Christopher Arnold griped when I said F&P and Mizuno should have preserved
the data better:
Respectfully, some people need funding to hire HELP, otherwise they use a
pencil and paper. It is not the fault of the discoverer that he ONLY
discovered the breakthrough that a hard working professional data cruncher
would never have bothered attempting, much less even think of.
You do not need a professional data cruncher anymore. The interface boards
from HP (or whatever they call it now) and these other companies all come
with marvelous, sophisticated data collection software. Too sophisticated.
Even I can't figure out what half these features do, and I used to make
data collection gadgets like that back when Z-80 assembly language
dinosaurs roamed the earth, making the boulders tremble.
In my opinion, any researcher who is capable of building innovating new
devices and performing valid experiments should also be capable of using
modern computers and data collection. Apple computers in particular. Mizuno
could certainly have done it. He rebuilds and maintains SEM and other
equipment from the 1960s -- stuff with 8" floppy disks, for heaven sake.
(Not just him; most professors at the underfunded Japanese National
Universities use 30 and 40-year-old equipment.)
If you need HELP, you must begin by making a professional presentation of
your work. You must show your research in the best light, in a well-written
presentation with properly labeled graphs, with error bars. If you can't do
that I doubt you are capable of doing a real experiment. If you are too
lazy to do that, you do not deserve funding.
On very rare occasions I have seen amateur presentations with hand-drawn
graphs and spelling mistakes, yet which described excellent research.
Dennis Cravens used to put out work like that. The versions of his papers
uploaded at LENR-CANR.org have been extensively cleaned up, with his
permission, by me. (Who else?) Researchers from Russia and Japan often have
difficulty with English, which is not their fault, so I give them a hand
too. If we did not make these papers look presentable, very few people
would bother to download them. I know that because I have left a few in
their original state. People will not take the time to wade through badly
written papers, and you can't blame them for that. I have waded through
hundreds, and it is no picnic.
What if - Pons and Fleischmans had $30 Million to set up a lab, computers
and data collectors instead of them having the ENTIRE SCIENTIFIC
establishment destroy them for daring to break new ground without their
approval?
Actually, they were given $30 million, by Toyota. They were making good
progress, too. It is a shame their supporter at Toyota died before they
succeeded.
My device produces far hotter and more energetic plasma than the P&F
underwater arc discharge, the tritium monitor shows that a radioactive gas
is being detected and many New materials have been produced from reacting
with the plasma. . . .
Great. Do you have any idea how many other people make similar claims? Take
a number, join the crowd. Back of the line, please.
I have heard from dozens of people who say they have Astounding New
Breakthrough Machines. I have read hundreds of papers from these people.
Most of them are suffering from a terminal case of Inventor's Disease. If I
were to win the $170 million lottery, I would hand out millions to
researchers who have done good work and deserve funding, but to be brutally
frank, I would not give people like you one thin dime of funding. Not until
you stop bitching about how the world treats you, and learn to present your
information in a full, formal, academically correct way that will impress
professional scientists. If you have a valid idea, and you can make a
technically convincing presentation of it, and you are willing to make cut
the kind of deal that a sane businessman would expect, I expect you could
eventually get millions of dollars in funding. If you will not do these
things, you will get nothing, and it will be entirely your fault.
This is just the way life is, but to insinuate that the fathers of
discovery ignorant for not doing everything according to scientific
protocol, when the $cientific attackers like MIT falsified the reports as
Dr. Mallove attested to, is a little unscientific - isn't it?
Yes, they are ignorant. Scientific protocol exist for good reasons. What is
your goal anyway? Why do you want to ignore or overthrow these protocols?
Is that more important to you than convincing people to look at your work?
You have a choice: you can revolutionize science, or you can invent your
own private protocols, standards and vocabulary -- the way the Correas have
done -- and the world will ignore you. You can't do both.
Anyway, what kind of weird moral equivalency are you postulating here?!?
The people at MIT are unprofessional scoundrels, so it is okay for you to
be a sloppy nincompoop who does not bother to write things down or publish
papers? Two wrongs make a right?
- Jed
- You have to make a professional presentation Jed Rothwell
-
