“I completely revert the burden of proof to orthodox physicists who now will have to prove the non-existence of cold fusion, if they can, since they have been claiming it for years if not decades. The only way my theory leaves them, is to find a counter example to our theory.”
This is kind of an odd statement. He has a theoretical proof and now the burden is on everyone else to disprove his theory?
He’s an incredibly brilliant super-scientist, not a logician.
If the theory works, make a reactor, collect free energy, get rich, who cares what anybody else thinks.
As a consequence, even if the burden of proof remains to cold fusionists to experimentally prove, at least, they are right, on a theoretical point of view, I completely revert the burden of proof to orthodox physicists who now will have to prove the non-existence of cold fusion, if they can, since they have been claiming it for years if not decades.
How can anyone be "right" on a theoretical point of view? Indeed, you can't be wrong on a theoretical point of view, but the only way to certify you are right, is to prove it, making it a fact, not a theory.
That's how science works - you pt it out there and see if anyone can break it.