Richard Feynman on the Scientific Method taught to a class of students.
*"In general, we look for a new law by the following process. First, we guess it (audience laughter), no, don’t laugh, that’s really true.Then we compute the consequences of the guess, to see what, if this is right, if this law we guess is right, to see what it would imply and then we compare the computation results to nature, or we say compare to experiment or experience, compare it directly with observations to see if it works. If it disagrees with experiment, it’s wrong. In that simple statement is the key to science. It doesn’t make any difference how beautiful your guess is, it doesn’t matter how smart you are who made the guess, or what his name is… If it disagrees with experiment, it’s wrong. That’s all there is to it.”* On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 12:39 PM, a.ashfield <[email protected]> wrote: > > <http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]&q=from:%22Bob+Cook%22> > <http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]&q=date:20151103>Bob > Cook wrote: "It would be interesting to read your letter to DOE. Why not > include on Vortex?" > > As DOE have failed to reply in about four months, here it is. > This after some years of frustration trying to get DOE to reevaluate LENR. > 7/7/2015 > > To Dr. Ernest Moniz - Secretary of Energy > > Dear Dr. Moniz, > > I read that you have been closely associated with DOE and MIT for many > years. Why have both those organizations ignored LENR (aka cold fusion)? > In fact both were involved in the infanticide of that field in 1989 – > 1990. May I suggest you read the few pages by Beaudette linked here to see > why that was a mistake? > <http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/BeaudetteCexcessheat.pdf> > http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/BeaudetteCexcessheat.pdf > > See also the special section on LENR in *Current Science,* starting with > McKubre’s paper. > http://www.currentscience.ac.in/php/feat.php?feature=Special%20Section:%20Low%20Energy%20Nuclear%20Reactions&featid=10094 > > The game changed after Andrea Rossi contacted Prof Focardi in 2007 and he > demonstrated a reactor called the E-Cat (Energy Catalyzer) in 2011 that was > capable of generating kW of heat. Developed with his own funds, some > details of the design were not released. The refusal of the Patent Office > to consider patents on cold fusion – thanks to DOE staff – didn’t help. > > In 2013-2014 ELFORSK (Swedish equivalent of EPRI) tested the later high > temperature E-Cat twice at Lugano. The second time for a month, when it > produced 1.5 MW of excess heat. Late last year and again this year Dr. > Parkhomov replicated the Lugano test in Russia. Reported at the ICCF-19 > Conference. > > > http://www.scribd.com/doc/242284200/Observation-of-abundant-heat-production-from-a-reactor-device-and-of-isotopic-changes-in-the-fuel > > Rossi sold the rights for the E-Cat to Industrial Heat LLC over a year > ago. They have built a 1 MW thermal LENR plant that has been operating for > 137 days as part of a one year trial. Norway's largest newspaper > Aftenposten has reported they have expert third party confirmation that it > is operating well Other independent reports are that it is running well > with a COP of 20 – 80(!) Photos of the plant > http://andrea-rossi.com/1mw-plant/ > LENR is proven beyond reasonable doubt. Some of your people like NASA > Chief Scientist Dennis Bushnell endorse it but DOE doesn’t. From direct > experience of DOE (eg. cleaning up the radwaste at Hanford – we would have > finished by now) I don’t expect DOE to help, but you should re-evaluate > money you are spending on renewable energy, like ITER and solar, and fire > the group-think physicists who have provided such poor advice, missing > something as important as LENR. > > You have been with tasked with implementing critical Department *of *Energy > missions in support of President Obama's goals of growing the economy, > enhancing security and protecting the environment. But by not even > considering cheap, safe, pollution free LENR I think you have failed in > your duty. > Sincerely, > > Adrian Ashfield > > > > >
