Comments on Letter (Phys. Rev. L, Vol.89, No. 10,2002) by D. Shapira and M. Saltmarsh

2013/07/08 by R.P. Taleyarkhan, Rusi P. Taleyarkhan, Colin D. West +14
Earth and Planetary Sciences · Physics and Astronomy · #Cold Fusion and Nuclear Reactions #FOS: Physical sciences #General Physics (physics.gen-ph) #Quantum, superfluid, helium dynamics #Radioactive Decay and Measurement Techniques #physics.gen-ph

paper · pdf · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1307.3217

10 pages, 3 figures, 4 tables

arxiv created 2013/07/08 · openalex publication_date 2013/07/08 · arxiv updated 2013/07/12 · openalex created_date 2024/04/11 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/28

Abstract

This article focuses on correcting several factual errors and critiques in the previously published Letter in Phys. Rev. L, Vol. 89, No. 10, 2022, by D. Shapira and M. Saltmarsh. The authors of the Letter did not perform their own "independent" experiments as claimed; they did not perform control experiments with normal acetone; and, neither did they monitor for tritium. It their Letter, the authors (D. Shapira and M. Saltmarsh) failed to disclose that the data they collected actually confirmed our claims of having observed statistically significant nuclear emissions in chilled, cavitated deuterated acetone.

Related

• Comments on the question of the discovery of element 112 as early as 1971
• A Comment on the note arXiv:2006.13147 on arXiv:2005.05301, "Preparation of the Neutrino-4 experiment on search for sterile neutrino and the obtained results of measurements"
• Response to the comment by N. Severijns, O. Zimmer, H.-F. Wirth and D. Rich regarding article "Observation of the neutron radiative decay" in JETP Letters 83(1) p.5
• A comment on "Radiation reaction reexamined: bound momentum and Schott term" by D.V. Gal'tsov and P. Spirin
• Comment on Yerin et al , Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 077002 (2018), and, Mironov et al, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 237002 (2012)