Are you kidding, or what?
On 11-12-21 04:33 PM, Giovanni Santostasi wrote:
I didn't say that being reproducible by amateurs would be the only way
I would take LENR seriously.
Multiple tests done by respectable scientists, with high sigmas, and
blind methods
"blind methods" ???
What, you think LENR should be treated as some kind of drug?
Blind testing is done in the social sciences and in medicine but not in
physics. It's nutty to even suggest it.
"And in flask A, we have EITHER D20 OR H20, but the researcher *doesn't*
*know* *which*. At the end of the experiment, the sealed files will be
retrieved from the vault and opened and we'll find out what flask A
really contained!"
What a bizarre suggestion.
would be acceptable. But in the end the acceptance of this phenomenon
as a practical approach to energy production would have to be
reproducible not just by amateurs but by EVERYBODY.
This is rank lunacy.
Heck, I can't even reliably trigger a uranium fission chain reaction in
my kitchen, and that's apparently a lot easier to obtain than a LENR OU
result!
It would have to be reproducible as easy as we can lit a room, with
the turn of a switch. It would have to be easy to see and witness that
it would be taken for granted eventually as we do with electricity and
light bulbs.
Yeah, and those fission reactors we all have in our basements.
