"I can’t even make the claim that because some of these experiments resulted in heat output, that LENR must be real. For all I know, the experiment was laced with all or any sort of catalyst they could lay their hands on and a few of them blew up....not surprisingly...This author uses the fact that a window was melted to assert that a vast amount of heat was produced. This is the kind of claim that I find very misleading and unscientific."
"So if this is what all the LENR advocates believe, then I can say that they are clearly more believing in faith then they are believing in science.
"But that is just my opinion and like everyone knows, everyone has at least one."
You are very full of opinions on the basis of having studied almost nothing about the topic. You are GROSSLY ignorant of the reality of the subject, which is covered in literally thousands of scientific papers.
PLEASE do some homework. READ BEAUDETTE'S BOOK. It is THE best, most concise introduction to the SCIENCE of the subject. If you don't want to put out the bucks, your local public library can borrow it from another library either for free or a small charge (typically postage).
If you take the above as an insult, it is not intended to be. At this point you are in the "...knows not, and knows not that he knows not..." stage.
I’m not insulted....I was responding to what the writer of a piece on a NASA site had said about it.
It also tied to “thousands of tests” phrase that I continually get from advocates of this technology which I view as a mishmash of private efforts by all sorts of people trying to discover the “Big One”.
Kinda like my own personal quest (just a mental exercise) with “anti-gravity”.
So no, I’m not insulted...I am just trying to flesh out the underlying emotional connection to this.....”potential” science inquiry. To me all this is essentially anecdotal evidence and until it’s matured into something useful and proved, it’s hard for me to get attached to it. So I won’t do that no matter how much I read about it, and I have read a number of papers about it, all different but yet the same.
I keep reading about this transmutation angle, and all I see as proof of that is either theoretical or it’s purported to be proven by a picture of a piece of nickel partially destroyed that has copper like particles adhering to it.
Sorry...but that won’t do for me. I know Nickel pretty well. I have seen it partially melted, melted it, watched it boil in a arc furnace. It actually does gain a copper like sheen to it when exposed to high temps. (in this case over 2200 degrees F) I don’t particularly know why but I was told it was normal when I asked...
There are far too many questions here and few answers about this reported reaction so rather than remain silent any wait for the cows to come home, I thought I would participate in some debate which I find often to be stimulating.
“PLEASE do some homework. READ BEAUDETTE’S BOOK”
Not adverse to reading books....lol
I’ll see if it’s available electronically. I have not been inside a library since college, more than 40 years ago....arrrgh.....time...time...time..
Just wanted to address this comment while I am thinking about it because tomorrow I will not recall it.
Yes...I do have a lot of opinions on this without too much study into what has been said by others. The reason is the same reason this entire concept has been more or less shunned by the science community. The opinions, as I dissect them, are connected to the claim of transmutation to a large degree. Other issues as well but this is the big one.
I think I have already said many times that I don't question that some sort of energy release is in fact taking place and releasing heat. Now that should suffice to satisfy accusations that my opinions are flat wrong, denier liar, yaddadadadada....
My objections largely revolve around the explanations of how the heat is produced and to a degree, because of the limited manor of the test referenced on this thread, I have issues with the potential viability of the civil use of this heat and it's sustainability and it's cost/benefit.
The transmutation thing is likely the beginning and the end of my problems with this and to describe the thinking that is going on in my mind will require at least a hundred thousand words to cover this single point.
If I had to shorten it up to a paragraph or two I would say that Nickel, the primary component of this device, has always been to me to be a mystery metal. I don't think we have it classified properly. In fact I don't think the metallurgists understand exactly what it is!
As I mentioned at some point, I once worked for a metal specialty business that had it's own large foundry and machine shop facilities. I was a maintenance tech with other responsibility's connected to testing, measurements, heat treating....whatever they wanted me to do...
Nickel was a big part of the alloy business and it was discussed often, and there were mostly questions with no answers as to it's qualities. It's not that well understood and even as a element on the chart, they can't seem to make up their minds as to the atomic structure. So they use two different atomic configurations. Years ago, the thought crossed my mind that perhaps they had it wrong and that there something very special about nickel.
I could go further into it and even explain that my fascination with nickel eventually through circumstances beyond my control caused the loss of my job there.
I think that is enough for now....but I wanted you to understand that my numerous opinions have roots in my past and in what I know, they are not just off the cuff. At least not all of them...lol