Have I missed something? Why is Rossi still being taken seriously here on vortex-L?
At the very least, his proprietary secrecy has cost Science a great deal. On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 3:31 PM, a.ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net> wrote: > It has been evident for years that Rossi has been spending time boning up > on atomic physics. > > What he writes here makes sense to me, but perhaps others here, more > expert than me, will comment. > > > 1. Andrea Rossi > March 31, 2017 at 12:55 PM > > <http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=892&cpage=223#comment-1273347> > > Eugene Atthove: > As a matter of fact, neutrinos and antineutrinos in the nuclear > physics equations are “tricks”, assumed to be real to obtain the respect of > the leptons conservation law. > For example: the neutron decay, of which we talked yesterday, gives > one proton, one electron and one antineutrino: why? Because at the left of > the neutron decay equation you do not have leptons, at the right you have > one lepton and this would be against the leptons number conservation law: > therefore you have to assume the emission of an antineutrino, so you have > one plus lepton ( the electron ), one minus lepton ( the antineutrino ) = > zero leptons also at the right of the equation, so that the law is > respected. You could say that this sounds a little bit tricky, like an > artifact, but…it is, albeit without this trick the Standard Model would > brutally crack down: realistically, between a crack and a trick is better > the trick. > Warm Regards, > A.R. > >
