Rethinking (continuously) and understanding (deeply) LENR+- just a new episode.

Only in mathematics you can find a solution based only on the data of the problem; in real life you must search continuously for data, seemingly outside of the problem that can be relevant and useful for a solution. Take in account, please that the real solutions are rarely complete, unique and definitive.                     

In this spirit yesterday I have asked my forum colleagues to discuss about this paper:

Picking Apart Photosynthesis: New Insights Could Lead to Better Catalysts for Water Splitting:                                   http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/03/130329125305.htm

When I want to feel depressed I am just thinking that we humans still were not able to understand and reproduce- directly, indirectly or in sufficient extent, photosynthesis and nitrogen fixation that are very natural even for the humblest plants.,. An unpleasant question attacks me insidiously: isn’t our Science not much more primitive and underdeveloped than we are learned to think? Aren’t we actually an arrogant species?

My friend Axil, who has just worked out an advanced form of his theory based on the ideas first presented in, http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2013/03/guest-editorial-axil-about-how-lenr.html was now inspired by: the new Photosynthesis of paper see below.

AXIL’s thoughts for Easter

The first principle of our meta-theory about LENR is survival.

As I think about this principle and its importance, I am becoming preoccupied by it.

I have responded about this first principle on your blog recently. I have posted a response to your post on Photosynthesis about how this principle applies as follows…

 Easter is the day set aside for the contemplation of miracles. How can Photosynthesis come into being if not for miracles?

The world around us and in us is full of miracles: of blood and brain, of green sunlight and DNA.

How can the world we know exist, if not for miracles?

Cold fusion would be such a miracle, a miracle full of miracles.

If we want to study miracles, how does nature do it? What is the natural meta-theory of miracles?

If we take the religious view, we wait for a prophet who is inspired by the Holy Ghost to descend into our world and perform these miracles.

Does such a man exist? Has he built the Hot Cat for us?

Or do we take the agnostic view of natural selection: survival of the fittest where miracles evolve over eons of untiring trial and error; an endless cycle of countless deaths and rebirths bathed in boundless new beginnings; life, pain, death, rot and decay, hoping upon hope for that one sparkling instance of progress to be passed forward to the next. Where advancements are few and far between made in nano-steps without discouragement where automaton repetition and mindless replication leads to an endless march in a random walk toward something new with only the slightest chance for change but in the full light of faith that what replaces is bitter than what is replaced.

But what is revealed from our battle to understand is that survival is the key.

The meta-theory of life states that those systems that make a future possible are all important.

For all that we know locked in this eternal struggle;  the bacteria, plants, computing systems, and cold fusion reactors, take the square root of the interdependent components and you can find a small but all important number of key components that are so imperative that not a single other piece can get by without them.

This rule of survival applies equally to complex networks because they are all examples of open access systems with components that are independently installed. Bacteria are the ultimate BitTorrents of biology, referring to a popular file-sharing protocol.

In our study of life, bacteria have this enormous common pool of genes that they are freely sharing with each other. Bacterial systems can easily add or remove genes from their genomes through what's called horizontal gene transfer, a kind of file sharing between bacteria on the internet of adaptation.

This survival mechanism is central for plants as well as cold fusion reactors. To deal with energy without ill effects takes some doing; complexity is to be expected.

In the meta-approach of dreams on this day of days where miracles live again all will work out in this quest for understanding if the survival principle can be identified and appreciated.

For the cold fusion reactor, it is the mechanism that can produce extreme amounts of energy and still be able to survive and thrive.

This age old meta-principle of survival is true for the cold fusion reaction of every stripe as well as for the trees and grasses.

For those reactors that meet the test, they move forward into the future. For those who don’t, they are discarded into the dustbin of history.

At this juncture, I feel it is the quantum mechanical condensation of electron activity that keeps the cold fusion reaction from burning itself up; a fire that never consumes its fuel like a burning bush from which the word of God comes forth.

To get this principle right in our minds is all important.

Yiannis’ complementary ideas- a bit more secular and more positive

I was also following this "mainstream" perception of natural selection (reserving some skepticism based on intuition) till I read Margulis new revision on such "scientific dogma".
Margulis introduced the idea that evolution/natural selection is based on symbiosis and not antagonism. The first modern cell was created when environmental conditions have forced two pre-cariotic cells to cooperate to survive! The cell had no membrane to get protected (but an advanced based on DNA reproduction system) whilst a cell with no nucleus had what was missing from nucleus (but a primitive-still existing today-reproduction system). A new species was created when the previous two cooperated through their merge. (This is not the only symbiotic example governing evolution: The tiger helps rabbit to progress eating the weaker members).

Keeping the analogies, LENR/CF theories have no chance to survive unless merges ideas through cooperation with other neighboring area of ideas/theories. The new "species” has already been named as LENR+... Obviously this L and N in such name still need to be defined or proved as the "environment" out there is still toxic and hostile to such new ideas.

Conclusions

This is a writing and a dialogue that will remain open and with no definitive conclusions for a long time. The dialogue made me happy, last time I have told that useful LENR+ is man=made, artificial. However I knew this is the truth but not the unique truth; the contrary is also true because LENR is so similar to fundamental aspects of life. I am grateful to my friends for their

subtle and valuable ideas.