Thanks for the support.
I would like to remind you that LENR occurs in an apparently ordinary material without any outside treatment other than having D made available. The special condition is a feature present in the normal physical-chemical structure. None of the conditions you describe are required. Therefore, you are not describing LENR. You are discussing an entirely different phenomenon. I would like to focus on what we know to be true about LENR.
The root cause is presently invisible because it occurs on an atomic scale. We are forced to discover its characteristics using an indirect approach. That is why we are having so much difficulting agreeing on anything. The event is too small to see, it is too unusual to explain mathematically, and it is so rarely produced that we do not have enough information to understand its cause. We need to make good guesses. So far, the guesses have been useless. The question is "Can the people here do better"? The jury is still out.
The atomic scale has many variables and the videos where meant to take a step few steps back on the wilderness hike that you analogized, as it relates to ionic hydrogen compounds of Alkaline metals. These too can be considered apparently ordinary materials, but that is just a matter of subjective perception.
What is the definition of a ordinary material and how is that an argument on the topic of the LENR phenomenon?
You yourself have suggested having nanoscale topological "cracks" seem to increase the probability of this phenomenon. So I am confused about that statement you made on ordinary materials?
From all the research I have done, the "hot" catalytic gaseous experiments are the least reliable and hardest to reproduce. It seems they are just a distraction from the original works going back as far as 1920s with Paneth, Peters and Tandberg. I subscribe to the hypothesis of a more electrical sun than Arthur Eddington predicts and there are some interesting theories that PM Robatialle and others have suggested.
If video format works better for you click this link.
In all of the experiments that have confirmed results, alkaline metals are used along with D2 or H2, as well as an electrified cathodic substrate which seems to form "events".
You refer to it as NAS, but they could as easily be called dark space for all I care since they are not well defined.
The point is these events seem to produce radiative effects and material byproducts previously unknown by our predictions. There are however many people who have good guess predictions on these things in mathematical formalization like the Schwinger limit, or in observable experiments like the collapsing of a field in a incompressible fluid which exceed predictions.
We can throw out good guesses all day long, but unless they are testable, aren't they useless?
So again the question remains. What are the purposed experiments which can help us eliminate any variables to better explain the root of these phenomena?
It's kind of silly that the majority of the arguments in the fusion space are about theory. We use electricity because we are aware of how the predictable patterns of ED physics which give us useful technologies in our lives. However, our best theoretical explanation of it's exact details are still very paradoxically fuzzy.
Perhaps the same can be said about Fusion with it's potential usefulness to generate abundant energy for humanity?
Anyways, glad to have some dialogue with you good sir.
I hope your are able to enjoy every present moment to the fullest of your abilities.