Vorl Bek <vorl....@antichef.com> wrote:
> From reading the exchanges here and on other forums, I have the
> impression (my 'verdict') that the evidence for lenr is
> either:
>
> anecdotal ('all the water boiled out of the bucket!';'there
> was a terrific explosion!' - that sort of report), but that the
> events can not be repeated;
>
As McKubre shows, the events have been repeated. See:
http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/McKubreMCHcoldfusionb.pdf
The explosions are extremely rare. I have photos of them at LENR-CANR.org
mainly to warn off amateurs, and to keep people from doing these
experiments in poorly equipped, unsafe labs, not because I think the
explosions prove anything about the effect that the published data does not
prove.
> laboratory curiosities: 3.001 watts out for 3 watts in; or larger
> ratios, but can't be achieved regularly, and can not be scaled up;
>
They cannot be scaled up safely because they cannot be controlled.
> in fact, according to Cude, claims have been scaled down over
> the years.
>
That is correct. The cathodes are much smaller, for various reasons. The
ratio of heat to the mass of the cathode is much higher, however.
> Despite the cries here that nobody (I assume that means taxpayers)
> will give money to allow lenr enthusiasts . . .
We are hoping that funding will be made available to professional
scientists, not "enthusiasts." We would like to see a situation in which a
professional scientist with tenure can apply for a grant and not have
authorities call him up and threaten to shut down his lab or deport him. In
other words, we favor traditional academic freedom, and the freedom to do
research the other scientists and the public thinks has no merit.
> to do the job they could
> do if they had more money, I find it hard to believe that if there
> was anything to the lenr effect, that some way of exploiting it
> would not have been found since P&F in 1989.
>
Why do you find it hard to believe this is difficult? Many other subject
are difficult, after all. Billions have been spent on plasma fusion with
not significant progress towards commercialization. There has not been much
progress in HTSC which was discovered at about the same time as cold
fusion, even though HTSC got a lot more funding. Hundreds of billions have
been spent on cancer research since the 1960s but unfortunately the death
rate has hardly changed at all for many types of cancer.
>
> In fact, the Japanese gave P&F a lab and x million dollars and a
> couple of years to repeat their original supposed lenr effect, and
> they could not do it.
>
That is incorrect. The achieved high reproducibility, routinely triggering
boil offs in 64 cells at at time. The work culminated with cells that ran
for weeks at boiling temperature, at 40 to 100 W. See:
http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RouletteTresultsofi.pdf
This project was terminated because of politics and disputes over money
between Toyota and other companies, not because the research itself failed.
The NHE project was terminated because it made little progress. Although as
Miles reported, he did achieve significant excess heat at their lab. The
lab director and others refused to look, and they reported that he did not
produce heat. This was also politically motivated, obviously.
- Jed
