On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 3:53 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Many, if not most, of the LENR detractors/skeptics base their viewpoint on > a position that LENR can’t work because it contradicts the laws of physics. > The heart of the matter lies in engineering. A good engineer will use the > optimum physical principle to get the job done. > > > As a example, a Wakefield accelerator that is just a few feet in length > uses a different set of physical laws to do what the CERN 17 mile diameter > accelerator does. A scientist who specialized in nuclear physics may not > understand what laws to apply to get his job done in a more optimized way. > That does not make the physical principles applied in the optimized > solution invalid. It just means that the engineers of the optimized > solution have amazed the scientist to such a huge extent that the scientist > is baffled into disbelief when he sees the results of the engineering. > > > Another example is the reactionless engine that NASA has just tested > that supposedly violates Newton's Laws of Motion. It turns out that the EMF > field used in the engine pushes against the virtual particles in the > vacuum. > > > Newton's laws of motion are effectively violated unless the reaction of these virtual particles can be observed in another way. > This does not make the test that NASA conducted of that engine a SCAM or > the engineers who understand what is going on morons. > > > At least the Church never questioned Galileo's intelligence. Heretic yes. Moron no. Harry
