I am beginning a survey of cold fusion experiments that span the many disparate paradigms of cold fusion in which I will attempt to unite them with Rydberg matter as a unifying causation principal.
See the first post “Cold Fusion Magic Dust” On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 9:59 PM, Harry Veeder <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 12:17 PM, Guenter Wildgruber > <[email protected]> wrote: > > post #3 > > > > intermediate note. > > > > The case of Case. > > > > He is definitely not your typical scientist. > > He is/was a practitioner with >30years experience, and as such one does > not > > so much rely on theory but on intuition. > > What works and not is more in your bones and not in your head. > > > > This makes a difference, because this is not peer-reviewable, and > reveals a > > fundamental problem of peer-reviewed scientific method: That it scraps > > intuition altogether and replaces it by a mechanical method of > > intersubjective verification, where all the intricate details are put > under > > the rug of the method. > > > > The fight is about those accepting some sort of sublime, and those who > build > > up knowledge up from the robust, i.e. the hard skeptics. > > > > What the hard skeptics miss, is, that their axioms -ie Occam- are on > shaky > > ground, or more to the point: Occam does not have a foundation in > 'reality'. > > I think occam's razor is useful for selecting explanatory axioms which > emerge from a given philosphical outlook or paradigm, but it is a > ridiculous basis for evaluating and comparing explanations which > emerge from different paradigms. > >
