Another little calculation to consider. I'm trying to figure out if we can put some kind of figure on how much power is being generated if we assume a nuclear origin for this phenomenon.
Let's assume for the moment that the voltage generated is like the voltage on a capacitor. Where can the charge generating the voltage come from? Let's image that either it's from charged particles coming directly from the working electrode (not a lot of evidence for this at the moment, cf Stevenson Geiger with the mica window) or from EM radiation from the working electrode that's e.g. knocking electrons off the counter electrode. Either way, the counter electrode charges up based on how many presumed nuclear reactions happening in the working electrode.
Taking Alan Smith setup (because I know it more), the plate area is about 128cm^2, there is an air gap so the relative dielectric constant is essentially 1, separation between plates 0.1mm, voltage about 0.25V.
The charge on the plates (Q) is therefore:
Q = capacitance x voltage = dielectric constant x area x voltage / separation
Q = 8.85x10^-12 x1 x 128x10^-4 x 0.25 / 10^-4 = 2.8x10^-10 C
How many electrons (or lack of electrons) would 2.8x10^-10 C amount to?
Number of electrons (or lack of electrons) = 2.8x10^-10 / 1.6x10^-19 = 1.8x10^9
Let's imagine that each of these corresponds to some nuclear event and let's recall that Alan said the voltage took a few minutes to build up (let's say 3 min... Alan Smith please correct me if I'm wrong here). Then the number of reactions per second would be:
1.8x10^9 / 3x60 = 10x10^6, i.e. 10 million reactions per second
Finally, let's imagine that each reaction gives off 20MeV (not unreasonable for a nuclear reaction). Then this would amount to the following power output:
10x10^6 x 20x10^6 x 1.6x10^-19 = 3.2x10^-5 W = 32 micro watts
I have the sense that micro watts is the right order of magnitude from what's been done by Stevenson and Frank Gordon . Is that right?
If this is indeed cold fusion, then what we have here is a very sensitive diagnostic for measuring it.... i'd say probably far better than calorimetry... not to hate too much on the calorimetry folks.... it's just that calorimetry is too hard for me hehe.