From: Kevin O'Malley
Why should I apologize? Will I be getting an apology from Y E Kim for his direct comment agreeing that this gives his theory a leg up? You shouldn't . but if Kim thinks this article helps his theory - he must know something that is not apparent to the rest of us. or else he must not have paid close attention to other details either. But to add another layer of complication to this general subject - there is the BEC of Dirac via Don Hotson, which is another name for the Dirac epo or "sea of negative energy" and essentially another name for ZPE. Hotson has published several relevant articles to Infinite Energy. This Dirac BEC has more theoretical validity than anything proposed by Kim, IMHO because it covers everything in LENR - not just deuterium. Hotson's interpretation of Dirac is that there is a background field composed of electrons and positrons - virtual positronium - existing in 4-space which forms a foundation for 3-space. Everything builds on that. This makes more sense than a "hot BEC" of any particular boson or composite boson in our 3-space. Polaritons too may be "real" in 4-space. Substantial heat is a local phenomenon incompatible with Bose-Einstein statistics, and Dirac's math has stood the test of time; therefore, since the appropriate bosonic interpretation may not exist in 3-space at all. But the worst part of Kim's theory is that it fails with the Rossi effect. Why should anyone who wants to see this technology pushed to commercialization soon waste time with a 3-space BEC if it offers no insight into the major device out there at present - the HotCat ? If you want an appropriate BEC theory then the Dirac epo/BEC version can provide more understanding with less baggage... as long as one is open to a fourth spatial dimension.
