On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 7:31 AM, Alain Sepeda <alain.sep...@gmail.com>wrote:
> that point merit some correction > > http://www.lenr-forum.com/showthread.php?815-Celani-discovery-of-High-Temp-Superconduction-rejected<http://www.lenr-forum.com/showthread.php?815-Celani-discovery-of-High-Temp-Superconduction-rejected&highlight=celani+superconduction> > > Celani found HTSC as an anomaly, and as Kuhn explain, anomalies are > rejected as long as possible... > mainstream accept HTSC when is was so undeniable ... and by the way it is > not so shocking, not so far from the usual paradigm... > > " > > - (1983-1987). After the experience with silicon detectors > (sensitivity of about 1e-/3.6eV energy released), I decided to study > innovative detectors having an equivalent sensitivity thousand times > larger. So I started to study Superconducting Tunnel Junctions (Ni-Pb; > T=4.2K), in collaboration with Salerno University, having an intrinsic > energy gap of only few meV. Found some quite intriguing results using thick > junctions on 1985. One of these were contaminated (by chance) from several > other elements and showed behaviour similar to superconductivity even at > temperature as large as 77K (LN2). It was stated a multi-disciplinary > Commission in order to clarify the origin of such signals. *Unfortunately > the results were rejected, a-priori, because in disagreement with the BCS > model/theory* (i.e. max temperature of superconductivity stated at > 32K). One year later Bednorz and Muller (from IBM, Zurich), independently > (and starting from different points of view), found similar results in > Cuprate Oxides mixed with rare-hearts and got Nobel Prize." > > > It is funny as the myth of teleological and materialist science is denied > by evidences. > > > > It demonstrates how quickly the mainstream accepts unexpected results when the evidence is good. In one year, they got the Nobel prize for results that had not theoretical support. Kind of shoots down the claim that cold fusion is rejected because of the absence of theoretical support. In 24 years, the evidence for cold fusion has not improved. Only the number of claims from people looking for investment has increased.
