Skip to main content

View Diary: Defkalion Demonstrates LENR Reactor (34 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  You mischaracterized my argument. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Silvia Nightshade, polecat

    It's not happening because it violates fundamental physics, the conservation of energy.

    If you could point me to a theory that explains the lack of gamma ray measurements, or an explanation of why the million times more likely branching reactions don't occur, please do.

    Your claim about 'hundreds if not thousands' of scientific papers is just flat out wrong, assuming that you refer to peer reviewed publications. If you're referring to non-peer reviewed papers, then yes, many of the true believers are quite prolific writers.

    You only reduce error if measurements are independent. Given the fact that it's a small cadre of true believers, it doesn't matter how many measurements they make, it will always support their belief.

    Your common sense fails if you don't consider the possibility that these people just aren't doing good science, and it's not 'irresponsible' to note a waste of resources.

    If you want to 'save the planet', then why would you encourage people to use polluting energy chasing a fantasy? Is the energy for the experiments coming from renewable power? Heck, if this stuff works, why don't they whip together a few LENR reactors to power their experiments?

    I think we both know why.

    •  Defkalion demonstration (0+ / 0-)

      Hi Ozy I do appreciate your taking the time and your responses are valid. I am on a camping trip tapping this out on my iPhone so I have to be brief. A very good place to start for documentation would be. This site is run by Jed Rothwell who is admittedly an ardent supporter of LENR. If you spend some time there you will learn that a lot of the research is in fact peer reviewed although to be a peer in this setting I assume you do have to be at least disposed to accept the possibility that LENR effects are real. More later if you are game!

      •  I would prefer a more specific link (0+ / 0-)

        to support your various claims. And given that the claims violate several basic, fundamental principles of well established physics, only allowing review by people who already accept LENR as possible eliminates actual critical review of most of the scientific population.

        Science works best when it tries to disprove something new and fails, not when it is looking for ways that something new 'might be possible' despite everything else telling you that it isn't. That leads to crack-pot science, perpetual motion machines, and wastes of time and money.

        If the science of LENR was sound, it wouldn't matter if a reviewer 'believed' in it or not. The theory, equations, and results would stand on their own.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site