The Inconceivable Embarrassment From Cold Fusion

New Energy and Fuel ^ | Dec 10 2012 | Anon

[Wonder Warthog]

"There are books about ghost hunting, too. One man's "excellent analysis" is another man's unreasonable speculation and bullshit."

Read it and see for yourself. The evidence is there, but you and some others simply refuse to look at it.

[Wonder Warthog]

"Only by the feeble minded that like hearing big sounding words. Cold-fusion has never been replicated. There’s always an excuse why it couldn’t be done."

Sorry, but you're simply wrong. Read Beaudette's book. He goes into depth on each topic, calorimetry, neutron detection, "nuclear ash", and transmutation, and covers the initial experiments and the replications under each heading, with references to the scientific literature in each case. He doesn't cover as many replications as Storms, but more than sufficient to prove his case.

[Moonman62]

Is there are a chart with error bars showing expected output for given inputs? How well does each replication agree with the chart?

[Kevmo]

If presented with a stock certificate from BNY Mellon, do you treat it with the same precaution as you would from one claimed to be found in grandma’s safe? How would you treat one presented from a convicted forger?
***Good point. Proceeding from your analogy of fraudulence, the only verified instance of fraud in LENR so far has been from MIT when they fudged their positive results. So, How would you treat anti-LENR assertions presented from such fraudsters?

[Moonman62]

If there are 80+ years (the effect was first claimed in the 1920's) of non-fraudulent LENR claims, then meeting the following request for basic scientific evidence should be simple:

Is there a chart with error bars showing expected output for given inputs? How well does each replication agree with the chart?

[Moonman62]

So the skeptopaths are allowed certain tactics on FR but the LENR afficianados are not.

Can you explain "skeptopath?" It looks like nothing more than derogatory slang to me.

[Triple]

“the only verified instance of fraud in LENR so far has been from MIT” - K

So, you trust Rossi more than you do MIT, and you have seen no evidence of fraud from Rossi.

Interesting...(I think most people do not share your opinion or observations.)

[TXnMA]

You and I share similar professional backgrounds-- although I decided that the effort of applying for follow-on I*R 100s benefitted my employer more than me -- so I declined the effort...

Your answers sound reasonable; I will follow your posts with an open mind...

[Wonder Warthog]

"Your answers sound reasonable; I will follow your posts with an open mind..."

Please, please, please read Beaudette's book. It is very much what I would have written if I had the time.

This quote from page 341 explains all:

"This book was written by one who loves science. I wrote it in the hope that this new field of scientific research, misnamed cold fusion, might become known to mainstream science rather than being known only to a small cadre of scientists working in an intellectual ghetto."

Like Beaudette, I love science, and the bastardization of science that the pathological skeptics have promulgated REALLY ...... me off.

[Kevmo]

If you can prove fraud for Rossi, by all means contact the authorities and have him arrested. MIT’s fraud has already been proven.

[Kevmo]

If you have something legitimate to ask, some other freeper needs to ask it. Your history of disingenuousness on this topic is enough for me to proceed with higher priorities in my life, such as clipping my toenails.

[TXnMA]

I just watched (and understood) the video of Iwamura's paper, and will do so several more times. Fortunately, I lived in Japan for three years, and am able to follow Iwamura's (quite good, BTW) "JEnglish" fairly well.

As physical chemist, this is the sort of investigation of the mechanism I have been wanting to see: clear, stepwise, using several iterations of materials and conditions -- with multiple, repeated runs producing excellently-overlapping results from standardized, repeatable measurements.

Iwamura's folks do experimentation as it should be done! Only one who comprehends all the variables he explored and reported can appreciate the vast amount of time, work, and attention to detail involved in that report.

By comparison, Rossi's "I fired it up and it got hot!" method naturally leaves genuine professional experimental scientists dissatisfied and unconvinced.

Note that Iwamura focused on the transmuation mechanisms (and variables that affect them) -- and never (yet) reported on the energy effects that the "short-cutters" in the LENR field have taken a "go directly to energy commercialization" approach toward hyping.

Does anyone really think that the likes of Rossi would ever characterize intermediate materials of higher work function (as Iwamura did) -- knowing that their effectiveness should be less or nil -- instead of concentrating solely on the "optimum" material because it would produce "the most results" -- NOW?

If LENR is ever going to become "mainstream" -- careful, "plodding" work on understanding the mechanism MUST be done first. Iwamura is to be congratulated. Rossi, et al, ...well... they do more harm than good...

Another problem is that there are too many dumb@$$3$ who leap to shout spectacular things like

"The Inconceivable Embarrassment From Cold Fusion!"

instead of simply announcing,

"Mitsubishi Reports Progress on Validating and Understanding LENR Transmutation Mechanisms".

~~~~~~~~~~

You 'hypemeisters' are your own worst enemies...

[Triple]

“If you can prove fraud for Rossi, by all means contact the authorities and have him arrested.” - K

Nice evasion.

I take it to mean you don’t really want to admit that there truly is evidence of fraud on the part of Rossi.

[Wonder Warthog]

"If LENR is ever going to become "mainstream" -- careful, "plodding" work on understanding the mechanism MUST be done first. Iwamura is to be congratulated. Rossi, et al, ...well... they do more harm than good..."

I'm sorry, but "understanding the mechanism" has zip to do with the scientific validity or lack of same of CF/LENR. And the "plodding work" has largely been done. The failure has been on the part of the theorists to understand and acknowledge the reality of the subject, and get their asses to work on said understanding. There is a whole new field of physics out there, and being ignored.

To understand just how MUCH "plodding work" has already been done, read Beaudette, then Storms, and then the LENR/CANR database.

"Another problem is that there are too many dumb@$$3$ who leap to shout spectacular things like "The Inconceivable Embarrassment From Cold Fusion!"

I didn't write the headline....the originator of the article did. The Mods frown on posters using our own headlines.

But the headline is accurate, even if you don't like it. Eventually, the reality of cold fusion will be realized by both the general public and the larger scientific community, and the reputations of a large number of the chronic CF skeptics will suffer (and deservedly) as a result.

"You 'hypemeisters' are your own worst enemies..."

Neither Kevmo nor I are "hypemiesters", though the skeptopaths try their darnedest to paint us as such.

[Moonman62]

TXnMA handed you a gift and you did not take it.

[Moonman62]

I didn't write the headline....the originator of the article did. The Mods frown on posters using our own headlines.

You could have excerpted the original article from Krivit's site, which has an accurate headline and is much better written.

Instead you chose a hyped article (which includes a mention of Rossi the con artist) by "anon." You are your own worst enemy.

[Moonman62]

If you call your critics pathological skeptics, do we get to call you and your partner pathological cranks?

[Kevmo]

I take it to mean you don’t really want to admit that there truly is evidence of fraud on the part of Rossi.
***Nice evasion.

Of course there is evidence of fraud on Rossi’s part. But we’re talking proof versus proof. One dirtbag group at MIT meets that standard whereas the other questionable character dude does not meet the standard (or else he’d be in jail by now).

[Kevmo]

I agree with much of what you say here. The SCIENCE behind LENR is detailed, substantive, and worthwhile. When someone tries to jump to ENGINEERING capitalization of their discoveries which includes hiding trade secrets, that’s where the problems have been.

Of course, if only 10% of the Hot-Fusion public trough money was available for the kind of research & engineering needed in this field, we would not have an energy crisis right now.

But the anti-LENR crowd isn’t just anti-Rossi; they are anti-science pathological skeptics. If you honestly think that the differently titled article is worthwhile, why not post it yourself rather than criticize another Freeper’s mistake? Posting it is what someone would do who appreciates science.

[BlueDragon]

And here I thought all along that skepticism was a required thing...

But congratulations. Seagulls have been successfully transmuted into skeptopaths before our very eyes.
I guess that beats waving pom-poms;

Rossi-Rossi he's got a [E-CAT] plan
He can heat water like nobody can!

So after the home team drops back and punts, enough lose interest including the "opposing team" that all one needs do is bring some breathless, hyper-ventilating article that links purported basis for all this ducks(?) coming-home-to-roost editorializing um-phah to another article which withholds certain data behind a pay-wall.

The home team can then pick up the months ago punted ball, with much or most of the methodology used to achieve results hidden from view. The "football" having always been much in the shape of a black box...

Now there are, or can arguably be good enough reasons for claimed results only being spoken of (even in form of graphical imagery), and results chiefly summarized... But that doesn't exactly get the ball fully over the goal line, scoring the decisive "win", giving the pom-pom wavers reason to gloat. Not quite yet.

Who's spackling who around here?

Here is a man asking the question
Is this really the end of the world?
Seagull, you must have known for a long time
The shape of things to come.
? Now you fly, through the sky, never asking why,?
And you fly all around 'til somebody, Shoots you down