space and all, sorry for speaking out of turn here. As I see it, if the tests were to focus upon gamma emissions only, then a positive result may be missed as the reactions may not produce many gammas, just heat (as per Dr. Jones above quote). If we are looking for a lack of gammas as a negative sign of reactions, we might miss a true reaction. But by primarily looking for the anomalous heat, and the other possible byproducts secondarily, we end up catching any positive reaction. Secondly, heat is sale-able, radioactivity - not so much.
It appears then that 100% reproducibility is key in order to accept this as viable tech? 100% reproducible for whom? Is this arena now just for the "big boys", or are the backyard enthusiasts, the garage tinkerers and the kitchen chemists allowed to play as well?
Oh, and If I understand correctly about detecting gammas, your counter needs to be specifically designed to read gammas or it may be picking up lower energy emissions that you don't know which are which. This may be a moot point now as I don't know the capabilities of the newer counters nowadays, but the older ones had to be specific built.
It appears then that 100% reproducibility is key in order to accept this as viable tech? 100% reproducible for whom? Is this arena now just for the "big boys", or are the backyard enthusiasts, the garage tinkerers and the kitchen chemists allowed to play as well?
Oh, and If I understand correctly about detecting gammas, your counter needs to be specifically designed to read gammas or it may be picking up lower energy emissions that you don't know which are which. This may be a moot point now as I don't know the capabilities of the newer counters nowadays, but the older ones had to be specific built.