On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 11:26 AM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote:
And anyone who has followed the vortex group over the years realizes that > it is top heavy with programmers may have learned a little physics along > the way, but who look at LENR mostly as a control problem. True, and well-put. Vortex has a lot of programmers, and some of us view LENR as a control problem. And more, as an empirical issue to be sorted out rather than explained away. The main objections from physicists who have voiced an opinion on the matter of LENR seem to be to the effect that it should be impossible by accepted theories, i.e., applied mathematical models. Software developers are generally skeptical of the scope and accuracy of mathematical models and see their application primarily as a curve-fitting problem -- are the data we have accurate, does the mathematical model accurately fit those data, and, once it does, can it be used to find new discoveries? When you dig into assumptions in such models pertaining to things like the linearity of important variables (to allow the use of linear algebra), it is easy to see room for a given model possibly being a bad fit in some unexplored area of the parameter space. Is the speed of light a constant value over time? We assume it is. But what's the basis for that assumption? That's just one of many things that we assume that could be queried and found incorrect in the future. Eric
