I did not see references to all chemicals or compounds that release energy..
***Then maybe you can find where they made some sort of mistake.
It could theoretically be true that they found something,
***to quote you yourself, “Ummmm.....OK...Ya...” but now you’re saying they “theoretically” found something. Either you accept the 10x figure or you don’t.
but they are still hiding something
***Industrial trade secrets. It happens far more often than you think.
I do not accept the 10x more than any chemical known....
I accept the test readings so far as they go, but I believe the 10X which is based of those readings to be exaggerated by multiple steps taken during the test.
So lets say it was 5X.......would that be so impressive to you.
But I can’t estimate it. The test was rudimentary and lacked even what I would call scientific methods of standard testing, starting with the dummy control vessel and continuing through to the paint and the lack of a testing environment.
So at best it’s only interesting to poke at and see what falls out. But to me it proves nothing about cold fusion. At least had it melted down I could have said it might be fusion of the hotter variety, or had they revealed what was in the device I would have taken some time with that before getting PO’d about the test.
As I said, chemistry is not my field. I would with it or did during my career, but running heat calculation estimates with a formula that takes the outside temperature in air and includes the outer area and from that gives you a time/MOH output is sometime that I used tables for and never had to do the calculations so I'm uncomfortable with it.
It's a calculation we electricians use to determine the maximum loading for wires in different environments and I probably could do it given time and the ability to make mistakes....or minor screwups until I got it right. So I might try it if I have time and there is enough info for me to plug into a formula. Not even sure where to find the formula I need but it's probably in one of my books. (been reading tables since I got out of school)
I really would like this project to bear fruit if it's economical. But I can't say it is over cheap nat gas, oil and of course nuclear. But if it works, and the chemicals needed are borderline efficient, it might be worth something. There would be a matter of emissions....I have sucked up enough nickel fumes to choke a horse and it's not good, but I can see possibilities in it vs the fuel cell tech which they cannot seem to get priced low enough to make widely usefull except for special purposes and they tend to be unstable at times.
So we will see.....But I see nothing yet but some sort of game of cat and proprietary mouse. and very little else.