Posted on 03/14/2013 1:27:00 PM PDT by Kevmo
Larsen, the fellow referenced earlier in this article, would dispute your argument ~ that it’s hot fusion ~ the theory he contributed to says much of that light is from the corona and there a different process prevails ~ which is simply not the same as ‘hot fusion’ which goes on INSIDE the stars and which is expressed, for the most part, at non-visible light frequencies.
The mobsters involved in that have been getting rounded up lately and put on trial. I keep my eye out for some of their American associates who have made it a practice to harrass folks interested in competing alternative energy projects.
jus' sayin' eh!
Nobody is raging against legitimate research
***You haven’t been paying attention to what your fellow anti-science truthers have been saying, even on this thread....
Cold fusion also has zip to do with legitimate science.
39 posted on Thursday, March 14, 2013 7:35:28 PM by Moonman62 (The US has become a government with a country, rather than a country with a government.)
Sounds like the typical pseudo-scientific malarkey that has been surrounding cold fusion for some time. After my own little quick survey, here is a reputable retort to the theory:
http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/43138/widom-larsen-theory
I am not an expert in nuclear physics. But clearly, the “mainstream” does not accept this. However, being trained both as a condensed matter physicist and chemist, I appreciate the appeal cold fusion, a.k.a. these days “LENR”, has for some otherwise level-headed scientist. But alas it is not energetically viable under currently accepted theories. If some mechanism exists for something like LENR, then it will have to be discovered and proven by experimental evidence, because that would represent probably the greatest breakthrough in physics since the Michelson-Morley experiment, which disproved ether and foreshadowed the quantum and Einstein relativity revolution. That is, it is a paradigm shifting crisis in conventional thinking, ala Kuhnian revolution.
And so I sound like a skeptic, which IMHO is a good scientist. Show me the evidence! However, I would not want to discourage the tinkerers and dreamers to continue their efforts to flail at convention. Ultimately that is what is required to usurp those of us who are conservative in our views ;)
Show me the evidence!
***Read Baudettes book. Read the papers at lenr-canr.org
Amazon.com: Excess Heat: Why Cold Fusion Research Prevailed ...
http://www.amazon.com/Excess-Heat-Fusion-Research-Prevailed/dp/0967854830 - View by Ixquick Proxy - Highlight
Excess Heat: Why Cold Fusion Research Prevailed (2nd Edition) [Charles G. ... Mr. Baudette has done a excellent job of presenting the fact and history of this ...
Familiarize yourself with the evidence
alas it is not energetically viable under currently accepted theories.
if it disagrees with experiment it is wrong. That is all there is to it. ~Nobel Prize Winning Nuclear Physicist Richard Feynman
You can disagree all you like. My position is real science, yours is pseudoscience. The "scientific consensus" is meaningless, and is basically "bandwagoning". ONE well done experiment, properly verified, is sufficient to overthrow even the most beautiful theory. See Einstein, Feinman, Schwinger, and hundreds of other "hard" scientists.
All "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" does is give scientific-SOUNDING cover for "some" supposed scientists to ignore data they don't like.
I see Kevmo has already recommended Beaudette's book and the publications archive at LENR/CANR. The evidence is available.
Get back to us with your opinion after reading Beaudette.
What has impeded LENR is science politics, not lack of evidence. The "hot fusioneers" are protecting their cash cow of grant money. Nothing more, nothing less.
“your fellow anti-science truthers”
Why should I care what you think when you lump everyone in together with your stupid Alinsky tactics, regardless of what their actual opinions are?
Yeah, right. If it was only one incident of fraud, your theory might be plausible, but alas, there are many, so it is not.
Well, I should be more specific. The nonsense you and Warthog post from blogs and discussion forums has zip to do with legitimate science. Things like fusion in light bulbs and Rossi's fraud are examples.
There is only one legitimate cold fusion and that is muon catalyzed.
The only verified instance of fraud in LENR was when a coterie of MIT physicists fudged their positive results.
http://newenergytimes.com/v2/sr/ColdFusion1989/MIT/MITAllegations.shtml
Why should I care about what you think, and why should you care what I think... typical standoff caused by anti-science truthers, like you.
On every one of your threads you resort to name calling. Why should anyone take you seriously?
Using just one line for each "experiment" would take up how many pages of a publication? How could such an article ever be peer reviewed?
“anti-science truthers”
Again with the childish name-calling. What are you, in 3rd grade? Grow up, man.
I wasn’t speaking of fraud in LENR research, just the history of fraud by a particular individual, your boy Rossi. That’s one of the many reasons most people are skeptical of him, and by extension, your posts. You see, if you don’t have enough discernment to realize that Rossi is most likely pulling a con, then anything else you post is suspect by extension.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.