On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 7:48 PM, Mark Iverson markiver...@charter.netwrote:
There have been more than 60,000 papers published on high-temperature
superconductive material since its discovery in 1986, said Jak Chakhalian,
professor of physics at the University of Arkansas. Unfortunately, as of
Both HTSC and CF were discovered before their time both
are very different from what was thought in the moments
of discovery and both need new tools, concepts and ideas
in order to be understood..
For LENR I recommend you to watch very carefully and without
prejudices what our colleague Axil says.
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 4:08 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote:
Both HTSC and CF were discovered before their time both
are very different from what was thought in the moments
of discovery and both need new tools, concepts and ideas
in order to be understood..
The validity of the
It was parallel thinking, I well know each field has its own
characteristics and fate. Cold Fusion had the problem of reproducibility
from the very start this
is the real cause of its bad reputation. Theoretical weakness has just added
to the problem- it seems to be so intellectual.
I understand
Reproducibility is indeed the crux of most alt/fringe science technologies.
Conventional science is not so willing to accept hard to reproduce effects
as real, effects where not all of the requirements for reproducibility are
known or readily controllable.
This does not mean that these effects
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 4:49 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote:
But excess heat is certain in the
2011 series of experiments and this test of the Professors too.
You mean *you* are certain. Others are not. To say something is certain
should mean that certainty represents some kind
that point merit some correction
http://www.lenr-forum.com/showthread.php?815-Celani-discovery-of-High-Temp-Superconduction-rejectedhttp://www.lenr-forum.com/showthread.php?815-Celani-discovery-of-High-Temp-Superconduction-rejectedhighlight=celani+superconduction
Celani found HTSC as an anomaly,
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 7:31 AM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.comwrote:
that point merit some correction
maye be they could change their position because a board of physicist did
not publish a Fatwa claiming tha HTSC was pseudo-science and crook job, and
because it was easier to reproduce...
the pattern of thing that are accepted are qite clear :
- fact should be so huge that it is stupid to deny
-
, 29 May 2013 22:54:15 +1200
Subject: Re: [Vo]:More delusional scientists, and over 60,000 publications!
From: berry.joh...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reproducibility is indeed the crux of most alt/fringe science technologies.
Conventional science is not so willing to accept hard to reproduce
There have been more than 60,000 papers published on high-temperature
superconductive material since its discovery in 1986, said Jak Chakhalian,
professor of physics at the University of Arkansas. Unfortunately, as of
today we have *zero theoretical understanding* of the mechanism behind this
Mark,
If I get a chance may I quote you?
[mg]
On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 5:48 PM, Mark Iverson markiver...@charter.netwrote:
There have been more than 60,000 papers published on high-temperature
superconductive material since its discovery in 1986, said Jak Chakhalian,
professor of physics at
mg:
I've responded offlist.
-mi
From: mark.gi...@gmail.com [mailto:mark.gi...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Mark
Gibbs
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 9:07 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:More delusional scientists, and over 60,000 publications!
Mark,
If I get a chance may I quote
13 matches
Mail list logo
