The historians of our field will discover that the following Survey is/was an important event in the evolution and evaluation of what we call now LENR:
It was an attempt to see what happens and, more important, what will happen- and the most important, what have we to do in order to “convince” Cold Fusion to happen to become an energy source.
We have used four questions- No 1 and No. 2 about understanding Cold Fusion, No. 3 about prediction and No. 4 about actions necessary to make a positive prediction to be a self-fulfilling prophecy.
1. WHAT IS COLD FUSION (LENR, CMNS, CANR)
2. HOW DOES IT WORK?
3. WHAT CHANCES DOES IT HAVE TO BE SCALED UP
TO A TECHNIOLOGY?
4. WHAT MUST WE DO IN ORDER TO ATTAIN THIS?
The questions are easy and natural however the answers were not so; and this has not changed much, we have received them from 16 nice and helpful colleagues: A.Takahashi, B. Beaty, D. Britz, A. De Ninno, J. Dufour, E. Storms, H. Lietz, H. Heffner, X.Z. Li, L. Kowalski, J.P. Biberian, R. Van Spaandonk, T. Chubb, M. Miles, H. Kozima, R. Gimpel, plus the two organizers of the Survey, Steve and myself.
Dear colleagues- you could re-read your ideas from 7 years ago and see with proud nostalgia how good your analysis, synthesis and prediction were. I am also doing this with my inimitable-not-to-be-imitated-incurably-egocentric- pseudoliterary-prescientific writings. However, even my proverbial modesty can not stop me from observing that I had a bright idea re action: “Lucky - we clearly need luck- in different form: a solid breakthrough now, good ideas”
Very soon we will know if really had luck and the Solution of our problems is still here and it came – in a great extent from outside of our community and if it is a new, different LENR (LENR+) or it was just a practical joke of Fatum and we are in a deeper trouble than ever.
What has changed and which are the most relevant questions today? Which questions should we change and why/why not?
Piantelli’s results are now more visible; however they were present very early. Nanometric approaches were also developed by Arata, Ahern and many others. Transition metals and gas phase seem to have better perspectives than palladium and wet phase systems. The absolute novelty- is more companies claiming to be VERY near to manufacturing commercial generators. Do we have unreliable information about undeniable facts- or is it becoming so in few weeks/months? The situation is so lovely complex and so amazingly open that it will be a real fun to answer the new questions. The Survey will end on August 5 this year- I want to\send the results to the participants of ICCF-17 to help them in paradigm change.
Two questions, more complex and condensed than those from 2005 will give a greater crop of answers, I hope. We (the CF community) have been considering that theory first! Is the genuinely scientific way, however now it also seems possible that the more reliable results coming from the commercial energy generators will help us a lot to understand the very essence of LENR/LENRs (?)
1. WHAT IS LENR AND HOW DOES IT WORK< WHEN IT WORKS WELL- AND WHEN NOT?
2. WHICH NEW LENR TECHNOLOGY WILL GO FIRST COMMERCIAL AND WHEN?
Everybody is invited to participate; I will ask the participants to ask their real names (being a bureaucrat) however if somebody has strong reasons to not mix with the CF/LENR people etc. OK you can use nicknames, pseudonyms etc. – it seems so democratic!
The answers will be published as soon as it is possible for me- steadily at “LENR SURVEY 2012 ANSWERS” on my blog.
Thank you in advance!