The lesson of Benabou model is between both your visions. Groupthink : Collective Delusions In Organizations and Markets(Paper IOM 2012-07 by Roland Benabou)<http://www.princeton.edu/~rbenabou/papers/Groupthink%20IOM%202012_07_02%20BW.pdf>
in fact those guy are intelligent, they know they are toasted on longterm, they know they will be toasted faster if they open their eyes. so all their IQ is used to close their brain, their eyes. Intelligence and competence have nothing to do. Subprime crisis was predictable by a junior economist, just seeing the correlation of assets... LENR could be accepted as not impossible by someone with lattice QM education...at list not impossible for just 2-body argument (maybe the best lattice QM theorist could ruleout some LENR, but we have enough occupied to manage semiconductors, superconductors, nanotech, and they have no time to disprove LENR)... like you I am sure that it is not a problem of competence. question is if they - made a bet that it was so improbable, that they decided to cook 2 chemist for lunch, taking a slight risk of being wrong... but no, cannot be wrong.... see Lewis... - uncounsciously feel that it was so damaging for their funding, their physicist ego, that they denied the reality, blocking any capacity of their brain. that capacity to block your brain is very common http://www.princeton.edu/~rbenabou/papers/Patterns%20of%20Denial%204l%20fin.pdf delusion start after a period of rationality, when commitment, and codependence are too huge to allow individual stepback. Beaudette have a different theory, it is that they lived in the unreal worl of particle physics for too long and were not able to understand real experiment lab work, with "shit happens", hard to replicate, unreliable... one exmaple of their incompetence in experimental work that shocked me, as modest engineer, is tha they asked for IDENTICAL replication... it is stupid, since you can also replicate artifacts... and difficulties to replicate is never a surprise... hard to imagine one can be so stupid, but some professions, like judge or physicist have a problem with reality. that is education if not brainwashing during studies, as Thomas Kuhn describe. 2014/1/4 Edmund Storms <[email protected]> > Hi Dave, > > I also would rather not believe people in such influential positions > would be so cynical and self-serving to reject CF based only on their self > interest. On the other hand, I have a hard time believing they could be so > stupid to ignore the evidence. I'm sure their training in physics makes the > rejection easier, but I would hope not that easy, at least not in the face > of such overwhelming the evidence. But then, we see how Congress acts and > both explanations of their behavior look plausible. > > Ed > On Jan 3, 2014, at 3:51 PM, David Roberson wrote: > > Hello Ed, > > Although your take on the subject might be the correct one, I find it > difficult to imagine that anyone with integrity would act in that manner. > My suspicion is that these guys actually believe exactly what they have > stated. All of their training in physics makes LENR appear impossible and > they certainly must think that some obscure error has been made by the labs > that reported excess heat. > > They harbor the idea that one day the truth will be found and all of the > nonsense(their belief) about cold fusion will go away. They just did not > have adequate time at the lab site to uncover the errors. > > Can you imagine how ignorant these guys will appear in the future when > LENR is accepted? I am sure they feel the same way about our > misguided prospects. > > Dave > -----Original Message----- > From: Edmund Storms <[email protected]> > To: vortex-l <[email protected]> > Cc: Edmund Storms <[email protected]> > Sent: Fri, Jan 3, 2014 5:38 pm > Subject: Re: [Vo]:McKubre visitors who peer-reviewed his lab, then get > (unethically) silent > > Jed, while your descriptions might explain Garwin's behavior toward > LENR. I think another explanation is more likely. Garwin and the other high > level skeptics are not stupid and they are not ignorant. They know that CF > has a potential to disrupt both the hot fusion program as well as the > conventional energy industries, all of which involve billions of dollars > and thousands of jobs. The system is simply protecting itself and Garwin > has a self-interest to play along. Fleischmann did not play along and was > punished. Koonin et al. played along and were rewarded. The message is > clear. > > Ed > On Jan 3, 2014, at 7:46 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > > David Roberson <[email protected]> wrote: > > He should have confidence in what he has seen, but I can think of other >> things that one might see on fleeting occasions but still have >> reservations. I suppose UFO's, ghosts, and etc. fall into that category. >> > > I think it was Garwin who described it as fleeting, like a UFO. This is a > mischaracterization. As McKubre said, it is "neither small nor fleeting." > > http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/McKubreMCHdevelopmen.pdf > > My point is that if Garwin agrees the noise level is 50 mW, and the > signal is 500 to 1000 mW -- as he said -- then the various reasons he gave > to doubt the results are not large enough to make a significant difference. > The first thing he mentioned, the 3% overall excess heat, is nonsense. It > is 3% overall but at time it was 30% and at other times it was over 100% of > input. It was never negative, so there was no energy storage. The 3% is not > a valid reason to question the results. Garwin is an experienced scientist. > He should understand that. If he does not understand it he is incompetent > and if he does understand it he is being disingenuous. > > - Jed > > > >
