Interesting idea, but the Rossi cell was predictible. Globally we ( a rather small group) knew that LENR is possible in principle but very difficult to achieve in practice- at a technologically valuable level. Based on a long saga of trial-and-error, in which seemingly the number of errors was much greater than the number of trials (in my personal opinion because only very clean surfaces can work) More specifically Piantelli's work has solved the problems of a working Ni-H cell, Piantelli has working cells. Before Rossi.If the Rossi cell is a real progress toward these- it is not known for sure.
As regarding Taleb's book, I have reviewed it for my readers in the issue No 340 of my weekly newsletter Info Kappa- now continued at my blog Ego Out.(I will publish Informavore's Sunday 440 today) A great book, some parts as Extremistan vs Mediocristan are absolutely bright but the author insists too much demonstrating us that the experts- mainly in economics are stupid. When anti-intellectualism is extended to experts- bad things can happen. Peter On Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 4:51 AM, Jones Beene <[email protected]> wrote: > The ‘Black Swan Theory’ of human development was developed by Nassim > Nicholas Taleb to better explain the role of “freaky” randomness in > history and science. Not just ‘improbability’ but utter unpredictabilityon > one level, > yet with the kind of hidden influences that makes it stochastic instead of > pure randomness. > > Taleb, rephrasing David Hume sez: the observation of even a million white > swans does not justify the statement that "all swans are white." And if > you are from ‘down-under’, for example, you might have thought most were > black. > > The main points of ‘Black Swan Theory’ (Wiki): > > 1. The disproportionate role of high-impact, hard to predict, and rare > events that are beyond the realm of normal expectations in history, science, > finance and technology > > 2. The non-computability of the probability of the consequential rare > events using scientific methods (owing to the very nature of small > probabilities) > > 3. The psychological biases that make people individually and > collectively blind to uncertainty and unaware of the massive role of the > rare event in historical affairs > > Randomness, of a special kind, plays a big part in these paradigm shifts,in > the course of history.Physicist > s, especially at the PhD level, are exceedingly prone to the falling into > the ‘black swan’ logical error in their thinking process, since they wantto > believe in the power of > predictability, based on known facts and slight natural divergence. They > simply cannot grasp that major and unpredictable divergence exists from > what is known and that it is often the most important factor of all. > > Unfortunately, in analyzing most ‘astounding’ claims - they are often > correct, and Bob Park can be up to 99% correct in spurts, since they only > attack the weakest claims. They absolutely dread what is happening now in > Bologna – to be exposed as completely wrong on the most important new > development of their lifetime. This is why the Parks and Garwins of the > world can be so dangerous to society in the final analysis – and yes, Park may > have been a ‘net negative’ voice to the general public for all of these > years for failing to take notice of the original ‘black swan’ back in 1989, > despite being right most of the time otherwise. > > When the err, they can set back real progress by decades. Shame on you! …and > you know who you are, so it is not necessary to name more names > . Redemption is still possible. > > Progress, according to Taleb, absolutely depends on the occasional black > swan – which is what we can call the “Goodyear moment” since it recognizes > that accidental moments in science can be far more productive than the b > est-laid plans of mice and men. But they are not truly accidental either, > yet I will save my ‘what is stochastic?’ rant for another time and place. > > Jones >
