In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Wed, 30 Sep 2009 21:53:22 -0400: Hi, [snip] >Bias is too strong a word. It is more a case of neat-freak programmer (me) >who likes to keep things in neat categories. I meant what I said: people >come to LENR-CANR looking for one thing, and I don't want them to find much >stuff that doesn't seem to fit. That annoys me when I go to other >specialized websites.
My point Jed, is that neither LENR nor CANR specifically implies the presence of a lattice, hence I think restricting the content to papers based only on lattice based LENR-CANR is too severe a restriction. It may as yet turn out that it really does only occur in a lattice, but I don't think we are that far along yet in our understanding of the phenomenon (or perhaps phenomena if it turns out that there are actually several different mechanisms capable of producing LENR-CANR). > >The beauty of the Internet is that anyone can find Mills in an instant, so >they don't need me. Here you implicitly recognize that Mills might be relevant to the topic. > >A few unclassifiable odds things such as Oriani or Vysotskii will not bother >readers. Think of it this way. You go to the Freer Gallery to say Oriental >art. It is chock full of magnificent ancient paintings and sculptures from >China and Japan. There are also a few paintings by Whistler interspersed >among them -- also masterpieces. They don't bother the viewer even though >they are "off topic" as it were, The problem is that you seem to think that if it isn't lattice based then it's "off topic". Let me give a concrete example. Muon catalyzed fusion clearly meets the definition of a Low Energy Nuclear Reaction, and hence papers on it could find a place in your library, but I suspect you wouldn't even consider including them. I understand how this has happened. It's because CF started with lattice based reactions, and all the work since has also been lattice based (AFAIK)- in fact I doubt that anyone other than me has even considered that it might not need to be lattice based. >I don't recall ever discussing this with Ed. I also do not recall Mills or >anyone else in his team submitting a paper to LENR-CANR Am I mistaken in believing that you actively seek out papers for inclusion, and don't just wait for people to send them to you? >, although I met with >them at MIT and at other time. At MIT I got the distinct impression they >considered their gigantic bulk Ni experiments to be a form of cold fusion, >and I expect most cold fusion researchers think so. I have thought about >uploading their MIT slides but I can't find any of the authors to ask >permission. (And as you have seen, some authors do go ape shit when you >upload without permission!) > >- Jed Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
