Interesting article, but far from reality.

Compared to most article you cover a much wider scope of what is happening in science, but you miss most of what is happening industrially.

My point of view is that we are in a cas of paradigm change in nuclear energy, like the one Thomas Kuhn studied in "the structure of scientifc revolution".

That theory is clearly explaining why LENr is rejected. In such transition the old-school community choose the evidence that "are acceptable" so thet their position stay winning. IT IS IMPOSSIBLe TO CONVINCE WITH EVIDENCES. thait is a conclusion of Thosma Kuhn. Beside some More than Iwamura and toyota , moe than NASA GRC 89/2008 (and Tsignhua 2005, biberian 2007) replication of gas loading heat, more than mc kubre isothermal calorimetry, more tha ENEA report 41 showing He4/Heat correlatin, you can find tritium production, that simply show, prove that the mainstream position is undefendable. It is undefendable, but it is forbidden to critic it.

the evidence are clear today, that LENr cannot be inexistent. tritiuum, neutron, transmutation, he4, correlation, linke with crystallographic structure (and not metrology artifact).

as Thomas Kuhn says, it is impossible to convince wit evidence.

the only way is through a global theory, that encompass all the physics.

Clearly there is no good theory today, not widom larsen, not kim-zubarev BEC, not takahashi TSC...

NASA and Zawodny are wrong when claiming they have the final theory, yet I understand that they claim that just to allow the delusional mainstream to look at the fact. Because mainstream scientist, like a priest, don't look at evidence when they think it oppose their dogma.

In fact LENr does not violate physics, and it simply probably work by a process that simply physicists don't imagine yet. Like it happens for plane, when discovering the theory of wings. Widom-Larsen is showing an example of how a theory could respect quantum mechanic, and LENR... it does nor work, but the ideas pave the way, like TSC and Kim BEC.

The patent of NASA is loose in my opinion (I don't believe they have a real technology, unlike defkalion and brillouin who are filing patents).

beside those scientific question, the business is working on industrializing all http://www.lenrnews.eu/lenr-summary-for-policy-makers/

Rossi is unpredictable, yet Aldo Prois give Rossi some credibility. Defkalion despite the "very strange" disdain of US-based actors, seems very credible, and Nelson report, "very strangely" ignored, is clear that Defkalion have much more than a tea kettle (kW range), that they are not a fraud, that it is working on-demand, and that however the COP is validated only around 3, with hope to get better. they today claim on the first day, and much more later... they claim no need to publicity and that they have to refuse partners.. I can just confirm that underground there are few startups working on LENR projects, and some old-industry discretely contacting those actors.

I've made early this year an executive summary on that subject http://www.lenrnews.eu/lenr-summary-for-policy-makers/ In the introduction you can also follow the link to an article that discuss of why LENR is proved beyond any reasonable doubt.

Sure the discussion here is... Late.

less late that the one on APS.

-- AlainCo the techwatcher of lenr-forum.com

Posts

Wikitag Contributions

Comments