Saturday, September 21, 2013

AXIL's metaphor explaining "Everything I knew..." paper

An idea is like a forest fire, if it catches on to just a few bushes in a rain soaked woodland, it will eventually consume that limited source of sustenance and in the due course of time will eventually die out.

But if that idea is set is the dry tinder of a huge woodlot, its vigorous spread and survival is assured. 

Survival of LENR as a permanent concept in the history of humankind is Peter’s primary concern. LENR is a critical long term survival instrument in the toolbox of mankind’s future that must not be lost. 

To ignite the conflagration of the LENR inferno that will preserve LENR in perpetuity, Peter believes that it is critical to legitimize LENR through the development of a commercial product. I believe this is a wise and true idea.

Because of the burden of its history and the essence of its nature, Pd/D serves neither the advancement of science nor the development of a commercial product. Peter believes that study of the Pd/D system undercuts the development of a commercial product based on Ni/H through the diversion of money, attention and talent away from Ni/H development.

This enfeebled Pd/D spark is inherently weak and will eventually be extinguished and erased from the history of ideas. 

Unfortunately at this juncture, like Peter I also believe that the success of a commercial LENR product is the only event that will reverse the negative impressions and disposition of the science community toward LENR. 


  1. All the debate beside PdD/NiH, science/industry make me evolve.

    The first debate is whether LENR(+) should be understood as science first, then industrial. I feel that history says, like Taleb says, like Norbert Alter, that NO. Industrial struggle, and scientific struggle, are a parallel work, which seed each others. Industri often lead, but science catch it back and feed it sot it can continue.

    The second debate is whether PdD electrolysis was a bad luck, or an asset among many.

    My vision from far is that PdD caught too much attention, for many reason :
    - because of a kind of conservatism, (as Fleischman moaned) that make sponsor ask to test in the know direction...
    - because it is easier for some kind of experimentalists. Electrolysis, is done at room temperature, room pressure, with tabletop tools... even if Hightech, and tricky, it is not big science.
    - because of low budget. tabletop experiment demand less budget, and non specific devices, that is compatible with stolen time, off-time usage of labs....

    there are exception. for example Iwamura used microelectronics kind of tools, probably because he have access to it, and he know it well.

    Rossi, as an expert in petrochemical, seemed to be more used with high temperature dry gas... fralick seemed to have followed a similar preference.

    globally from the vision of studies on innovation, what we need is a big variety of people, experienced with different technology, with different preference.

    Electrolysis is as peter says a very complex system, but easy to build and run. Maybe it have kept the sacred flame of LENR alive?

    and anyway one day, as a complex system, it will raise complex answers... I just expect that gas phase powders/foam or thin film will help to establish theoretical answers first...

  2. Weak? Enfeebled? Will be extinguished? PdD LENR is not weak, it's chaotic, so far. It's expensive. It may remain a scientific curiosity, but definitely crucial to the history of LENR. It remains a mystery, as with all LENR.

    There is no doubt that the development of a *available* commercial product will break open the floodgates. *However,* some will continue to investigate PdD, because it's easy, and there is much known about it.

    Until it happens, we don't know which will come first, the commercial product or a breakthrough in "mainstream understanding." My claim has been for a while that the corner has already been turned, don't be fooled by internet pseudoskeptical trolls who imagine that their fantasies are "science." In the journals, cold fusion is real. Scientists who are interested will carry on, and increasingly others will join them.

    One way or another, it's coming.

    As I am a skeptic, or aspire to be one, I'll allow that "it" could be something totally amazing: discovery of the artifact that explains the heat/helium ratio. Otherwise, I'm betting on it. And that's just ordinary science, correlation, probability.

    That kind of result does not yet exist with NiH. We don't know the ash. So the present situation:

    NiH: commercially ahead, multiple companies, no independent confirmations. Ash unknown.
    PdD: still difficult to reproduce, but independent confirmation of a reproducible experiment (the measurement of heat/helium). Ash known.

  3. Dear Abd,

    At fast reading your comment I saw "breakthrough understandinG"
    Actually it is about the understanding by the mainstream" some sudden change of the genarl opiniongeneraland a lot of scientists fall in love with LENR. Not very probable, what can trigger such an event? Suddenly everybody's IQ increases with 30 points?

    A sudden understanding inside the community would be more surprising, an illumination, satori whatever. PdD science? Topology- unknoan, nature-unknown. Mechanism -unknown? What kind of science is this? We know that high loading and flux CAN be good but this is only pre-science! It is something very rotten in Pd-landa, so many good experiments and s a lot of theories contradict each other and vice-versa. I like the work, admire the workers but the results are- let's use you euphemism-chaotic in the best case.Inconsistent, not scientific yet.