I would definitely agree Mizuno’s equipment is the best option at this time.
It seems resonant to me that the opportunity to test this comes up just at the tine we have the details of the set up for a test released from Mizuno.
We also have the ideal interface with Jed. His contact with Mizuno, his long history in LENR and his ability to speak Japanese. It’s a really good opportunity that just opens at this time. A perfect match you might say. Maybe too good to miss.
I would like to see Mizuno’s method verified. (We should bare in mind it might not be easy to do right off the bat but certainly worth pursuing)
It maybe the work and approach with this could establish trust between the team and the community about aims, motives which would be fair I think.
The need to verify the technology out weighs many things in my opinion. Not for business opportunity or positive belief or skeptical proof reasons. But simply because if there is any chance for a positive result the world could really be helped by it. For that in these times, we should never stop searching.
I would also like to see:
Holmlid work verified (I suppose this might be difficult but I wonder if Zeiner’s work with one of Mizuno’s prototype’s can give an opening there?)
Russ and Alan’s work verified when ready. (But I wonder if he is already getting verification by other groups?)
Mizuno’s work looks like the best first opportunity but I wonder if it is also worth making a priority list of follow ups including others?
To get in the frame. I would suggest they see a working prototype before starting. I wonder if that would be possible.
I would also suggest verification of other potential LENR related aspects than just thermal. Perhaps different particle measurement methods, radiation and apparent transmutations, isotopic ratio changes of fuel, presence of helium and other gases, magnetic fields and charges etc. but I suppose thermal must still be the highest priority.