At 01:34 PM 3/28/2012, Guenter Wildgruber wrote:
On the other hand we are confronted with the situation that anybody,
who thinks LENR could be real, is easily located in the mental asylum.
Did you read that review I cited? Storms, "Status of cold fusion
(2010)." I assure you that Dr. Storms is not "in the mental asylum,"
nor are the reviewers for Naturwissenschaften, which is the "flagship
multidisciplinary journal" of Springer-Verlag, one of the largest
scientific publishers in the world. Mainstream. Not a "fringe" journal.
So which criteria do we have to decide?
Articles authorized and put into 'truth-status' by Peer-reviewed journals?
Yes. (But "truth-status" doesn't exist.) To do more than that
requires a deep understanding of the field.
The reputation of cold fusion is that "it could not be replicated."
That's utterly inconsistent with what has been published in the
peer-reviewed mainstream press, not to mention thousands of
conference papers (which, individually, aren't particularly reliable,
quality varies greatly, but much sound work has expeditiously been
published this way; and you can tell, to some degree by what is later
cited in peer-reviewed sources).
Experiments? Which maybe faulty. Conducted by idiots with two left hands.
Got any in mind? The "faulty" experiment is one that was not
completely reported. Experiments often leave much to be desired,
requiring more work. Others criticism them because they didn't do
this or that, but often they are simply doing what they can. In
hindsight, there is almost always something left out.
Corporate and other scammers, who make a cheap profit on -ahem- con-fusion?
Not common. Rossi is a possibility. Defkalion, less likely but still
quite possible. Commercial interests aren't "scientists," though they
might employ some. We have no "science" on Rossi, nothing reported
according to the protocols of science. Rossi himself dismissed the
very concept of a control experiment. Why should he run a control: he
knows, he thinks, what he will see with a control: nothing.
But anyone who knows science knows the importance of controls. Rossi
dumps X energy into his system. How much steam can you make with X
energy? Some, it appears. How much steadm was actually generated?
Well, not exactly measured, because .... and on and on.
Posters on an imaginary stage?
Everything is possible and has to be weighed by common sense, which
seems to be a rare feature nowadays.
I tried to involve as much common sense as possible, as everybody in
this list tries.
I have come to some preliminary conclusions or hypotheses, which
worry me, I must confess.
That means nothing if you aren't specific.
And i hope, that the very insightful people in this list give me
indications, where I err.
Your comment is very much appreciated, to be sure.
Fodder for thinking. what more can I ask for?
best regards anyway
You're welcome.
The point here was that Le Claire is not claiming cold fusion (though
he has claimed that "cold fusion" is really his effect -- but his
effect is obviously, if real, hot fusion, plain old thermonuclear
fusion, very dangerous unless the levels are super-low, as they are
with, for example, piezo-electric devices that are used to generate
neutrons by fusing a little deuterium.
