Part ONE
The S Korea ICCF17-symposium approaching, plus some soon to be revealed 'breakthroughs' by Rossi/DGT, we should consider other optional realities, as improbable as they may be. Probability being in the eye of the beholder. Now to repeat: I think LENR is real, but have some doubts wether it is anything near a commercial level. 'Commercial' being something comprising a) useful (power >1kW, COP >6) and b) affordable, and c) safe. Respectable people including freshmen at MIT and Italy could reproduce LENR with little residual doubt wrt the effect in general. Output power is consistently low, in the mWatt to say Watt level. The argument seems to go something like: demonstrate the principle, not commercial aspects. ALL demonstrations of this type show an effect, but not on a commercial level! Now several companies claim to bridge the gap from effect TO EVERYDAY USE: 1) Rossi 2) DGT 3) Brillouin 4) Blacklight power 5) Nanospire 6) others ... put Your favorite claimant in here. (Note: Sterling Allan eg is one of those persons who are endlessly optimistic, and I just read his strange findings, to somehow understand his type of state of mind, which is completely alien to me.) How credible are those claims 1-.6? What evidence did they show? What are their claims exactly? Note how different (1-3) from (4) and (5) is: (4), Randell Mills is quite a maverick, maybe a genius, kicking out a 2000-page epitome to rewrite the fundamentals of physics. Admirable of sorts. Compare this to eg 'Ramon Lull', also a very strange genius. (5), LeClair is not a physicist, and only has little theory, as far as I can see, except the effects of cavitation, which very well could produce strange effects, including local fusion, with transmutations and dangerous emissions of radioactivitiy of all sorts Not your decent e-cat, which you want to have in Your living room. ---- (3) Brillouin, is somewhat in between, and claims to have some sort of an activation method, which is basically some electronic feat, which is naturally not disclosed in sufficient detail. 'We are in it for the money', right? (1),(2), Rossi and DGT, being the most fervent claimants to date, obviously have a common root, which dates back to the work of Piantelli/Focardi , who at times seemed to be sympathetic to this strain of development of Rossi,, but currently keep some distance, as far as I can see. Note that Piantelli seems to have a difficult time collecting some 50k to 100k$ to advance his case. Same with Brillouin, with a bit more money asked for. Maybe you ask yourself, as I do: Why is that? Rossi and DGT do not seem to have this financial difficulty at all! Are they so far ahead as they claim, or could there be another cause? Next: Part TWO. ________________________________
