3 ms·
> The problem wasn’t with the temperature range, it was with the not working and not being fusion. And them being chemists not physicists. And the University
by JackFr 5y ago
> The problem wasn’t with the temperature range, it was with the not working and not being fusion.
And them being chemists not physicists.
And the University of Utah issuing a press release before the anything was peer reviewed.
The whole episode is is an example of what can go wrong with science. This article shows what clearly could have been a useful and productive field of investigation became poisoned to the extent that no significant research could go on for a quarter century and still the authors have to go to great pains to distance themselves from Fleischman and Pons.
- phkahler 5y ago>> And them being chemists not physicists. That was a huge part of it - I wrote a paper on the controversy for a class. The physicists basically said "That can't work, it must be a chemical reaction." Regardless of the physics working or not, they were effectively saying two chemists couldn't properly do calorimetry on a cell containing 4 elements that don't do very much chemically. This a much harsher thing than the chemists saying physics overlooked something.