It would be ironically tragic if the guy who has spent the best part of his life supporting cold fusion and then LENR, did not recognize the personification of his goal when it was placed in front of him. It would be an even bigger tragedy if he fought against his goal’s realization. I cannot imagine how bad he would feel when the error of his ways became apparent to him, when it was too late and all he fought for during those lonely cold years was lost because of his own actions. Oh well… such is life.
Anybody that agrees with Mary Y in any way needs to reevaluate his thinking processes. On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 11:04 AM, Jed Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote: > I responded to some of the comments at Mats Lewan's blog: > > > https://matslew.wordpress.com/2013/07/24/comments-on-defkalion-reactor-demo-in-milan/#comment-1097 > > I have to walk a fine line. I do not want to get dragged into a fight > between Defkalion and Mary Yugo. I also do not want anyone to think I > endorse Defkalion's claims. They have to publish an independent replication > to establish credibility. I cannot judge whether their claims are true, > false, or mistaken. It is even remotely possible they are fraudulent, > although I doubt that. > > The video was a helpful guide to their claims. It puts us in a better > position to judge an independent evaluation. But until we see that > evaluation we must reserve judgement. No one gets a free pass. Nullius in > verba. If Defkalion wants people to believe them, they will publish one of > their reports now held under NDA. > > I think it is irresponsible to accuse them of fraud, but it would also be > irresponsible to endorse their claims. I wrote in the blog: "In view of the > recent tests by Levi et al., and some unpublished previous tests, I think > it is extremely unlikely that Rossi is engaged in fraud. I regard the Levi > report as independent verification. I have not seen a similar independent > verification of Defkalion’s claims so I cannot judge their credibility. > Obviously I cannot endorse their claims either." > > On the other hand, there is no harm in speculating about the theoretical > or engineering aspects of Defkalion's claims, on the assumption that the > claims are true. When an interesting new experiment is published we glom > onto it. We try to figure out how it fits into the big picture of cold > fusion. We do this even though we know that many results turn out to be > mistaken. I am still not sure about Celani's wire claims, especially after > the MFMP and others made heroic attempts to replicate with no clear > results. If that turns out to be a mistake, oy veh! Too bad! That will mean > we have wasted our time speculating about the theoretical or practical uses > of wire, and the MFMP has wasted months of effort and a ton of money. > Them's the breaks. If you don't like that, do not get involved in > cutting-edge scientific research. > > We would have to forgive Celani if it turns out to be a mistake. Fraud > would infuriating and unforgivable. But they are functionally similar in > many ways. I do not think many people outside of Defkalion have invested > much effort or time evaluating their results, or speculating about the > theoretical implications. Until the demo we have not had much to speculate > about. People have spent a lot of effort looking at Rossi's results. This > has been fruitful. > > - Jed > >
