[Moonman62]

Well, the energy output would depend on the rate of reaction. The theory seems to tell us how it might happen, but not how often.

Simple energy tests can surely show us something is going on, but beyond that, they are pretty variable and unreliable.

Spectroscopic and electron-diffraction analysis, if the tests were performed over a wide variety of elements/isotopes, would give much, much more concrete results. And as a bonus we could get some ideas about the rate of reaction, thus predictions of energy output.

Pretty much I agree, but it's been over 20 years for cold fusion. At best, it's still a scientific anomaly. It's getting moldy and rotten from being in the basement of science for so long.

[djf]

That’s why we need a testable theory. With a testable theory, the experimental setups can be controlled to the point where they can maximize the results.

Without a theory, they’re kind of shooting in the dark. Cold fusion happens Only on a Tuesday if I was in too much of a hurry to take a shower before work, and Mars is retrograde...

I think it is a real phenomenon, there are simply too many examples of results, yeah, there are plenty of nutballs in the mix but some of these guys are the very best. And it only takes one actual positive result, it would help a whole lot if it’s reproducible.

[muawiyah]

"White Light" LEDs were a scientific impossibility for 8 or 9 decades after the first demonstration of LEDs. All we had were these little red "bulbs" that could blink forever.

Then, as if by magic, someone figured out how it could be done, and simultaneously someone else came up with printable lasing micro-LEDs.

These devices, in turn, allowed for incredible reductions in the size of batteries required for all sorts of things.