So. You're one of those idiots who think theory trumps experimental data. I suspected as much. The Gamow Window and any other theory fall before replicable experimental data. Apparently the "new breed" of physicist you represent has forgotten what Einstein, Feynmann, and countless others understood to be the fundamental basis for ALL science.
As I said "....mumble, mumble....Coulomb barrier.....mumble mumble....". Totally typical.
Independent repeatability with an open flow of data is not what Rossi has provided. Nice try though.
Still waiting for the deliverables he promised for March 2012
And by the by Feynman would have laughed at you... He is no doubt spinning in his grave
“In 1928, George Gamow, the great Russian-American theoretical physicist, derived a quantum-mechanical formula that gave a non-zero probability of two charged particles overcoming their mutual electrostatic repulsion and coming very close together. This quantum mechanical probability is now universally known as the “Gamow factor.’’ It is widely used to explain the measured rates of certain radioactive decays.
In the decade that followed Gamow’s epochal work, Atkinson and Houtermans and later Gamow and Teller used the Gamow factor to derive the rate at which nuclear reactions would proceed at the high temperatures believed to exist in the interiors of stars. The Gamow factor was needed in order to estimate how often two nuclei with the same sign of electrical charge would get close enough together to fuse and thereby generate energy according to Einstein’s relation between excess mass and energy release.”
I quote this directly because apparently you are not familiar enough with fusion to know that Gamow’s work has been predictive over and over again. But hey don’t let facts bother you.