Hi.
It is written: message: I read a recent editorial in "Physics Today" journal where the > editor was interviewing a physicist of some repute on what criteria he > would accept the LENR/cold fusion phenomenon as worthy of further research > and DOE funding. The physicist replied that if the LENR/cold fusion > community could demonstrate an input/output energy ratio of 1/10, 100% > repeatability and economic feasibility he would recommend going ahead.
This is exactly my point 1 from my last post. Jed says it is unreasonable. Yet with 15 years and 1000's of papers it's hardly an unexpected response.
So true. Note that this was achieved at, and written up for, ICCF-10. The JET Thermal Demonstration with the phusor showed more than 270% excess heat over a week. JET Thermal Products URL for Public Open-House Cold Fusion (ICCF-10) Demonstration at MIT http://world.std.com/~mica/jeticcf10demo.html
BTW, this ICCF10 paper, and other associated with it, are not even listed at the <b>censored</b> LENR/cold fusion site. [The reason(s) that the usual suspects censor cold fusion news has occasionally in the past, and no doubt again soon will, become clearer.]
Dr. Mitchell Swartz
==================================================================
The COLD FUSION TIMES - the Uncensored cold fusion site http://world.std.com/~mica/cft.html
Latest links to, and excerpt information from, the just-issued DOE Report,
to this week's Nature, Salt Lake City, and New York Times articles about it,
(and to info re: Dr. Mallove's cold case) have been updated.
Links are also present to references in cold fusion which are uncensored (unlike the 'CF/LENR' site),
and to robust cold fusion systems, including the JTP Phusor.
