Dr. Edmund Storms: Nano-Cracks, Metallic Hydrogen, & Explaining LENR

Transcript

today I welcome back Dr Edmund storms Dr Storms is a nuclear chemist who spent 34 years working at Los El National Labs there he conducted Research into materials for use in nuclear power and propulsion reactors including studies of cold fusion he's the author of the science of low energy nuclear reaction published in 2007 and has recently published a followup book exploring the theoretical side of LR Ed thanks for once again agreeing to S down today well thank you John it's a pleasure so just in case anyone is joining us for the first time and missed our first interview together can you briefly explain your background and entry into the field of cold fusion well I was working at the Los alos National Lab doing studies of materials involved in space propulsion nuclear space propulsion when p and Flashman made their announcement that announcement was really exciting to the people Los Alamos because if they were correct if that source of energy actually existed then much of the difficulties that Los Alamos had in supplying power for spacecraft and for space propulsion would go away and so a lot of people at the laboratory put aside what they were doing and set about trying to replicate what pond of fleshman were claiming in my case I was working in a group where many of the world's experts in TR of detection were working working and so it seemed natural that we would try to make tritium by the cold fusion technique which we did we were successful it wasn't a lot of success I mean we ran over 200 different combinations of materials using the electrolytic technique and got 13 samples to produce trium at levels that could not be accounted for any other way and that work was later published in a peerreview journal our work was of the few successes at Los Alamos and because of that Los Alamos the hire people higher up in the laboratory particularly those who follow the dictates of the doe were not convinced but I was convinced and my group leader was convinced and people who actually saw it work were convinced but when I left the laboratory I then built a laboratory here in sananta Fe next to my home where I continued the study as I just mentioned you recently wrote a new book titled the explanation of low energy nuclear reaction what is the book's overall thesis and what do you hope to accomplish by writing it and specifically how is it different from your first book on lenr published in 2007 the first book was basically a summary of all the experimental work that was done prior to 2007 the goal was to try to bring all that together into one place try to make make sense of it try to show the errors and what were errors and what were not errors in order to convince people that the phenomena was real it failed to do that it only sold a thousand copies and it obviously did not change the mind that mattered I continued my work trying to replicate the effect and in order to do that you have to understand something about how it works you can do just random experiments but the most effective ones are Guided by some kind of basic understanding in order to achieve that understanding I read all the various theories and I was appalled at the conflicts between what is actually known in the field and the conflicts with natural law that were implicit in these theories and I found that none of them were successful in guiding my work so out of desperation I said okay obviously the only way I'm going to get a better theory is the big one myself so I set about trying to understand what a theory had to explain and how the various theories that already were proposed were flawed and set about writing a book that would put this in a context that made it possible for ordinary people to understand what cold fusion was all about and I had done this in various papers and talks but those have such a limitation in the the time and the number of pages that I could not explain the full breadth of the field of the phenomena using that technique so it became clear that writing a book where there is no page limit would be the only way of doing this effectively and so the second book resulted so the overall thesis is an assessment of theory right and a presentation of your theory or is it a mix of those two things my theory is not a mixture of other theories except one of the things about co- Fusion there there are certain features that have to be taken into account and the various theories address those features in different ways for example there has to be a special place in the material that can support the nuclear reaction people make different choices as to where that is the hydrogen atoms have to come together in order to fuse they can't be isolated as they normally are in a lattice they have to somehow or another form of cluster and the various the provide different ways for that to happen so yes my theory has features in it that are identical sometimes to other theories but my theory puts all of the features that a theory has to address together into one Theory rather than just simply having an explanation of a selected group of observations I try to create a theory that explains absolutely everything all the observations that have been made so far about how process function and the results of the nuclear reaction and I try to do this without making a conflict with any known law of Nature and that's the other problem with the other theories most of them have basic conflicts with the law of thermodynamics and I consider that as a chemist I consider that an absolute no no the laws of thermodynamics are probably some of the most thoroughly documented thoroughly supported and thoroughly accepted laws known to man and you don't ignore them without very very good reason and most of the theories ignore these laws before we jump further into Theory experiment is often what informs Theory to begin with and then Theory can inform experiment and so on so it forms this kind of loop so it's been about seven years since you last wrote the book and that largely focused on experimental work so what do you think has been the most compelling developments experimentally in the field since you wrote your last book and have you explored these subjects at all in the new book well the most spectacular work has been done by imura at Mishi in Japan they've been exploring one of the transmutation reactions there's two separate independent transmutation reactions that produce different transmutation products and they explored one of those very very thoroughly and the other transmutation type reaction also has been explored but not as thoroughly the question of course is what's the difference between the two and how can you explain them in terms of the cold fusion reaction none of the theories had successfully done that and so that was a new approach that I chose there's also quite a bit of additional information about radiation being emitted initially radiation wasn't seen because it wasn't looked for and that created a bit of a problem as how the energy is being dissipated and people came up with all kinds of ideas as to why that would be true but as people look more carefully they did in fact find the radiation and that radiation gives tremendous insight as to what's going on within the nuclear process so that was new information and then there's been periodic additional excess energy produced the group energetics using superwave were particularly successful in recent times in producing large amounts of excess energy using the pwn Flashman electrolytic technique and then finally there's Andrea rosi who had discovered recently a way of creating active nickel that is capable of producing large amounts of heat and his efforts to commercialize that and to get people's attention for possible commercialization created a tremendous incentive to try to figure out what's going on because once he showed that these reactions could in fact be caused to occur at very high rates and produce very large amounts of energy that opened the door to commercial ation and that door is still open and people are trying to go through it unfortunately without proper understanding we've alluded to it a bit already and talked about it a little bit already but now can you begin to explain to us in a general sense your what's called resonant hydron Theory what led you to it generally speaking how can it account for what we observe in a variety of C Fusion systems as well that's a difficult question to answer that's the reason I wrote the book so if you want to answer you're going to have to buy the book I can tell you that there are certain assumptions that I make in the process of getting to the conclusion that a hydron is required the hydron is just simply a madeup word to describe a structure of hydrogen that forms within a gap it's not in the lattice itself it's only in cracks and these cracks have been seen to form but the cracks that are active are very very small cracks that is they have a very small Gap width that Gap width is too small to see with normal scanning electron microscopes but the larger cracks have been seen and of course where you have large cracks you have small cracks as well but anyway the issue is that there has to be a special environment and within that special environment there has to be a structure formed containing hydrogen that is able to overcome the coolon barrier by some process and then dissipate the energy and the hydron is the structure that I propose does that that's where all the magic of cold fusion lies that's the unique discovery of cold fusion the rest of the process mostly has to do with normal chemical behavior of the lattice itself and being able to deliver hydrogen to the Gap and make it available for the hydron to form so we have two separate processes going on in colusion that have frequently been mixed together by other theories we have a chemical normal ordinary nothing special chemical process taking place within the lattice and then we have a special chemical structure forming within a particular characteristic of the material which I identify as being cracks that initiate the nuclear reaction and most of the theories have focused only on the nuclear reaction occurring in the lattice itself if you try to do that you automatically get in conflict with laws of thermodynamics I move it out of the lattice into the crack where the laws of thermodynamics do not apply so the theory is a mixture of many different concepts many different requirements many different interactions but each one is identified separately and the inner relationship is shown and that inner relationship is consistent with everything that has been so far observed when C Fusion is initiated so that's the goal of any Theory to try to explain as large a collection of observation is possible and that's what this particular Theory does so at this moment what do you think might be the best way to engineer the nuclear active environment in this case nanocracks and if we're having a hydron structure form within those cracks it's not an ordinary structure it must be the result of some kind of phase transition or something like that and you equate it to metallic hydrogen so how does that exactly fit in your theory and why do you think metallic hydrogen specifically applies to lenr well metallic hydrogen is a form of hydrogen that was predicted theoretically back in 1935 and it is predicted to result if hydrogen's put under very high pressure that high pressure brings the nuclei closer together it forces the electrons into a different energy State and the presumption was that it would produce a superconductor and it would act as a metal under those conditions and then later in 1991 Hartz came to the conclusion that that structure would probably support a fusion reaction I mean after p and Flashman pointed out that that was happening in Palladium the natural conclusion was okay if you can force hydrogen close enough using high pressure perhaps you can achieve fusion reaction that way just by Brute Force essentially well hydrogen has a very limited possible electron interaction I mean there's only one electron involved with each nucleus so the number of energy states is very very limited and hydrogen is one of the more well-known electron States if I were going to form a particular structure that had the capability that I propose the hydroton has I almost have to access the same electron state that would be creating metallic hydrogen so there's a natural relationship between the two on the one hand people have proposed that metallic hydrogen can iate a nuclear reaction I'm saying that I can create something that has the characteristics to do precisely that within cracks and so therefore it has the characteristic of metallic hydrogen again how do you think you can engineer these cracks certain materials are more conducive to others in terms of forming the geometries that you would prefer but what if you notice from either your experiments or the body of work that you've analyze that suggests that we can actually engineer these things and initiate the reaction by creating them well the cracks are created under normal conditions by stress relief they're created in a totally praic ordinary way now cracks don't like to stay small they either will grow bigger as the stress is relieved or if the stress is not sufficient they will heal and go back to a solid state and that's the reason why clo Fusion is so difficult to reproduce because getting the crack precisely the right size and having it stay at that size is very very difficult and it's purely a matter of luck when a person is successful is successful in achieving that particular gap size so we have two situations one where you can try to make the gap size by chance by creating the right stress in the right material and there are recipes for doing that people have gradually been able to create material that is more successful in initiating the co- fusion reaction than has been the case in the past and so obviously you can in fact improve the ability of material to create exactly the right structure and of course the other way is to nanom machine the gaps into a material that's very difficult at this point the gaps are so small that people are not capable of making gaps that small yet but that's a natural direction to go but right now people are most likely to have success by engineering materials to when they're subjected to the right recipe create the right crack structure now what do you think is the best evidence suggesting that the reaction takes place on the surface and also takes place in the cracks are you finding reaction products in those areas or is it something else that suggests them well there's a number of pieces of evidence for that first of all the reaction products are found there for example the helium in order for the helium to be detected in the gas outside the solid it must have been produced very very close close to the surface if it's produced anywhere deeper than a few microns it will not be released into the gas the same thing is true of tridium the tridium is produced at the surface very close to the surface if it were produced deeper in it also would not be release the same way the transmutation products are all seen on the surface in particular sites when people have looked at an active surface with ir cameras they see flashes of heat areas showing that right at the surface active heat production is taking place and it's not steady it flashes off and on and of course the heat that you measure is the average of millions of these things turning on and off but all of that has to happen very near the surface otherwise it would not be visible so the the evidence is overwhelming that this is a phenomena associated with the surface this might be a more subtle question but you had the Palladium black work of aada and that was rep ated by MRI and I think that's been pointed to as evidence for reactions in the bulk material which is again the rest of the lattice there's the surface and there's the bul so what accounts for that well padium black is palladium having a very very small size and the nanometer range of size so it's all surface for all practical purposes when we're talking about pum black we're talking about a surface each individual particle of Palladium is incredibly small and so for all practical purposes there's only surface there so I don't I don't see the conflict so it doesn't really behave like bulk in other words because it's it's more it more resembles a surface than a bulk material because it's kind of loose particles right that's right the same is true of case material where very finely divided Palladium was deposited on carbon and similar to an ordinary Catalyst that Palladium is present in very finely divided form now people have based their theory on the idea that the more the surface the F of the particle the more likely the co Fusion is to happen that is not borne out by experimental observation but that success using very finally divided material encouraged people to explore that particular path to try to increase the chances of it working as far as I can tell has not succeeded but in any case it suggested a particular line of exploration my particular theory is suggesting a different line that you don't have to have very finely divided material in fact is that's actually not beneficial Rosy for example has said that his material wants to be in the 10 Micron range too small it doesn't work too big it doesn't work so there's an ideal size well that is also consistent with crack formation a very finely divided material such as a nanometer will not crack because it can't build up enough Str stress to sever the bonds and if it's too big you can build up too much stress and the cracks will be too big so there will be potentially an ideal particle size to get the exact correct size crack very possible that Rossy has discovered that now it might be a little confusing for people I know it was for me you have these nanop particles but in Palladium systems we have just kind of like the solid brick of material it has some bulk to it sometimes it's just a thin film but for the most part it's kind of a larger material but Rossi and dgt from what they've said we have a core of Nano particles are they just being pressurized in there or they mix with some of the material to give them a solid structure is it a type of Matrix what's going on in the core well one of the things you have to take into account when you talk about bulk material is that if you look at the surface of these materials that actually turn out to be nuclear active they're incredibly complex I mean under a scanning electr on microscope it looks like you know the state of Utah it looks like the Grand Canyon and the canyon land and so you really don't know how to call them a bulk material when we know it's happening in the surface and it's happening in that kind of environment and that kind of environment is incredibly complex having effective sizes all over the map when you try to mix finally divided particle Behavior with bulk Behavior you have to talk about it in the same terms as the atom sees and when you look at it from the atom's point of view they're essentially the same the bulk material the surface of it is covered with Nano structures now is code deposition does that fit into the puzzle for you because it seems that that catalyzes the reaction in some way by helping to create a complex surface yeah the codeposition produces a very complex surface and that complex surface very frequently but not always becomes nuclear active I mean codeposition works but it doesn't work 100% of the time it's like most of all aspects of Co Fusion it works enough to keep you interested it keeps you working but it doesn't work often enough to satisfy your need for a reproducible sample but yes the surface that is deposited is very complex and you can put these surfaces down other ways the codeposition puts it down by the electric technique you can also apply it by sputtering you can apply it by vaporization the only issue is creating the necessary stress and weak spots within the surface and it isn't just padium you can put down various things and they will also work various other elements all right so transitioning a bit more back into your theory specifically and theory in general you go through a lot of trouble in your book of emphasizing that any coherent Theory must respect certain laws of nature such as thermodynamics and those dictating chemical lates why is this important in your view and secondly isn't it possible that basic law is being violated in LR systems or some sort of Novel effect is at play even if it's unlikely well first of all yeah I mean cold fusion lenr obviously has some features about it that are new that people have not understood there's obviously a new phenomena that is outside of our present understanding but that does not say that that new feature is in conflict with what we already know I mean there's quite a difference between a new feature that conflicts with something or a new feature that adds to something and I'm suggesting that cold fusion adds to what we know it does not conflict with what we know now if we take that point of view then we know that the laws of thermodynamics are true and correct me modern chemistry could not function unless that were true I mean they are some of the most thoroughly supported laws that we know so you don't want to propose an explanation that conflicts with those unless you have a really good reason furthermore you don't want to find an explanation that conflicts with anything you don't want it to conflict unless that's the only route that you can take for an explanation so you should explore every other possibility that you can think of of before you are forced into an explanation that conflicts with basic understanding that has not been the case with the present theories they've taken the easy route they've tried to explain very limited observations while totally ignoring the laws of thermodynamics and that's a bit a problem because a material such as padium deuteride is a chemical structure to which the laws of thermodynamics apply without ambiguity and so it's not a plasma it's not like the situation in hot Fusion where plasma can have all kinds of conditions that can in fact not be addressed very effectively by the laws of thermodynamics once you are in a chemical structure the behavior has to be consistent with the laws of thermodynamics the various theories if you apply them to the lattice itself you're forced into making them consistent with laws of thermodynamics that's almost impossible to do that's why I felt the need to move out of the lattice into the crack because once moves the mechanism out of the lattice then a different set of laws apply you don't have to worry about the laws of thermodynamics in quite the same way it becomes much simpler and you don't get the basic conflicts but anyway my basic message is if you're going to explain cold fusion start by not having them conflict with basic knowledge you also put forward the idea of a cluster so you're not the only one to arrive at the idea of a certain cluster yours just happens to be this hydron polymer like chain that arranges itself in a linear defect other theorists like Takahashi you have the tetral symmetrical condensate the becc condensate so you do have clusters in other models what makes the hydron model the most likely to arrange inside cracks CU I know we've talked about Gibbs energy and how this is connected with this and this is kind of a complicated and nuanced topic but is there any simple way that you can communicate that I'm trying to create a collection of hydrogen that have the ability to do several things first of all they have to have the ability to come together and get close enough so that they can have a nuclear interaction and that means that you have to have some kind of bonding between them I mean you don't form a cluster in a chemical system or or even in a crack without bonding being involved that's the basic nature of chemistry the basic nature of how atoms interact they interact by bonding to one another through electron interaction so I have to create a structure that has the ability to bond then it also has to have the ability to resonate allowing the nuclei to get together periodically close enough that a nuclear interaction can occur and then I have to be able to get that extra mass energy out of that system without producing excessive energetic radiation or destroying the system from which it's coming in order to satisfy all those requirements the simplest concept is to create a linear molecule bonded together by normal chemical bonds involving the P electron energy State and the P electron energy state has the beauty that it has a configuration which allows essentially a string of hydrogen to form but normally does not form in ordinary chemical Lattis is because it takes too much energy the Gap allows that to form because of the nature of the Gap and I won't go into the deep details of that but nevertheless the Gap forces the electron energy into that state once in that state it allows this linear polymer as you call it to form and once that forms it becomes very straightforward for it to resonate the uniqueness of that occurs when the two nuclei get periodically close together somehow or another the two nuclei before they actually touch each other or interact in a normal nuclear way have to realize they have too much mass energy and the only way they can get rid of that mass energy is to give off a photon and each time they give off a photon it takes a little bit that energy away all of it doesn't go away all at once like in hot Fusion because of the resonant process the two nuclei immediately go apart resonating in the other direction and so the process is interrupted that's the unique character of coal Fusion in hot Fusion the two nuclei come together and stay together and they have to release their energy by the resulting nucleus exploding and thereby carrying away the energy as kinetic energy in the casee of cold fugure they come together periodically emit photons that carry away the excess mass energy till finally it got rid of all the excess in which case the two nuclei can come together making the final product without the need for it to explode and carry away that extra energy and so my predictions are that if you have deuterons in this hydron you will get hydrogen 4 which will Decay by Beta emission very very rapidly to helium 4 if you have a proton and a dudon two isotopes of hydrogen they will come together and form tridium and process they take up the electron that's between them that's helping to overcome the kolon barrier that forms trium which decays slowly and slow enough that we can actually see it being produced and finally if you have two protons fusing together you mageria which is stable so the theory accounts for the possible fusion reaction of all of the Isotopes of hydrogen and predicts the consequence of those Fusion reactions so two things real quick the idea of a chainlike structure forming in a defect I think has more precedence Than People realize even more recently experiments with carbon nanot tubes they've been forming structures just like that in these small Nano domain regions and structures so if these are kind of being recreated not exactly nanot tubes but some kind of Gap is being recreated in the environment then these kind of it would make sense that these structures would form because we already see that in certain things and also with ryberg atoms that you see in certain hot Fusion experiments where you can see clusters forming at the interface between the material and the plasma so there's prant for clusters and that makes a certain amount of sense so it's not some kind of just like off-the-wall idea the second thing is maybe you can better explain the idea of resonance because I think when a lot of people think of resonance you think of two tuning Forks you hit one the other one starts vibrating at the same frequency and this phenomenon we know is also going on to a degree in Stars between nucleons Fred Hoy came up with the theory about it but resonance is at play and fusion reactions so how is that entered into what does it mean when two nuclei are in resonance with each other what is that accomplishing well first of all the process of resonance you have essentially a bunch of positive charges that are held together by electrons in a linear fashion and eventually they start vibrating all in unison so that two of them come together and then of course the opposite two come go further apart and then at the next cycle the two that came together go further apart and the two that were further apart come together so it's a resonance along the length it's not a resonance like a violin string it's a resonance by compression and rarefaction along the Lan that's what you have to visualize now when that happens the presumption is that when the two nuclei come together at one point in the cycle they know before they actually touch that they have too much mass energy for that distance if they actually touch if they come together and actually fuse at that point you get hot fusion and there's evidence under certain conditions that can happen but in order to get cor Fusion you have to get rid of the energy peace meal you have to get it out of there not in one big explosion but over a period of time by small bits of it coming out that's the critical nature of cold fusion that's what makes it so unique and so the question is how does the nuclei know that it has to give off this energy as a photon I mean each nuclei that gets close together gives off one and they go off in opposite directions to conserve momentum and they go off along the line of the resonance in order to avoid creating spin components and so you can make this work totally consistent with all known laws of nature in that context the big question is what interaction between the nuclei makes it possible for them to know that they have this extra mass energy that's the big Discovery that's the unique thing about cold fusion that's where the Nobel Prize is located in identifying that process in hearing you describe the way it functions the picture in my mind is of cuckoo clocks on a wall and they start off randomly moving in opposite directions but they eventually entrain each other and they bring each other into a residence where they're all going the same directions and cooperating and it's through this mechanism of rific and mechanical communication between each other well if you if you take a spring for example that you can hang let's say something on at one end and you attach the spring to a fixed area and then you have the thing that is attached to the spring start bouncing up and down so the spring goes together and then the spring goes apart if you imagine the nuclei being an ARB an arbitrary place on the on the wire of of the spring and if you look there you'll see that the wire will go further apart and then the wire will come closer together as this thing as the weight bounces up and down that's to some extent what I'm imagining is taking place within the hydron now there's a possibility that there's a cocktail of reactions going on in the system there's the cold fusion Pond inflan heat mechanism that doesn't produce any radiation but produces heat commenor it with a d plus d reaction even though we're hypothesizing here a cluster it's a cluster that eventually permits some kind of D plus d we have that reaction but then we also have other reactions that might be producing the neutrons the energetic particles and this includes stuff like fracto Fusion so can you make a distinction between those two and you touched on this a bit earlier but maybe we can make it clear because I think it's important that's right there are a variety of reactions taking place the major reaction producing the Heat people see is the fusion reaction involving the hydroton but there are several other reactions that can produce different products including neutrons and one of them is called fractal fusion and this is well known and that is if you create a crack let's say you take a piece of lithium deuteride and you hit it with a hammer you will get a burst of neutrons and those burst of neutrons occur because when the lattice is broken split a voltage is created across that Gap and the deuterons within that region are ionized and they are accelerated and they smash into each other with enough energy to produce a fusion a normal hot fusion reaction and the normal hot fusion reaction produces tridium and neutrons both of which can be detected and they're both produced at equal amounts that reaction has been studied the neutrons and the trium have been measured we know that that reaction happens so in order to make the Gap that the hydron will get into some of the cracks will in fact produce a hot fusion reaction and so you'll get a few neutrons generally as bursts the other problem is the transmutation reaction transmutation has the deuteron go into the nucleus of a heavier element such as Palladium when that happens that nucleus will frequently fish will split will break into two parts and that reaction can really release neutrons on occasion there's a variety of things that can take place which complicates the interpretation and people have to be very careful when they interpret what is seen to make sure that they put what they're see in the right category we've already hit on a number of these but maybe we can form a quick checklist for people what do you think any theoretical model must acknowledge and account for in order for it to be considered a fundamentally sound framework so what pieces of evidence do they need to be incorporated well the absolute essential is that the theory not conflict in any way with the laws of thermodynamics or with the laws of probability or with the laws of conservation and momentum all of these laws have to be absolutely without question followed and if they're not followed that by itself is a reason to reject the idea doesn't matter what other clever ideas might be within the model if it conflicts with basic known laws of nature I would automatically reject it out of hand the second thing is that it has to account for the major observations it has to account for the production of helium and production of trium and production of both of those without Neutron of any significance and without energetic radiation of any significance that's a serious problem I mean just being able to account for those basic observations is a serious Challenge and third it has to somehow or another account for transmutation because transmutation is real it occurs at a much lower rate than does the fusion reaction but the evidence now is overwhelming that it does in fact occur and that's been the biggest challenge of present Theory because most theories have totally ignored that particular reaction except mine mine I make an effort to explain how Transportation takes place I guess from my reading of your material I think a lot of the problems you have with other theories that they ignore a major piece something like heat helium work which is considered by many to be a standard in the field there's some questions surrounding in a way but if you're going to hang your hat on a piece of evidence in science you're only going to get probabilities ultimately there's no such thing as certainty so when it comes to evidence that seems to be a pretty good piece and maybe we can just highlight that one real quick because I think the he helium correlation I talk with people about this sometimes and it's a pretty important topic because there's no way around that evidence without suggesting some kind of nuclear reaction and this is something that I think heena said if we found helium commencer with heat it would a miracle and scientists would be singing from the rooftops and praising it and then we'd have to recognize cold fusion finally and that was I don't know 92 and then miles began showing it kubri proved it Ania in Italy there's many people Arata I think there's well over a dozen Labs that have produced it over and over again so can you just talk about the heat helium work and the importance of that real quick there's 16 now 16 studies that have shown a relationship between hel and production and heat production that's 16 includes four that have shown a qualitative relationship actually a quantitated relationship so we now know that the amount of energy and the number of atoms of helium are consistent with the fusion reaction that is the DD fusion reaction which is 23.8 meev per helium if you measure the Heat and the number of atoms of helium they are consistent with what you would expect based upon a DD fusion reaction But Then There are 16 others that show a clear correlation that when you have heat production you have helium being produced if you have no heat production you have no helium being produced so there's the evidence for helium being produced when you have detarium present is now absolutely overwhelming I mean there just if this were any other field of science people would not even be discussing it it just it happens in the case of cold fusion you have to be overwhelmingly certain of the data well the data has gotten to that point now now I might add to tridium also adds information about this process because you cannot make tridium any other way except by a nuclear reaction and in the case of trium there are only a limited number of ways in which you can make tridium and one of them of course is hot Fusion but if you do it that way you get an equal number of neutrons when people make tritium by the cold fusion technique they have measured the neutrons and the neutrons are down by a factor of a million from what You' expect from the hot fusion reaction so some very strange nuclear reaction is making trium so it's possible we have something creating Neutron something creating tridium and something creating the excess heat all side by side yeah well I mean the case of cold fusion that there are no neutrons for all practical purposes the number of neutrons is very very small and people have seen them but the rate is really really trivial compared to the production rate of trium and the production rate of helium with all the theories out there you said earlier yourself that there is some overlap so isn't it likely that a final Theory there will be some compromise between what we currently know and also the Computing theories of the time can anyone Theory be even close to correct at this juncture or are we still groping in the dark a bit well that's the problem with these theories there is a certain amount of overlap there's a certain amount of similarity between the theories and I address that in my book you have to have something some way of getting over the barrier so you propose a tunneling or a resonance or a vibration or something of that sort that feature is present in a number of theories you have to form a cluster that requirement is present in all the theories how the cluster is formed however is different in the different theories and the problem with cluster formation within the lce itself that by itself conflicts with the law of of thermotics so you have the situation really where there's no way of bringing let's say creating an average of the various Concepts to arrive at a concept that is closer to the truth you really have to throw everything out and start from scratch and that's what I attempted to do and that's what I advise anybody who is trying to do a better job than I did to do the same thing throw everything out including my work by the way and start from scratch because you're not going to make any progress if you follow any of the present theories you know lately I've been thinking about your work and the analogy pops into my mind of Freeman Dyson where QED was in a state of pretty much disarray in the I think it was the 40s or the 50s I'm forget in which probably the 50s fman had his model schwinger had his model I think it was taka Nora or something like that had his model and other people were littered around all have different ideas about how to renormalize the theory and make it sensical and he came in and he he was one of the few people that was able to survey all the work bring it together and show either equivalence on certain things discrepancies on others and identified those three as having the the major commonalities to form what we know of is quantum electrodynamics so I think any Theory requires a kind of synthesis at the end and as you just suggested other people have to come in and do kind of the same process so your process I think is fundamentally correct and how all Theory should be approached and that yeah it's overwhelming to have to look at paper after paper and to distinguish something as small as the direction of radiation having a consequence of the theory you know that's easy to miss and that's one of those subtle things that your Theory actually incorporates which again even if it's not 100% correct and no Theory ever will be until I don't know hundreds of years probably at least it takes into account everything and tries to point in a a sensible Direction because you always make the analogy to the map you know we're digging for gold if we're digging for gold you have to make note of where gold has been looked for and not found yes to gamble to abandon certain piece of evidence or a certain ideas but moving forward or pursuing an idea that's kind of necessary sometimes when you do this I I recommend that this is not for the Fain of heart there's probably 2,000 papers now that you would have to read many of these papers are in journal are in conference proceedings that are not easily accessed much of this information is not easily available simply because the conventional journals refused to publish a lot of this information so I'm lucky in that I have kept a breast of everything that has been discovered in the field have all of the books and con and Conference proceedings and have roughly 5,000 papers in my database that I can access very very easily through the computer so that that makes it a lot easier for me aside from the fact that I have the time to read all this but if you're going to start from scratch this is this is not an easy job before we wrap up do you have anything you want to leave us with any projects obviously just finished the book so probably don't have any new projects immediately On Your Horizon but maybe you have some lab work that you're doing and also maybe if you want to mention the work that Ruby carrot of cfusion now.org had with your book Co Fusion is one of the most important discoveries of this century and it offers the ideal Source it offers the opportunity to solve the global warming issue that is surrounding the production of CO2 if offers the solution to having to use nuclear power which is most recently Fukushima shown to be very dangerous it has all of these benefits the very strange thing about it is that it has been actively suppressed it's been actively worked against by many people in government and in conventional science in spite of the absolute critical need for such energy the Japanese on the other hand I was told by one of the Japanese investigators many years ago they said look we in Japan we have no oil we have no good source of energy gold Fusion has a 1% chance of working will study it on the other hand you in the United States if Co Fusion has a 1% chance of not working you will not study it and that's pretty much been the case so somehow or another the attitude of the general public the attitude of science the attitude of government has to change so that this absolutely incredible Discovery can be applied and used to solve some of our critical problems Ruby was very helpful Ruby read the text and went over very very very carefully making it more readable more understandable forcing me to explain things that I thought were perfectly clear but obviously were not so she did a good job and there were several other people that have read the book and provided those insights also Tom Grimshaw for example also went through it very very carefully and made some very good suggestions that I very much appreciate well Ed thank you again for your time today and all the best of luck luck in your continued work and your continued writing and I encourage everyone to get this book and read it I've greatly enjoyed it I think it's a tremendous contribution to the literature yes there's a number of good books on Cold Fusion but they're few in number and there's none as thorough as this and there's none as important in pointing into a direction of where to look what is fruitful what is still worth pursuing and what should be looked at closer if we want to narrow the search a bit because otherwise we're just kind of one a theory landscape that we'll never escape from so I guess we'll leave it at that and thanks again Ed for your time well thank you very much John I enjoyed it