Re: [Vo]:An article more documented than usual on Cold Fusion early hisory
I wrote: My impression of the field is that it has become a little rarified, and its practitioners are tangled up in debates not unlike those of rabbinical scholars. To these debates I should also add those of Islamic theologians and medieval schoolmen (i.e., nothing specific to rabbinical scholars, per se). Eric
[Vo]:An article more documented than usual on Cold Fusion early hisory
I ust found that article http://www.conspirazzi.com/cold-fusion-proven-true it seems more documented than most even positive articles. if some can correct possible errors, or complete.
Re: [Vo]:An article more documented than usual on Cold Fusion early hisory
The behavior of this generation of physicists and astrophysicists will someday be seen as a dark chapter in the history of science and a condemnation of the new form of academic cooperation and competition that emerged from the paranoia of the Cold War. The culture of fundamental science has been utterly corrupted, and from my point of view, the greatest possible benefit of LENR will be the resulting purges of academia and restoration of order to a noble enterprise, when the people who ignored it or actively blocked it and suppressed its researchers are exposed for the charlatans they are. Their record will be empty string theory, vapid cosmology, multidimensional hallucinations, science fiction universes, and ignorant attacks on a new branch of science. -drl --- I write a little. I erase a lot. - Chopin From: Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com To: Vortex List vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, June 5, 2014 3:10 AM Subject: [Vo]:An article more documented than usual on Cold Fusion early hisory I ust found that article http://www.conspirazzi.com/cold-fusion-proven-true it seems more documented than most even positive articles. if some can correct possible errors, or complete.
Re: [Vo]:An article more documented than usual on Cold Fusion early hisory
I've already encountered rationalizations for this behavior that will result in an assortment of reforms, all of which will be ineffective. On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 6:32 AM, Danny Ross Lunsford antimatte...@yahoo.com wrote: The behavior of this generation of physicists and astrophysicists will someday be seen as a dark chapter in the history of science and a condemnation of the new form of academic cooperation and competition that emerged from the paranoia of the Cold War. The culture of fundamental science has been utterly corrupted, and from my point of view, the greatest possible benefit of LENR will be the resulting purges of academia and restoration of order to a noble enterprise, when the people who ignored it or actively blocked it and suppressed its researchers are exposed for the charlatans they are. Their record will be empty string theory, vapid cosmology, multidimensional hallucinations, science fiction universes, and ignorant attacks on a new branch of science. -drl --- I write a little. I erase a lot. - Chopin -- *From:* Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com *To:* Vortex List vortex-l@eskimo.com *Sent:* Thursday, June 5, 2014 3:10 AM *Subject:* [Vo]:An article more documented than usual on Cold Fusion early hisory I ust found that article http://www.conspirazzi.com/cold-fusion-proven-true it seems more documented than most even positive articles. if some can correct possible errors, or complete.
Re: [Vo]:An article more documented than usual on Cold Fusion early hisory
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 4:32 AM, Danny Ross Lunsford antimatte...@yahoo.com wrote: the people who ignored it or actively blocked it and suppressed its researchers are exposed for the charlatans they are. Their record will be empty string theory, vapid cosmology, multidimensional hallucinations, science fiction universes, and ignorant attacks on a new branch of science. I'm beginning to think what seems to have been a theoretical turn in the past few decades is partly what is responsible for the negative reception of the LENR research. Perhaps many physicists have lost their intuitive sense of what goes on in the physical world. There are whole subfields of physics that barely rely upon empirical evidence. Hypothetically speaking you might be able to connect string theory back to something that can be observed in the world, but even if this is true, it's so abstract that we've failed to do so yet. Presumably there are famous physicists who have devoted their careers to a subfield that has yet to give rise to observable predictions. One almost gets the sense that normal branches of physics (as opposed to theoretical physics) are second-class ones where scientists get their hands too dirty. Much of physics gives the sense of essentially being mathematics with additional fudge factor constants that you must include in your equations from time to time. My impression of the field is that it has become a little rarified, and its practitioners are tangled up in debates not unlike those of rabbinical scholars. Eric
Re: [Vo]:An article more documented than usual on Cold Fusion early hisory
its practitioners are tangled up in debates not unlike those of rabbinical scholars. ***In other words, it is the religion of scientism. On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 7:55 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 4:32 AM, Danny Ross Lunsford antimatte...@yahoo.com wrote: the people who ignored it or actively blocked it and suppressed its researchers are exposed for the charlatans they are. Their record will be empty string theory, vapid cosmology, multidimensional hallucinations, science fiction universes, and ignorant attacks on a new branch of science. I'm beginning to think what seems to have been a theoretical turn in the past few decades is partly what is responsible for the negative reception of the LENR research. Perhaps many physicists have lost their intuitive sense of what goes on in the physical world. There are whole subfields of physics that barely rely upon empirical evidence. Hypothetically speaking you might be able to connect string theory back to something that can be observed in the world, but even if this is true, it's so abstract that we've failed to do so yet. Presumably there are famous physicists who have devoted their careers to a subfield that has yet to give rise to observable predictions. One almost gets the sense that normal branches of physics (as opposed to theoretical physics) are second-class ones where scientists get their hands too dirty. Much of physics gives the sense of essentially being mathematics with additional fudge factor constants that you must include in your equations from time to time. My impression of the field is that it has become a little rarified, and its practitioners are tangled up in debates not unlike those of rabbinical scholars. Eric
Re: [Vo]:An article more documented than usual on Cold Fusion early hisory
There is nothing wrong with abstraction if the abstractor (e.g. Einstein, Dirac, Pauli) knows what he's doing. The problem is, Witten and his crowd, Greene, Smolin, Susskind, Arkami-Hared, Tegmark, none of those people is any good at physics, despite how highly they may think of themselves. What they are good at is competition. Witten at least is a superb mathematician and does understand physics (e.g. critical phenomena) although he is no good at making it, because he has absolutely no physical intuition. He started life as an economist. The rest of that crowd strike me as not even very smart. They are good at taking tests. -drl --- I write a little. I erase a lot. - Chopin From: Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, June 5, 2014 10:55 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:An article more documented than usual on Cold Fusion early hisory On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 4:32 AM, Danny Ross Lunsford antimatte...@yahoo.com wrote: the people who ignored it or actively blocked it and suppressed its researchers are exposed for the charlatans they are. Their record will be empty string theory, vapid cosmology, multidimensional hallucinations, science fiction universes, and ignorant attacks on a new branch of science. I'm beginning to think what seems to have been a theoretical turn in the past few decades is partly what is responsible for the negative reception of the LENR research. Perhaps many physicists have lost their intuitive sense of what goes on in the physical world. There are whole subfields of physics that barely rely upon empirical evidence. Hypothetically speaking you might be able to connect string theory back to something that can be observed in the world, but even if this is true, it's so abstract that we've failed to do so yet. Presumably there are famous physicists who have devoted their careers to a subfield that has yet to give rise to observable predictions. One almost gets the sense that normal branches of physics (as opposed to theoretical physics) are second-class ones where scientists get their hands too dirty. Much of physics gives the sense of essentially being mathematics with additional fudge factor constants that you must include in your equations from time to time. My impression of the field is that it has become a little rarified, and its practitioners are tangled up in debates not unlike those of rabbinical scholars. Eric
