Comment to "Comment on 'Compositional and Microchemical Evidence of Piezonuclear Fission Reactions in Rock Specimens Subjected to Compression Tests' [Strain 47 (Suppl. 2), 282 (2011)]" by G. Amato et al

TL;DR

This paper clarifies that the identical chemical assay values in a previous study may be due to notation issues rather than data manipulation, without questioning the original data's validity.

Contribution

It provides a clarification on the notation of chemical data, addressing concerns about data independence without challenging the original study's conclusions.

Findings

Identical assay values may result from notation issues.

The data's validity remains intact despite notation concerns.

No evaluation of the physical validity of the original data is made.

Abstract

It is shown that the evidence asserted in the Comment [arXiv:1205.6418] on the chemical composition data published by Carpinteri et al. [Strain 47 (Suppl. 2), 282 (2011)]-that the data "cannot be the result of independent measurements as claimed by the authors" -may be not necessarily true. A simpler fact could explain the identical assay values found for some of the chemical components, without this implying the asserted impossible correlations. The simpler reason does not invalidate the published numerical data, being related only to incorrect notation. On the other hand, it is out the scope of the present comment implying any evaluation about the physical validity of the data or about the conclusions drawn in the original paper.