Hmm permalink didn't work, but here it is: Alain Coetmeur 4 hours ago
EmDrive phenomenon is still uncertain, and may well be an unimagined artifact. Unimagined because until now, no artifact was able toe explain the result, and EmDrive phenomenon was replicated. Ethan Siegel, as usual give priority to theory facing evidences. On E-cat I can, only laugh at his misinformation. The same way, he reject evidences only from theory, despite a much more serious list of experimental evidences, he reject not only E-cat but also LENR aka cold fusion. E-cat reality, I concede, is mostly supported by business evidence, like Tom darden commitment, 50M$ investment by Woodford fund, Fortune article interviewing Tom darden and even strange name-dropping of Time magazine with “Industrial Heat” Experimental evidence of E-cat are mostly loose, and the only serious experimental evidence, the calorimetry of Ferrara test, the melting in Ferrara, and Lugano test isotopic shift, are hidden by smoke screen of false informations and conspiracy theories. The bad job or Rossi until Ferrara, and then on the Swedish physicists prevented better evidence to be clear. Anyway, people doing, like Woodford fund, their due diligence can acquire solid evidence. Since Woodford fund is very famous in UK, many other actors are looking at it. However LENR, despite the pathological consensus, is beyond the reasonable doubt. There is hundreds of peer reviewed papers that are produced by many scientists, from various scientists in many countries, in many recognized organizations. The consensus denying LENr reality is no less than a groupthink, a collective denial. Lawrence Forsley just published on Academia.edu a document listing the best papers presenting, among others, the numerous replications of US Navy Spawar co-deposition LENR experiment. There is much more, and all is denied without any rational reason. This is why no less than Airbus Chief scientist is now supporting LENR startups (like LENR-Cities), and organizing LENr Workshop in Airbus resort (Toulouse). Instead of parroting theory justified denial, I would appreciate Forbes reports Woodford fund investment, Airbus Innovations movements, Tohoku University LENR lab newly created with MHI and CleanPlanet, Baishishan technology park welcoming Tom darden E-cat technology, and maybe more that some journalist present in LENRG-Oxborf, LENRG-Milan, LENRG-Neuchatel, should have reported. Ethan Siegel is very good in explaining theory, and showing how evidence match the theory. With evidence that don’t match the theory, I think he is clearly out of his domain of competence. On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 4:56 AM, Blaze Spinnaker <blazespinna...@gmail.com> wrote: > Brilliant smackdown: > http://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2015/11/08/the-em-drive-nasas-impossible-engine-highlights-our-greatest-failing/?commentId=comment_blogAndPostId/blog/comment/4033-120-22 > > On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 4:51 AM, Blaze Spinnaker <blazespinna...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> What's particularly arrogant is he says "respect scientists" but then >> he's denigrating all of the extremely well educated and talented scientists >> that actually believe in cold fusion. >> >> I think Ethan is having a nervous breakdown. >> >> On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 4:41 AM, Blaze Spinnaker <blazespinna...@gmail.com >> > wrote: >> >>> It's just click bait. Move on. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 1:06 AM, Alain Sepeda <alain.sep...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> The usual ranting of Ethan Siegel against anomalies that don't respect >>>> theory. >>>> >>>> >>>> http://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2015/11/08/the-em-drive-nasas-impossible-engine-highlights-our-greatest-failing/ >>>> >>>> one day we will have to tell him what is science. >>>> >>> >>> >> >
