Steven Krivit wrote:
What if I were to say that the researchers in the field do not know how to make heat, and do not know how the heat is made when it does come.
That would only partially correct. They know a great deal more than they used to know. That is why reproducibility and the ratio of output to input have improved at many labs.
A crucial question is: Can we learn to control cold fusion without a comprehensive theory? Can we use empirical methods to improve cells to the point where they become practical sources of energy? Michael Melich believes we can, based on examples of other technology developed without fundamental theory, such as solid state radar. Others say that until the physics are fully understood, it is not likely the reaction will be controlled. I cannot judge this issue, but I hope that Melich is right, because I do not see many prospects for a theory.
But, surely, you will quote even myself, from my presentations in the past when I have said that people like McKubre have identified the required conditions prerequisite to making heat (Loading, current density, disequilibrium and D flux). And we may both remember McKubre once saying that every time he attains the prerequisite conditions that he can produce heat. So...Hey! Where's the heat? (Said to the tune of "Hey, Where's the Beef!")
Knowing what conditions must be met is not the same as knowing how to meet them 100% of the time. An experienced mountaineer can tell you about each of the steps needed to reach the top of Mt. Everest: about the climbing techniques, equipment and so on. But that does not mean that any mountaineer can actually climb Mt. Everest.
So why is loading so crucial in bulk Pd expts? Why didn't the other 30-40% load? Nobody knows! Crucial information is missing. . . .
My only point in all of that - NOT TO ARGUE ANY MINUTIA - is that some crucial knowledge is missing.
Obviously. That is why more research is needed. Research has answered many questions that were total mysteries in the past, including many that educated people thought could not be answered in principle, such as cellular reproduction, and the fact that a single cell (a fertilized egg) has enough information to form an entire body. I recall a biology textbook from the 1940s described this as an ineffable miracle, beyond the power of science to address.
Considering that the mystery to 100% PxH is unsolved, what sense does it make to wear blinders with any of the related aspects of LENR research, be they transmutation, tritium, neutrons or theory?
No one is wearing blinders. This comment makes no sense. - Jed
