MOTTO
Cited from memory:
I do not need results and/or hope to continue fight ((Wilhem of Orange)
LENR THINKER
THE PROBLEMS and/or TROUBLES OF COLD FUSION AND WHY THE SCIENTISTS REJECT COLD FUSION
Warning note.
As told, the first 27 years of cold Fusion history gave me the privilege and treasure of so many good friends, friends up to death, theirs or mine. I regret but the last year, due to my position in the Rossi vs Darden Trial- defending the Rossi technology has furnished the curse of enemies- and mutual, irreversible, violent enmity also will last up to death, their or much more probably mine, they are younger than me.
And these individuals of very low morals are- if they speak about me- misinterpreting everything I say. Now, they will probably accuse me, again, of disrespect for the Founders. Unfounded and unjust- Martin and Stanley have my full admiration for their genius- however I will show that a a long self--reinforcing chain of unlucky events and circumstances caused deep troubles to Cold Fusion; and that must be understood realistically for the sake of the future of our field.
The problem of opposition/funding to cold fusion was discussed yesterday on CMNS but - a coincidence also by Gerard Mc Ek and Andrea Rossi on JONP.
A very complex and also "wicked" problem, however in my opinion some vital aspects are ignored and these added make trouble. (You know, problems can be solved, troubles not really- we can complain and eventually get rid of them).
1. Cold Fusion was a "miscovery" that is a discovery made in a bad place, 25 years minimum before its time, by geniuses having an unproper profession for nurturing their brainchild. PdD is a not fully developed form of LENR- it is static not dynamic.
2. Very soon it became obvious that the trouble goes faar beyond a lack of theory
cold fusion is an unknown group nuclear phenomena lacking definition and identity. So for example if Ethan Siegel or Randy Mills rejects Cold fusion, that is not the same Cold Fusion that is embraced by Ed Storms, Peter Hagelstein Yuri Bazhutov
and these three scientists also have differing Images of the field.
Conceptual chaos was inborn for Cold Fusion and I want to see that somebody proves now it is cured. OK, let's admit it is difficult to make sharp distinctions between identity, definition, basic theory; reality transcends these due to the otherness, complexity, diversity, dynamism, deep change of Cold Fusion/LENR
that includes not only nuclear, but pre- and post-nuclear stages- phenomena
and demands a theoryplex, not an unique theoretical construct. If what i have said in this paragraph is true- it is not contributing to the attractiveness of Cold Fusion.
3. Many collateral idea have popped out fast, however the Founders' electrolytic cell became the dominant, genuine, variant of Cold fusion and despite all the obstacles shown in historical reviews up to the answers given now to Alan Smith the real rejection started gradually only when it was stated and restated the chronic inability to obtain convincingly reproducible and reproducibly convincing results, showing a promise for improvement- quantitative- i.e. scale up and intensification plus qualitative that is controllable & manageable- toward LENR technology. Based on a discussion with Fleischmann I think this was approx. the IMRA France test's finish.
Undeniably hundreds of promising results have been obtained worldwide assuring the survival of LENR, however these were not additive and the promising results matured and got old continuing to be promising results.
4. When two or more real choices exist and the bad(worst) one is chosen- this defines an error; I think this is definitely not the case with Cold Fussion for the following strategic steps:
a) Cold Fusion is first of all about thermal effects, and the trend was to prove these by more sensitive calorimetric measurement, the reliability of these is high but still not absolute as series of recent discussions between the best experts have shown it
huge creative energies etc. had been spent for measurement;
b) The axiom:"we have to discover how Cold fusion works, and only knowing this-
by using the Scientific Method may we proceed toward technological development'
is a must and that's perfectly fine, IF the PdD system is NOT a kind of cul-de-sac technically speaking i.e. it lacks actionable parameter; then the efforts have to be
redirected to other systems as the dry NiH as a pioneering representative of the "transition metal- light hydrogen systems" Question: where does Cold fusion rea;;ly work;
c) For pure blood physicists it is OK that there are many Cold Fusion experimental systems beyond the cradle system and also tens and tens off extremely smart theories ; what is disturbing is the lack of real connection between existing theories and experiment.
This is the first part of my essay to be continued tomorrow.
Question is it useful for defining "serious LENR research'?
I think it is ana alternative to this situation, but it is in danger to be rejected
ab ovo even in the Cold Fusion group.
I will speak again about the "technology First". Lenr + idea.
LENR MONITOR
Advantages of a Battery-Powered QuarkX
http://www.e-catworld.com/2017/04/24/advantages-of-a-battery-powered-quarkx/
Cited from memory:
I do not need results and/or hope to continue fight ((Wilhem of Orange)
LENR THINKER
THE PROBLEMS and/or TROUBLES OF COLD FUSION AND WHY THE SCIENTISTS REJECT COLD FUSION
Warning note.
As told, the first 27 years of cold Fusion history gave me the privilege and treasure of so many good friends, friends up to death, theirs or mine. I regret but the last year, due to my position in the Rossi vs Darden Trial- defending the Rossi technology has furnished the curse of enemies- and mutual, irreversible, violent enmity also will last up to death, their or much more probably mine, they are younger than me.
And these individuals of very low morals are- if they speak about me- misinterpreting everything I say. Now, they will probably accuse me, again, of disrespect for the Founders. Unfounded and unjust- Martin and Stanley have my full admiration for their genius- however I will show that a a long self--reinforcing chain of unlucky events and circumstances caused deep troubles to Cold Fusion; and that must be understood realistically for the sake of the future of our field.
The problem of opposition/funding to cold fusion was discussed yesterday on CMNS but - a coincidence also by Gerard Mc Ek and Andrea Rossi on JONP.
A very complex and also "wicked" problem, however in my opinion some vital aspects are ignored and these added make trouble. (You know, problems can be solved, troubles not really- we can complain and eventually get rid of them).
1. Cold Fusion was a "miscovery" that is a discovery made in a bad place, 25 years minimum before its time, by geniuses having an unproper profession for nurturing their brainchild. PdD is a not fully developed form of LENR- it is static not dynamic.
2. Very soon it became obvious that the trouble goes faar beyond a lack of theory
cold fusion is an unknown group nuclear phenomena lacking definition and identity. So for example if Ethan Siegel or Randy Mills rejects Cold fusion, that is not the same Cold Fusion that is embraced by Ed Storms, Peter Hagelstein Yuri Bazhutov
and these three scientists also have differing Images of the field.
Conceptual chaos was inborn for Cold Fusion and I want to see that somebody proves now it is cured. OK, let's admit it is difficult to make sharp distinctions between identity, definition, basic theory; reality transcends these due to the otherness, complexity, diversity, dynamism, deep change of Cold Fusion/LENR
that includes not only nuclear, but pre- and post-nuclear stages- phenomena
and demands a theoryplex, not an unique theoretical construct. If what i have said in this paragraph is true- it is not contributing to the attractiveness of Cold Fusion.
3. Many collateral idea have popped out fast, however the Founders' electrolytic cell became the dominant, genuine, variant of Cold fusion and despite all the obstacles shown in historical reviews up to the answers given now to Alan Smith the real rejection started gradually only when it was stated and restated the chronic inability to obtain convincingly reproducible and reproducibly convincing results, showing a promise for improvement- quantitative- i.e. scale up and intensification plus qualitative that is controllable & manageable- toward LENR technology. Based on a discussion with Fleischmann I think this was approx. the IMRA France test's finish.
Undeniably hundreds of promising results have been obtained worldwide assuring the survival of LENR, however these were not additive and the promising results matured and got old continuing to be promising results.
4. When two or more real choices exist and the bad(worst) one is chosen- this defines an error; I think this is definitely not the case with Cold Fussion for the following strategic steps:
a) Cold Fusion is first of all about thermal effects, and the trend was to prove these by more sensitive calorimetric measurement, the reliability of these is high but still not absolute as series of recent discussions between the best experts have shown it
huge creative energies etc. had been spent for measurement;
b) The axiom:"we have to discover how Cold fusion works, and only knowing this-
by using the Scientific Method may we proceed toward technological development'
is a must and that's perfectly fine, IF the PdD system is NOT a kind of cul-de-sac technically speaking i.e. it lacks actionable parameter; then the efforts have to be
redirected to other systems as the dry NiH as a pioneering representative of the "transition metal- light hydrogen systems" Question: where does Cold fusion rea;;ly work;
c) For pure blood physicists it is OK that there are many Cold Fusion experimental systems beyond the cradle system and also tens and tens off extremely smart theories ; what is disturbing is the lack of real connection between existing theories and experiment.
This is the first part of my essay to be continued tomorrow.
Question is it useful for defining "serious LENR research'?
I think it is ana alternative to this situation, but it is in danger to be rejected
ab ovo even in the Cold Fusion group.
I will speak again about the "technology First". Lenr + idea.
LENR MONITOR
Advantages of a Battery-Powered QuarkX
http://www.e-catworld.com/2017/04/24/advantages-of-a-battery-powered-quarkx/
From Rossi's JONP.
Giuseppe
April 23, 2017 at 3:37 PM
Dear Andrea,
seems that to activate the E-Cat you need heat, does the QuarkX need heat to be activated?
Best regards, Giuseppe
Andrea Rossi
April 23, 2017 at 3:48 PM
Giuseppe:
Not exactly. The mechanism is much more complex and is based on electromagnetic fields.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
LENR INSPIRATION
1) Revealing the mystery behind the formation of hollowed nanoparticles during metal oxidation
Giuseppe
April 23, 2017 at 3:37 PM
Dear Andrea,
seems that to activate the E-Cat you need heat, does the QuarkX need heat to be activated?
Best regards, Giuseppe
Andrea Rossi
April 23, 2017 at 3:48 PM
Giuseppe:
Not exactly. The mechanism is much more complex and is based on electromagnetic fields.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
LENR INSPIRATION
1) Revealing the mystery behind the formation of hollowed nanoparticles during metal oxidation
Date:April 22, 2017
Source:Argonne National Laboratory
Summary:
New knowledge has been gained about the behavior of metal nanoparticles when they undergo oxidation, by integrating X-ray imaging and computer modeling and simulation. This knowledge adds to our understanding of fundamental processes like oxidation and corrosion.
2) The IDEA is great- paper about medicine
Science has outgrown the human mind and its limited capacitieshttps://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?shva=1#inbox
3) Jack Ma Sees Decades of Pain as Internet Upends Old Economy
3) Jack Ma Sees Decades of Pain as Internet Upends Old Economy
No comments:
Post a Comment