COLD FUSION

Those who follow the unpecedented Cold Fusion episode might be interested in my new essay;

it is posted at: pages.csam.montclair.edu/~kowalski/xyz.htm

Please share this link with those who might be interested, for example, with journalists, friends,

colleagues, students, etc. Or forward this post to them.

The essay is not copyrighted; feel free to use it in any way you wish.

Comments will be appreciated, as usual.

Thank you in advance,

Ludwik Kowalski, Ph.D. (see Wikipedia)

It would help if you had an abstract with such papers … and a greater visual distinction in your quoted material, especially when you leave out a quote mark. It becomes difficult to keep track of who is speaking in the extended prose. Perhaps indentation as is used throughout internet forums? … italics? … color? … something?

“Facts and logic do not work in this field.” seems like an interesting statement from X1. I have to wonder what kind of “facts and logic” he uses to support that notion.

“QM is thermodynamics” … “chemistry is QM” - typical novice philosopher mindset of the Quantum Magi lusting for more reverence. And QM explains nothing. It is an after-the-fact tool for gaining statistical accuracy. It is correlation, not causation. It is NOT a valid ontology. Can those people even spell “ontology”? :eusa-snooty:

It seems obvious to me that CF is far, far more of a sociopolitical governed issue than an issue for science to “figure out”.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfY8QBxiAsU[/youtube]

Is the resonate collision of deuterons the only method being currently used for CF production (as opposed to perhaps ballistic collisions)?

And have they yet discovered that they are also creating a proportionally very small amount of lithium in the process?