I'm surprised, but their position seems correct. the real spirit of wikipedia is to let different position express, givent they have references...
clearly the article is skeptic, but it is the mainstream position. their information on preliminary patent office position is useful. it seems that todays clearly the theories, and event the facts are not enough settled, event to battle. my fear would have been that like on some really controversial subject they suppress the dissent. another usual method is to set as mainstream a non mainstream position, fruit of an insider lobby , despite of scientific and industry knowledge. we have been lucky, and BTW despite my positive spirit here, I'm really skeptic of any position, including negatives ones. When the truth is known, either we will see that we can me scammed by a network of internet dog, or manipulated by mainstream press and similar media like wikipedia (wikipedia is clealy taken under control by mainstream lobby and media, and not the one you imagine named lobby, the one that are very politically correct- forget Exxon and other dying devil of previous century). trying to settle and believe in a theory before the fact are settled, if a bit risky. by the way, anything that: - break the conservation of energy - break the growth of entropy - transmit useful information faster than light (group velocity, not phase velocity) - break Heisenberg inequality - break general relativity is very very very suspect to me. but CF and LENR does not need such, like superconduction. I would say that CF and LENR don't break the law of physics, just the tradition. We are not far from what have been sais about plane (cannot fly because heavier than air). if the measures are good, weakness of gamma could imply nucleus spin transition (energy do match), maybe also lattice behavior like in superconduction or semiconductors, and even maybe surface effects and 2D lattice.... but it is a guess. I don't understand nano-magnetism, but if it is nucleus spin transition, or nucleus-electroninteraction, or nucleus-lattice spin transition, It could be a candidate... today the most important (and our society have forgotten that principle), is to settle the facts. many talking of zero point energy seems not to really understand what it is really. by definition, you cannot use energy from it. however it can catalyse, by creating temporary particle and energy (let's say it is a short term loan)... like what is done for tunneling. really , and wikipedia is right, we should be careful when promoting theories... we could (do) look crazy. 2011/12/2 Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> > I am surprised they did not erase the whole article. > > They probably will, soon. > > - Jed > >
