From: Eric Walker …. Claims made by … Holmlid, which are contraindicated in multiple ways by a simple application of logic are nonetheless incorporated into analysis as though they are factual.
Whoa, Eric. Since when does “logic” contradict experimental results? Where – precisely - is this fountain of logic that contradicts Holmlid’s real data? Isn’t every scientific breakthrough a contradiction of logic, almost by definition”? In the realm of subjectivity – “application of logic” can be rather low on the latter, down there slightly above “because I told you so” or “ that’s what I was taught at University”. There are no hard and fast rules of logic other than when experience is verified by experiment -- and experimental data is exactly what Holmlid has provided. I have my doubts about the muon data, like everyone else … mostly because it is revolutionary, since it appears to have been done correctly in practice - but no one to my knowledge has contradicted by experiment or failed replication, the real data of Holmlid; and until then, he should be given benefit of the doubt … Holmlid has the proper credentials and educational background, the work experience, the intelligence, the University affiliation, the strong complement of co-authors, a long string of peer-reviewed publications, and so on. There is no reason not to afford him full benefit of doubt without any need of qualification, especially on any forum where LENR is generally tolerated. Jones
