Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: *I think this is more a case where the result does not fit in with > conventional, textbook physics and engineering. * > > In nanoplasmonics, Hot Spots have be experimentally verified to produce > solitons with a EMF power density of 100 terawatts per cm2 before the > sensors blew out. > > Not finding this behavior is a result of not looking in the proper text > book. >
Well, naturally if you think an intense magnetic field is an important clue, then you should take note of it. I meant that people who do not believe in nanoplasmonics should not fret about temporarily setting aside this claim. You can always look at it again if new evidence emerges. There is no need to accept all claims at once from a researcher. An evaluation should not be "all or nothing." You can accept some claims readily, others with reservations, and still others you put aside, without prejudice, waiting for better evidence. A researcher can be right about some things and wrong about others. Fleischmann and Pons made a mistake measuring neutrons in 1989. Many physicists dismissed all of their claims because they got that one wrong. That was a dangerous attitude. - Jed
