My response at the Mark Gibbs blog: A more neutral, and useful, name would be “Fleischmann Pons Phenomenon” since, at this point, it is interpreted by physics authorities to be merely a sociological phenomenon that originated with the two named perpetrators, and, by those skeptical of the physics authorities, as potentially recognizing the heroism of the named partners. Once the mechanism is known — whether it was “delusion and incompetence” or real physics — a more specific name can be properly applied. Yes, the physics authorities will object to this more neutral description, but that is simply because they are the “true believers” in their interpretation of the FPP.
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 5:52 AM, Mark Gibbs <[email protected]> wrote: > > http://www.forbes.com/sites/markgibbs/2013/07/15/why-cold-fusion-has-to-die/ > > [mg] >
