The first paper on this was garbage- I made a long post here saying that it had no business being published- it was very full of holes, I said that while they may have had fusion events, their paper proved only that they were lousy experimentalists....

This new paper filled in a LOT of those holes, not all, but I will say I think they did a good job of convincing me that there is something there-

HOWEVER, THIS specific technique will NOT ever be a useful power source, although it could teach us about the subject...

My main problem with the new paper is the use of Neutrons to initiate the Bubbles- because much of their evidence relies on neutron detection... They made a good argument that they were able to distinguish between the neutrons they shot into the acetone and those due to fusion, but still it makes me antsy...

I am not the only one that thinks the first paper had no business being published, Its good they tried to fill the holes, They didnt fill them in the ways I would have found to be 100% "conclusive" but I am thinking they may have something.

Just my opinion...