I had a look at the basics of this method to derive transition energies a couple of years back. Refer to the paper ‘LENR catalyst identification model’ on the Subtle Atomics website.

In recent times I have become more concerned about the discontinuity around n=1 that this theory requires. Calculate the ratio of differences between adjacent states and you will understand. Either n=1 is a very special state (which it may be), or below ground state atomic states don’t make sense.

Between 2015 and 2020 around 250 experiments were conducted looking at the validity of the inverse Rydberg relationship for catalyst identification based on augur energies. No particular strong correlations were identified for all calculated catalysts, but there were some positive (excess energy) results with Ni, Cu, Sn, Sr(?) and one alloy. Transmutations were also recorded with Ti (CSIRO validated), not explainable by inverse Rydberg theory.

Based on these results I am now exploring other types of dense hydrogen, i.e. metallic, which can be described as m<1.

Not a lot data points to work with, but possibly another method to identify catalysts (and dark matter...).

The main point I’m making is that it is worth keeping in mind a broader range of calculation methods for identifying potential catalysts for dense H formation...