I’m hoping he is the real deal also. But I don’t believe much on faith, so I don’t think he is. All he has to do to convince the whole world of legitimate science is to simply melt that garbage pail of cracked ice under controlled conditions. He isn’t offering to do that. I don’t think he ever will. He hasn’t published a peer-reviewed paper reporting results of useful amounts of energy. I don’t think he ever will. I’m guessing his project will turn into another Black Light Power operation that burns through millions of investor’s money, but never brings a working product to market. It’s interesting that his patent doesn’t claim to produce useful amounts of energy. The BLP operation employs PhDs out the ying yang, but after over 20-years of broken promises it still hasn’t brought an energy-producing product to market, and it certainly hasn’t melted the first garbage pail of crushed ice. I don’t think we need to concern ourselves with technical claims; we just need to see some ice melting. That’s about as simple as it gets, and the proponents of LENR aren’t melting ice.
]]>Hi Alain,
As much as I would like to believe that a commercial LENR exists, the evidence remains questionable to say the least. I have looked at Defkalion, Rossi’s ECat and I remain a skeptic. Every document I see that praises or describes LENR successes comes from a limited number of cold fusion supporter sites. I have yet to see a scientific or engineering journal publish LENR results. It is a disappointment to me because if Fleischman and Pons were proven right then all the world would be a beneficiary. But right now it seems that confidence men are big in the LENR cold fusion business. That’s why I’m hoping Professor Miley is the real deal.
It seems you are not warare of recent (less than 20 years ;-> ) experiments and calorimetry.
not alos of tritium, he4, transmutation, neutrons detections…
http://lenrnews.eu/evidences-that-lenr-is-real-beyond-any-reasonable-doubt/
they could not melt ice until recently because it was just lab work, at small power to be more precise and answer to skeptics… in facts trangely you are more precise at small power.
Ask Ed storms, he will explain you why. His work at Naturwissenschaften is to organize review of LENr papers… he made a nice review that you should read.
http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/StormsEstatusofcoa.pdf
about commercial claims, yes Rossi is a clow, following exactly (is he copying) the same method as the Wright brothers… forget him.
But don’t forget aldo Proia. check his CV (at energaya), and his interview…
about Defkalion, the extraordinary evidence of >>1 is given by Nelson (who bashed Rossi for loose demo, in comparison), who was happy of beeing allowed to play with the reactor. it was warming water, so performance around 100C was awful, but already what you ask : few hundred watts produced and warming water…
please update your data I’ve made an executive summary
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Flenrnews.eu%2F%3Fp%3D1018