Yes Dennis, this is an odd field of study with no useful end in sight.
We are the target of every conventional scientist and now of each other.
My work started like most people - with an awareness that a very
important discovery had been made by F-P , which might solve many
serious environmental problems that result from use of carbon- and
uranium-based fuels. For many years, the challenge was fun and
sometimes profitable. During this time, I hoped conventional science
would wake up to the proof being provided and allow the benefit to be
realized. I see very little progress in this direction.
After hundreds of experiments, most of which failed to initiate LENR,
I realized no progress in achieving reproducibility would be possible
without applying a basically correct theory. So I set about studying
all the theories, which I found to be not only in conflict with basic
laws but many observed behaviors. So, I created a description that did
not have these limitations. I discovered that very few people care to
understand what I propose or are willing to change their clearly
flawed approach. Even explaining the basic idea became a
frustration. I find that the field is now locked into the same kind
of small minded approach I find is used by skeptics who reject the
whole idea. As a result, the fun has gone out of my work. I see no
future for a studies done at my level of funding and with no access to
tools capable of seeing at the nano-level. I have one more study to
do, during which I hope to explore the validity of my theory.
Meanwhile, I'm starting house repair and will not be contributing to
discussions.
I expect the important discoveries will be made by people who have
access to modern laboratories. Hopefully, they will discover how the
process actually works. However, I expect this understanding will not
happen anytime soon because the present theories are too far from
reality. Of course, you might say I'm not correct, but how would you
know without understanding what I'm claiming and why? I see no effort
being made to achieve this understanding and I have given up trying to
explain. My papers now speak for me. If I'm wrong, I obviously have
been wasting my time. Time will tell if I'm right or not and only the
use of modern tools can answer the question. I have neither the time
nor the tools. So, I may look for a new hobby.
Ed
On Mar 22, 2013, at 4:04 PM, DJ Cravens wrote:
yes, we all get cranky - you, Ed, me......
when you work in this field you work with more than just a "pebble
in the shoe"-
arrows in your back, loss of job position,....
When the night is darkest, you must just follow the star you can see
and let others follow the
one they see. When the dawn comes, I only hope we all make our
journey safely. (my own quote)
D2
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2013 17:55:05 -0400
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Fwd: CMNS: only a perfect LENR theory should
attack other theories
From: jedrothw...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Edmund Storms <stor...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
I don't remember be cranky with Krivit.
It doesn't take much to set him off. He thinks the worst of me, and
many others.
I was disgusted and dumbfounded at his approach, which I explained
in the same way I explain similar feelings here on Vortex. The
exaggeration he describes is totally in Krivit's mind.
That it is.
I'm also at a loss as to how an expression of a personal opinion
about Krivit to Krivit can be slanderous.
He's just being silly. Don't fret about it.
I get the impression he does not have much experience in academia,
science or engineering. People such as you, Mel Miles and Pam Boss
follow the rules of academic discourse to a T. Also, you punctuate
properly, and you use the correct units of measurement. Believe me,
I notice stuff like that!
Even when you are cranky -- and who isn't, from time to time?!? --
no one has ever had cause to complain about you.
- Jed
