what is shocking me, is that activist or deniers, convinced or not, most people will again and again discuss whether the theory allow it, whether it is possible...
No need to ask the permission to theory for LENR to exist, since it happens. nobody challenge the evidence... they talk of theory.... exhausting. 2014-06-11 19:39 GMT+02:00 Lennart Thornros <lenn...@thornros.com>: > Alain I think the link you provided has a lot of value. > The reasons are many. There are many clarifications of what is the > current status of LENR is in a nutshell. > 1. There is no denial of that something happens when certain parameters > are engaged some certain way, which produce more energy than what can be > explained with current thermodynamic laws. > 2. We do not know what is happening and where the science will need a > modification. > 3. We do not know if even the ecat is capable of producing a COP large > enough that useful energy (I.E electricity) can be extracted for a long > period of time - reliable. (Maybe changing soon - hope so.) > 4. Scientists will discuss theoretical possibilities for a long time > forward and an increasing number of scientists will be engaged if a viable > commercial product is offered to the market. One day someone will provide > an explanation and perhaps receive a Nobel prize or at least receive > well deserved accolade. > 5. Regardless of 4 above as soon as a commercial product is available we > will see many competing products many with the Ecat concept and others with > competing concepts. > 6. It is clear to me that immediately we reach the critical point > (commercialization), we will enter a period, which in its own way might be > as important for the future development of LENR as is the reasons to find > the theories behind it. The reasons for that i,s many interests are now > going to collide. I do not think that any government conspiracy will be an > issue for reasons I am happy to give later. However, I am sure that > established businesses - particularly energy companies, which can see the > of their business model - will be key players. > > I know that was a lot of words to reach a point obvious to most people > here. My concern is that if we let the big and mighty and very resourceful > energy companies take over they will work this entirely as it fits their > agenda. Implementation will happen as is best for the change over of those > large entities - as they are too big to fail they will allowed that by the > government (see GM). I know that many people in Vortex wants to see greener > earth and a better planet - soon. I think that it is most important to make > sure there is an adequate business model to take care of the opportunity, > which a successful LENR could provide. The problem is that the window of > opportunity will be small. I will stop here with saying that in short that > means to change to a more flexible format (business model) with very small > footprint but high flexibility and speed. Henry Ford's influence gave us > big and self sufficient companies with stability to survive without any > concern about the outside factors. Now we cannot be away from outside > factors even for a minute or when asleep (Cellphone) so we need a format > that mirrors our time and the product of the future. > > Best Regards , > Lennart Thornros > > www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com > lenn...@thornros.com > +1 916 436 1899 > 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648 > > “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a > commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM > > > On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 1:08 AM, Alain Sepeda <alain.sep...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> >> http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/83658-low-energy-nuclear-reactions-cold-fusion-thread-hijack-split/ >> >> If serious people with good reference can participate >> > >
