3 ms·

Doubters and such should note several things about this press release: 1. It's from the American Chemical Society. While no one is infallible, they're not exa

by limist 17y ago

Doubters and such should note several things about this press release: 1. It's from the American Chemical Society. While no one is infallible, they're not exactly flakes. 2. There are some serious names and institutions involved. Same caveat as 1. 3. Ask yourself if your doubts are based on hearsay of hearsay. Unless you are a nuclear chemist or physicist who has tried experimentally to produce low energy nuclear reactions without success, maybe there are reasons research has continued for so many years in the face of overwhelming public and professional ridicule.

andrewcooke 17y ago
Isn't the fact that it's interesting, and that the pay-off would be huge, reason enough? The idea that there is a confirmed, reliable, reproducible effect, but that people are hiding that, seems a little odd. You seem to be confusing being hopeful or popular with being (proven) right.
- limist 17y ago
  If you are referring to my point 3, there are plenty of problems (cancer, biotech, AI, energy) that are both interesting, and have the possibility of a large pay-off, while NOT suffering ridicule from the mainstream - in fact, while enjoying some respect. Most researchers will (quite rationally) choose career options that are interesting, potentially valuable, and safe. Sure, cold fusion is interesting, and has the chance of a big pay-off, but it also presents enormous problems to a would-be researcher, including lack of funding, dismissive colleagues, and ignorant pseudo-skepticism from the public. For a professional scientist to pursue it in the face of such problems require more than faith and courage; it probably requires at least some evidence they've seen with their own eyes. If you're interested, lookup Francesco Scaramuzzi and Julian Schwinger along with keywords of "cold fusion."
  - andrewcooke 17y ago
    there's some strange emotional subtext to your posting that i don't quite get. these people can choose what they want to work on. i am not putting a gun to their heads forcing them to do this. nor am i laughing at them. if they're right - great. who wouldn't want a free lunch? but i don't see the point in painting them as heroes or presenting this work as something successful when, as far as i can see, it is not. i've done research. you do it because it's interesting, not because of what other people think. and everyone has problems with funding: it's a market; if there's more money in one area there are more people too. as i said, i'm not sure why you're so emotionally involved with this, but it doesn't seem healthy. if you're involved in cold fusion maybe you should look elsewhere, because science isn't really about being loved or acclaimed by the public...
    - limist 17y ago
      Thanks for playing psychiatrist. I'm not sure why you think I'm emotional about this. Are you? BTW, if you do research solely by what you find interesting, more power to you. But to propose that most or all researchers do so, while not caring what their colleagues and peers think, doesn't square with well-documented reality (e.g. Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions).
ars 17y ago
> Ask yourself if your doubts are based on hearsay of hearsay. Unless you are a nuclear chemist or physicist who has tried experimentally to produce low energy nuclear reactions without success And what if my doubts are based on my fathers work, who did actually try to reproduce this experimentally? And published the failure in Fusion Technology? And I went to the lab and saw the equipment too. Basically the problem with the experiments is that no one does the calorimetry correctly. And especially that people do not calculate the Faraday Efficiency of the electrolysis, and so show excess heat when there is none.

by limist 17y ago

andrewcooke 17y ago

Isn't the fact that it's interesting, and that the pay-off would be huge, reason enough? The idea that there is a confirmed, reliable, reproducible effect, but that people are hiding that, seems a little odd. You seem to be confusing being hopeful or popular with being (proven) right.

limist 17y ago
If you are referring to my point 3, there are plenty of problems (cancer, biotech, AI, energy) that are both interesting, and have the possibility of a large pay-off, while NOT suffering ridicule from the mainstream - in fact, while enjoying some respect. Most researchers will (quite rationally) choose career options that are interesting, potentially valuable, and safe. Sure, cold fusion is interesting, and has the chance of a big pay-off, but it also presents enormous problems to a would-be researcher, including lack of funding, dismissive colleagues, and ignorant pseudo-skepticism from the public. For a professional scientist to pursue it in the face of such problems require more than faith and courage; it probably requires at least some evidence they've seen with their own eyes. If you're interested, lookup Francesco Scaramuzzi and Julian Schwinger along with keywords of "cold fusion."
- andrewcooke 17y ago
  there's some strange emotional subtext to your posting that i don't quite get. these people can choose what they want to work on. i am not putting a gun to their heads forcing them to do this. nor am i laughing at them. if they're right - great. who wouldn't want a free lunch? but i don't see the point in painting them as heroes or presenting this work as something successful when, as far as i can see, it is not. i've done research. you do it because it's interesting, not because of what other people think. and everyone has problems with funding: it's a market; if there's more money in one area there are more people too. as i said, i'm not sure why you're so emotionally involved with this, but it doesn't seem healthy. if you're involved in cold fusion maybe you should look elsewhere, because science isn't really about being loved or acclaimed by the public...
  - limist 17y ago
    Thanks for playing psychiatrist. I'm not sure why you think I'm emotional about this. Are you? BTW, if you do research solely by what you find interesting, more power to you. But to propose that most or all researchers do so, while not caring what their colleagues and peers think, doesn't square with well-documented reality (e.g. Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions).

ars 17y ago

> Ask yourself if your doubts are based on hearsay of hearsay. Unless you are a nuclear chemist or physicist who has tried experimentally to produce low energy nuclear reactions without success And what if my doubts are based on my fathers work, who did actually try to reproduce this experimentally? And published the failure in Fusion Technology? And I went to the lab and saw the equipment too. Basically the problem with the experiments is that no one does the calorimetry correctly. And especially that people do not calculate the Faraday Efficiency of the electrolysis, and so show excess heat when there is none.