The link to the NRL article doesn't work. Thanks, Jack
On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote: > More blather, confusion and insults from Gibbs. He cites a paper from that > nitwit know-it-all Shanahan, the universal expert who thinks he knows more > about tritium than the PPPL, more about calorimetry than Storms, Duncan or > McKubre, and -- in short -- more about anything then everyone else combined. > > He cites this paper from Shanahan: > > https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B3d7yWtb1doPc3otVGFUNDZKUDQ/edit > > My responses, posted at NewWorkWorld, are below. > > - Jed > > Gibbs writes: "That really underlines what the difference is between cold > fusion fan boys and completely believe in its existence, and those who > remain skeptical and demand proof in the form of useful technology, by > which I mean a technology that delivers real, valuable commercial results." > > Useful technology is not and never has been a valid scientific criterion > to prove the existence of an effect. There are countless scientific effects > and phenomena that have no practical use, yet which everyone agrees exist. > Examples include high temperature superconductivity and supernova > explosions. Many effects, such as electricity, had no practical use for > decades after they were discovered. Nuclear fission was discovered in the > 1890s but it had no practical use until 1945. Semiconductor research began > in the 1920s but did not produce any useful results until 1949. > > Gibbs' arguments make no sense. Furthermore, he calls distinguished > scientists "fanboys" which is an outrageous insult. > > > > Shanahan's conclusions are completely unjustified. He thinks that his > opinion -- mere opinion -- automatically overrules rigorously peer-reviewed > experimental results published in major journals. Results obtained by > hundreds of distinguished experts from Los Alamos, BARC, the Princeton > Plasma Fusion Lab and other world-class labs. Despite his ego, Shanahan > does not know better than these people. The "reasons" given in his paper > would never pass peer-review. > > Cold fusion has been replicated thousands of times in hundreds of major > laboratories. Here is the latest irrefutable result, from the Naval > Research Laboratory: > > http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/D... > > Anomalous Results in Fleischmann-Pons Type Electrochemical Experiments > > Conclusions: > > * Large excess power (≥ 1kJ) events generated in 5% of Pd90Rh10 cathodes > > * Failed to disprove these results --> excess heat results observed at NRL > are real! > > Cells produced 40 times more output than input, and the heat far exceeded > the limits of chemistry. > > Gibbs' demand that researchers produce practical devices is unfair and > unrealistic given the lack of funding and the academic politics. > >
