Steven Krivit wrote:
> Hello Walter,
>
> Putting aside the hostile tone of your subject line for the
> moment, may I kindly ask you why they should do so?
>
> Also, so I may consider you and your comment seriously, would
> you care to disclose any of your related background or current
> involvement with science?
>
> For myself, I do not have a background in science, however, I
> have been reporting on and investigating the subject matter
> for 6 years.
>
> Thank you,
>
>
> Steven B. Krivit
> Editor, New Energy Times
> Executive Director, New Energy Institute Inc
Hello again, Steven.
You ask why cold fusion advocates should try to win the One Million Dollar
Paranormal Challenge. Terry of course has the right answer but let me
elaborate on it slightly. Let's step back and look at the state of cold
fusion in the West today; ground you've plowed multiple times by now.
First, publicly: Cold fusion is in general disrepute. The summary of the
DOE's 2004 review said "nothing new". (Inaccurate of course but that's
what people remember.) Every now and again CF gets a feature article in
some paper or magazine under the general heading, "Cold Fusion: Not Dead
Yet". The subject remains as a bit of history to be used in categorizing
other scientific controversies ("pathological science" or worse). And in
the government it is considered just fine to ridicule CF proponents and
threaten their jobs.
Second, privately: In the West I don't know if any major players are
still involved in research. If any are, their secrecy is probably causing
them to lose time and money duplicating and relearning stuff already done
years ago.
To the extent that some of the "old hands" are hanging on they are doing
so with reduced budget, staff, even office space.
Finally, the two small companies that are being touted as the coming
saviors of the field are clearly disreputable, even borderline fraudulent.
(I'm sure you'll understand why I don't name names here.) Why any CF
"names" remain involved with them I don't know, except that there don't
seem to be any alternatives -- which would imply that yes, no major
Western corporation has any active CF projects.
So maybe scientists in Japan (or Italy or Russia, or ...) will in a few
years finally solve cold fusion, which would be a little annoying but OK,
but that assumption leaves out one little problem:
The science of cold fusion is a mess.
What started as D-D fusion in a metal lattice without radiation (just two
or three miracles) now has "transmutations" occurring everywhere, with
energy appearing and disappearing from apparently nowhere, still almost
completely without tell-tale radiation. And experimentally still largely
hit-or-miss.
This sort of problem will not be solved without the involvement of the
entire worldwide physics community.
Which is why it is vital that cold fusion be rehabilitated in the West,
which is why, as a short-cut, we need to short-circuit the skeptics who,
using ridicule alone (!), are holding open-minded scientists and
science-funding officials in thrall. Winning Randi's prize will do that.
---
You ask about my science background. I have none. Nor have I ever been
involved with doing science. I am but a humble computer programmer. I've
learned most of what I know of cold fusion from sources like you. Any
knowledgeable skeptics should feel free to dismiss me and my opinions
instantly.
Fortunately I'm not talking to them here.
Regards,
Walter
