The theoretical introduction seems strange. the claim about spin incompatibility seems to ignore the neutrino in the equation?
anyway, theory is not so important, experiment decide. I'm a bit annoyed that so many papers focus on hypothesis, while the facts are blatant and not accepted. Is it decadence of our civilization ? Science was so successful since QM/SM and GR theories, in forecasting results from theories, that we forgot the basic of science : - that theories are consequences of experiments - that theories are sure working well, but sure imperfects, and doomed to be replaced by better one, keeping most of old results with more precision - that you can make useful things with phenomenological model, even very rough... this paper would deserve to have more alternative measurements, artifact hypothesis eliminations, cross checking, and no theory. I love theory, like I love TV series... But it is a serious subject, and we should focus on fact first. The most pitiful thing I've heard is that some magazine refuse papers because not enough theory... decadence. I'm living in France, in Europe, in occident, and recent scientific news show decadence. (Seralini Fraud mediatic success & french sequels, Aquila earthquake ape trial in Italy, LENR coverage, european fearmongering, engineering, medicine and science studies lack of popularity). Exhausting to fight that decadence, the pile of mainstream stupidity and corruption. It remind me the medieval period. Decadence, stupidity and corruption... and inquisition trial to enforce all by law. However we should not forget that an illuminated astrologist, Kepler, and a nasty religious extremist, Newton, set the base of Newtonian physics. 2012/10/23 chan.fusion.po...@gmail.com <chan.fusion.po...@gmail.com> > See: > http://www.i-b-r.org/**NeutronSynthesisNCA-I.pdf<http://www.i-b-r.org/NeutronSynthesisNCA-I.pdf> > Page 10 "The laboratory was evacuated again ..." > Chan > >
