Dear scientists,
thanks for your work and for your courage to deal with all those pseudo-intelligent sophists who have blinkers on.
You are like a modern Sokrates. Hopefully the combined idiocy of half-witted ignorance will not succed in trying to bring the same fate to you as back then they did to the father of philosophy!
Your summary states that the reaction was primed by heating and some electro-magnetic stimulation. It appears that the electro-magnetic stimulation mentioned was due to the current flow supplied to the system and not induced separately. Is that correct?
Secondly, what do you surmise is the suggested role (if any) that electro-magnetic stimulation alone might play in this process?
I wanna expand on this topic: the current, and a term I was missing: Plasma.
1. Could the Elecrons flow outside of the cables? Could Electrons have interacted directly with the fuel? More precisely: Would it have been possible that Electrons from the current remained in the reactor? Would it have been possible to measure it (the loss of Electrons in the current)?
2. Could the fuel or other parts of the reactor have turned into Plasma?
3. Could there have been Electron Captures?
(Plasma physics is somewhat undetermined. Maybe the combination of high temperature, electric current and oscillating electro-magnetic fields creates a special form of Plasma where Electron Capture (or other nuclear reactions) happen more easily.)
4. Was there an attempt to measure Neutrinos?
(I guess not. If they were not measured / detected than there could have been nuclear reactions with radioactive activity as in the case of Electron Capture.)
Yours,
Pyrphoros.
PS:
Maybe in this reactor a free proton is able to merge with an electron to create a free neutron (which would then join other atoms)...