There is an insurmountable conceptual divide that will make it impossible for the DOE to except LENR. A nuclear physicist will never believe that you can do nuclear physics without neutrons.
Nuclear physicists have spent their whole lives learning how matter can only be manipulated through the application of neutrons to matter. Neutrons for of nuclear physicist are like what paint is for a painter, he cannot do anything in his field without using neutrons. This need to hold on to the current paradigm in nuclear physics is why the Widom-Larsen theory still holds on to the concept that those high energy electrons will somehow produce neutrons, an absolute requirement for nuclear physics to occur. This need of neutrons is why LENR holds on tightly to the requirement for deuterium and palladium because nuclear reactions must use neutrons that are carried in deuterium. You cannot propose an avenue of research that counters the hegemony of the neutron at the DOE, such is just too much to ask for the high priests of the Bomb to accept. Even Lomax is tainted by the neutron addiction when he proposes accurate measurement of the heat/helium ratio. We must somehow convince the world that brute electromagnetic force can disrupt and reorganize the heart of matter, and that neutrons need not be involved in the LENR reaction. In this rejection of the current neutron paradigm is where the nub of the question lies. When you commit yourself and throw your hat over the fence, you are going against 100 years of nuclear physics. That is a lot to ask from anyone and yet it must be done to give birth to a new era of science. On Sun, Sep 1, 2013 at 1:33 AM, Peter Gluck <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear Friends, > > I have published now: > > http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2013/08/for-future-of-lenr-by-abd-ul-rahman.html > > This is actually the 3rd paper from the series:" Ideas and modes of > thinking for solving the LENR problem" i.e making it to progress > *My gratitude to the author!* > Abd and I know well it is not one single royal way to a successful LENR; > we also are aware that if intelligence can be defined as the art of > not confusing the points of view- wisdom includes the respect of > other people's points of view. We both want to bring new proofs > to the old saying promoted by Niels Bohr: "CONTRADICTORIA COMPLEMENTA SUNT" > > Peter > > -- > Dr. Peter Gluck > Cluj, Romania > http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com >
