>From Abd:
... > I'll comment on it: he [Bushnell] went on to say, but it isn't > fusion. > > That's apparently because he's swallowed, lock, stock, and sinker, > Widom-Larsen theory, and isolated, idiosyncratic attempt to "explain" > LENR by coming up with even more preposterous hypotheses, none of > which have been tested and shown to be of predictive value. But, Abd, you left out a really juicy part of the email: As you point out, Opdenaker states, as a result of his conversations with NASA scientist, Bushnell: > ...MY CHANGE OF MIND WAS A DIRECT RESULT OF TALKING WITH > DR. DENNIS BUSHNELL, THE CHIEF SCIENTIST FOR NASA LANGLEY WHO > HAS ASSURED ME THAT OVER 100 EXPERIMENTS WORLDWIDE INDICATE THAT > LENR IS REAL, CAPABLE OF PRODUCING ENERGY MUCH GREATER THAT > CHEMICAL REACTIONS, WITH MINIMAL RADIATION, THAT THEORIES > INDICATE THAT WHAT IS HAPPENING IS WEAK INTERACTIONS, BETA DECAY > AND NOT FUSION OF ANY KIND. But then, Opdenaker goes on to say: > FRANKLY, IT DOES NOT SEEM TO ME TO MATTER WHAT WE CALL IT > IF IT WORKS AND BUSHNELL SAYS IT DOES WORK. Opdenaker's brief little comment suggests to me that many who might take a closer look will not necessarily buy into the W-L theory as the correct theory. I think they will care less about any theoretical arguments that claim that the heat can't be due to "fusion" - that the heat can only be due to beta decay and ultra slow neutrons. I would even venture to say that Opdenaker might have even picked up on the some of the unseemly theoretical politics that seems to have attached itself to the WL camp as they go about denigrating all the other theoretical camps that are also currently on the table. Regardless to the ensuing politics, I gather Bushnell seems to be on favorable terms with the W-L folks and has probably gotten an ear-full from them. I suspect Opdenaker has already picked up on that. Meanwhile, I suspect Opdenaker could care less about what kind of theoretical product placement that might be occurring under the table. All Opdenaker would care about would be how much heat is being produced through the exploitation of a particular engineering process, and can that heat be produced consistently and on demand. The ensuring politics that comes with the favorite theory-of-the-day can come later. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks > He knows, though, of the heat evidence, and, indeed, Jed's right, > that evidence does show, once we look carefully at the reactions, at > what is in the cells under study, heat far beyond that possible from > chemical reactions in the cell -- unless they are totally unknown > chemical reactions, between elements not known to be present in the > cells, somehow being supplied. > > One can imagine that with Rossi, many have attempted it. With > standard FPHE, the chemistry is well-known, and if all the cell > components were to be maximally reactions, we'd still be far, far > short of what these cells have demonstrated. > > Put it this way, if this isn't a nuclear reaction, it is some kind of > super-battery, probably worth billions just for that. Unfortunately > for this battery idea, ... helium.
