experience.