XPost: sci.physics   
   From: jowr.pi.onspam@gmail.com   
      
   amdx  wrote in   
   news:cbd70$4eaf17aa$4b4c116f$20394@KNOLOGY.NET:   
      
   > On 10/31/2011 4:14 PM, amdx wrote:   
   >> On 10/31/2011 1:46 AM, Morris Dovey wrote:   
   >>> On 10/30/11 8:18 PM, amdx wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>> Sense you brought it up, I'm curious why you think fusion will   
   >>>> start without the undisclosed catalyst. Do think the catalyst is   
   >>>> just a ruse? I was thinking some of this was design for when the   
   >>>> catalyst becomes known you will be ready.   
   >>>   
   >>> I don't know if it will or won't start, but I've been unable to make   
   >>> any sense of his catalyst claim.   
   >>>   
   >>> In one public posting Rossi revealed that the catalyst was KaCO3 -   
   >>> which I found amusing/interesting.   
   >>>   
   >>> I decided to start with just nickel and hydrogen. If that won't   
   >>> work, I'll try adding CaCO3, and if that doesn't work I'll try   
   >>> K2CO3.   
   >>>   
   >>> Frankly, I do think the talk about catalyst /may/ be an attempt to   
   >>> muddy the water. :-)   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >> Here's some history of Ni/H fusion systems you might find   
   >> interesting.   
   >>   
   >> http://blog.zorinaq.com/?e=61   
   >>   
   >> Mikek   
   >   
   >  From the blog above I gleaned this;   
   > "....add a secret ingredient to break apart the molecular hydrogen   
   > (H2) into atomic hydrogen (H1)."   
   > I think that would be the catalyst.   
   >                Mikek   
      
   Bullshitanium?   
      
   It costs energy to break up H2.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)