There's huge consensus about what works though. Why not establish that as a basis and just say other approaches are open questions? Why does everyone go to such huge effort to say "pyroelectric fusion which works at low temperatures isn't cold fusion because it doesn't follow pons/fleischman experimental apparatus".
What really annoys me to no end is that the first historical usage of the term cold fusion actually referred to muon catalyzed fusion!! The whole term got hijacked by these drama seekers. On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 5:33 PM, Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 7:17 PM, Blaze Spinnaker <blazespinna...@gmail.com > > wrote: > > The idea that cold fusion doesn't involve hydrogen infused metal is just >> end-of-times for these people. >> > > It's really hard to sort out what is known from what is conjecture. There > are some careful experimentalists who have made some very measured > statements and drawn some very measured conclusions. And then there are > some popularizers who take those statements and overlay all kinds of > additional details that do not have a sure foundation, applying what they > believe to be obvious logic, which, when analyzed more closely, is not > obvious. > > - Does CF involve deuterium? In some cases it appears to. > - Does CF involve light hydrogen? There's some evidence that it might > in some cases. > - Does CF involve lithium? In some cases it might. > - Does CF involve palladium? Somehow, sometimes. > - Does CF involve nickel? Maybe, sometimes. > - Is helium-4 correlated with excess heat? Yes, in a subset of CF > experiments with very specific systems. > - Is helium-4 always correlated with excess heat in CF? Hard to say. > - Is the amount of excess heat indicative of the 23 MeV resulting from > d+d -> 4He? There was an experiment by a careful researcher that suggested > that it was in that particular case. > - Is the amount of excess heat always indicative of the 23 MeV > resulting from d+d -> 4He? Hard to say. > > People want to go well beyond measured statements of this kind. Some are > willing to manufacture consensus in the process. It's a little hard to > watch from the sidelines as this kind of thing is done. > > Eric > >
