<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Wishing for the impossible</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mmcgrath.co.uk/archives/49/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mmcgrath.co.uk/archives/49</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 19:41:42 +0100</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Jed Rothwell</title>
		<link>http://www.mmcgrath.co.uk/archives/49/comment-page-1#comment-50</link>
		<dc:creator>Jed Rothwell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jul 2007 16:04:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mmcgrath.co.uk/2007/07/18/wishing-for-the-impossible/#comment-50</guid>
		<description>You wrote: &quot;I doubt that &#039;cold fusion&#039; is really fusion.&quot;

I expect it is really fusion, based on the ratio of helium-4 to heat observed by researchers in the U.S. and Italy. This apparently triggers other processes such as the transmutation observed by Iwamura et al. (Mitsubishi) That is not surprising, since the effect occurs in a solid state lattice.

You can read a great deal about cold fusion at our web site:

http://lenr-canr.org/

This site features a bibliography of over 3,000 cold fusion papers, including hundreds from mainstream, peer-reviewed journals, and full text of over 500 papers.

Cold fusion has been replicated far more often than most people realize. Rabid opposition toward it has not diminished at all since 1989, but this has nothing to do with the scientific validity of the claim. The opposition is caused by human nature, as you say. I expect death is the only cure for it. As Max Planck explained, progress in science occurs &quot;funeral by funeral.&quot; &quot;A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.&quot; Unfortunately, in the case of cold fusion, the conservative opponents are young and the cold fusion researchers are old, so they are dying off faster. See the introduction and Chapter 19 of my book for more information on this depressing subject:

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJcoldfusiona.pdf

Sincerely,



Jed Rothwell
Librarian, LENR-CANR.org</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You wrote: &#8220;I doubt that &#8216;cold fusion&#8217; is really fusion.&#8221;</p>
<p>I expect it is really fusion, based on the ratio of helium-4 to heat observed by researchers in the U.S. and Italy. This apparently triggers other processes such as the transmutation observed by Iwamura et al. (Mitsubishi) That is not surprising, since the effect occurs in a solid state lattice.</p>
<p>You can read a great deal about cold fusion at our web site:</p>
<p><a href="http://lenr-canr.org/" rel="nofollow">http://lenr-canr.org/</a></p>
<p>This site features a bibliography of over 3,000 cold fusion papers, including hundreds from mainstream, peer-reviewed journals, and full text of over 500 papers.</p>
<p>Cold fusion has been replicated far more often than most people realize. Rabid opposition toward it has not diminished at all since 1989, but this has nothing to do with the scientific validity of the claim. The opposition is caused by human nature, as you say. I expect death is the only cure for it. As Max Planck explained, progress in science occurs &#8220;funeral by funeral.&#8221; &#8220;A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.&#8221; Unfortunately, in the case of cold fusion, the conservative opponents are young and the cold fusion researchers are old, so they are dying off faster. See the introduction and Chapter 19 of my book for more information on this depressing subject:</p>
<p><a href="http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJcoldfusiona.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJcoldfusiona.pdf</a></p>
<p>Sincerely,</p>
<p>Jed Rothwell<br />
Librarian, LENR-CANR.org</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
