I can’t read this whole thing, and I don’t have the expertise to drill into it, but a quick skim makes me think just what I thought — and hoped — back in 1990 as the ashes cooled over Fleishmann and Pons: that the phenomenology they suggested sounded plausible, sounded like it didn’t violate any principles of physics, and that maybe, over time, a theoretical framework would emerge that would allow us to isolate the “signal” from the “noise.”
That’s what this paper looks like, to me.
I’ll take your word for it. LOL
Looks like that to me as well.
Note that Sinha hints strongly that Mills’s Hydrino theory might be close. I think when this all gets hashed out, that it will be a combination of theories. So the final accepted theory will be something like Mills/Sinha/Widom-Larson/Horace Heffner/Focardi/whomever, borrowing elements from each theory to piece it together. The biggest pieces will come from Sinha.