[TXnMA]

Hmmm -- been having problems with my satellite ISP, so, when I got a brower timeout on my first post attempt I blamed it on Wild Blue. Apparently, though, it was FR's delay in acknowledging receipt that was the problem -- hence the double post.

FWIW, I perceive this publication as nothing more than a bunch of "blackboard theorizing" -- with no experimental attempt by the authors to confirm their conjectures. IMH(engineer's)O, that makes it only slightly more valuable than the chalk dust now on the erasers... '-)

[Kevmo]

Experimentalists are always criticized for not having the theory, and theorists are always criticized for not doing experiments. That naysaying criticism is as old and useless as the chalk on your eraser.

[Wonder Warthog]

"FWIW, I perceive this publication as nothing more than a bunch of "blackboard theorizing" -- with no experimental attempt by the authors to confirm their conjectures. IMH(engineer's)O, that makes it only slightly more valuable than the chalk dust now on the erasers.."

They have plenty of experimental data to work with. There is quite a large amount of peer-reviewed publications on experimental work on LANR, by many different approaches. And you can bet that, now that this theory has been published, some of those guys who did the peer-reviewed work will be looking specifically for the signatures of this theoretical model.