----- Original Message ----- From: "Jed Rothwell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<snip>
Quoting Ed Storms:

It is not necessary for the breakthrough to lead
directly to a practical device.

I agree with Ed about this, but it should be noted that other people such as Mike Melich feel that theory is somewhat overrated and that it is possible to make practical devices without a theory. He is the one who pointed to the Aegis radar example. According to him, the materials problems were worked out by Edisonian techniques and even today the theory is somewhat inadequate to explain performance. (I expect it is better than cold fusion theory.)

Aegis is a phased-array radar system. The antenna is a large flat plate with over a thousand individual radiating elements whose phase can be individually changed by a computer. The result is a well formed, electronically steered, beam which can flick across the sky, tracking multiple targets at the same time. The Aegis system has in mutiple trials intercepted incoming missiles. The phase shifting means is proprietary. Melich could be correct that its formulation was empirical, but it was well withing established knowledge.

However, the situation in LENR is a bit different. Nobody has built even a 1 kW reactor and run it for weeks. We don't know what the "consumables" are in the long term. All we have are interesting effects. We don't need a comprehensive theory, only a means to get X kilowatt-months. And don't forget that that the kilowatts must be in excess of the power necessary to run the aparatus.

Mike Carrell

Reply via email to