On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 9:35 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <[email protected]>wrote:
Cude>> You find it so hard to believe that a few hundred cold fusion researchers can all be wrong, but if cold fusion is real, then far far more researchers would have to be wrong. Lomax> This is the core of Cude's religious position: he believes that researchers have demonstrated that cold fusion is not real. It's a fantasy. Taking a little break from your actual research, I see. Your premise is wrong. You set up this straw man because you think you can knock it down. Basically everything that follows is therefore irrelevant (and more than a little boring), but what would be the fun in ignoring it? The core of my position has been stated many times. It's that cold fusion researchers have failed to demonstrate that cold fusion is real. The evidence is simply lacking. Since the effect is contrary to what we understand about natural science, without evidence for an effect, I remain skeptical. In this point of view, I am in good company. When P&F claimed they had evidence in 1989, the world leapt at the potential; journalists and scientists alike, all over the world, paid attention, and many got involved in experiments. When two scientists with respectable reputations claimed evidence for something revolutionary, no one wanted to be left behind. The world was giddy with excitement and anticipation. But then, in the next weeks, months, and years, nothing came of the great excitement. Many excellent scientists did experiments and concluded P&F were incompetent or deluded or both; that there was nothing there. CF was a bust. It didn't help that P&F were caught in a really obvious error with respect to the associated radiation. Now, I've heard your response to that. Those who failed to reproduce all did something wrong. The conditions weren't right. The D-Pd ratio was too low. The surface wasn't treated right. They actually did see heat, they were just too stupid to realize it. They were afraid their paradigm would collapse. And on and on. Well maybe so. But given the failures, the CF cabal would have to come up with something better to get taken seriously again. After all, new discoveries in science typically auger in progress at breakneck speed. That's the best time for a new field. Lots of low-hanging fruit to pick. Instead, CF people kept doing the same experiment with the same results over and over. Electrolysis experiments with input power, chemical reactions, differential equations, and finally after much data reduction, a claim of excess heat. Nothing obvious, and it never got more obvious. In fact as the experiments improved, the effect got smaller. (And as they got worse (as with Rossi) the effect got bigger.) Some people did try variations on the experiment, using gas loading, glow discharge, sonic, superwave, and so on, but in every case the results were and are unconvincing. As Rothwell complained, they never stand out. There is always some form of input (or at least it is not obviously excluded), and the heat is demonstrated with calorimetry, which is known for being prone to artifact. I think mainstream science's attitude toward the field has become like it is to other fringe areas that never seem to get anywhere. Instead of pulling their hair out trying to figure out where other people have gone wrong from their poorly documented, unrefereed accounts, they are waiting for evidence that stands out. The claim is a factor of a million more energy density than chemical. How can that be so hard to make obvious. Why can't they make an isolated device that remains indefinitely warmer than its surroundings? Why can't they make an isolated device that makes a cup of tea? That's what's needed. It's a bit like Uri Geller claiming he can bend spoons with his mind, as long as he provides the spoons and can control the conditions under which he demonstrates it. I can't explain how he does it, no matter how long I think about it, and tear my hear out. And, although it makes me a little curious, I'm not all that interested in understanding how he does it. I'm satisfied that it's a trick, an artifact, because if he could really bend metal with his mind, a far more direct demonstration could be done. Strip him down, to underwear, shackle his hands and feet, and bring in a metal bar he has never seen before and hold it a foot in front of his mind, and ask him to bend it. Same with CF. The experiments always have to have a certain context. Dardik required Duncan to come to Israel to see the experiment. Rossi invites only select people to his laboratory, with protocol under his control. They need input for safety they say, and the evidence for GJ/g heat comes in the form of instrument readings. It is purely a mug's game trying to understand and analyze these contrived experiments. If D-Pd or H-Ni generates GJ/g of heat, then take some D-Pd or H-Ni and put it in an isolated beaker and watch it boil. If an electrode is producing heat after death, isolate the electrode and prove it. If Arata's deuterated Pd generates heat for days without power, then remove it from his device (under pressure) and prove it.
