Taxonomy of Cold Fusion LENR

Taxonomy of Cold Fusion LENR

Taxonomy in all fields has always been an argument between the ‘lumpers’ and the latecomers to the field, ‘splitters.’

Neither is singularly correct but the ‘splitters’ inevitably become the most vocal as they define and re-define the rules, or in the case of the atom-ecology (and cold fusion/lenr) taxonomy the dimensions, of the taxa. By introducing smaller and smaller domains splitters can split off what seems to them larger and larger territories.

In what is now classical physics, or the sub-taxa of physics that is sub-atomic physics, is a world defined by ‘splitters’ both literally and figuratively. One of the founders of the field from its earliest time was once quoted in response to being asked if he could recall the names of all of the sub-atomic particles said, “If I could remember all of their names I would have become a botanist not a physicist.” (Enrico Fermi)

Some of the critters in the sub-atomic zoo - drawn to scale

Some of the critters in the sub-atomic zoo – drawn to scale – yes there is a quiz…

The dimensions now being proclaimed in lenr/cold fusion are far below the atomic scale down well into the sub-quark dimensions which may not be even dimensions at all…thus offering tiny territories of endless scope open to claim. It is all like some old Hollywood movie with male egos running rampant over the landscape trying to claim and cling to as much as possible.

It seems apparent that size does matter, but as real science has recently proven the louder the monkey the smaller the ‘junk.’ (ref Google ‘howler monkey balls‘). Just when the golden haired beauty of this movie, Ms. Goldilocks, will appear on the silver screen and lecture the boys to get themselves under control and stop parading is long overdue.

Understanding cold fusion/lenr comes in the doing

As for lenr/cold fusion taking place in bulk lattices, on surfaces, and in-between-scapes there is unequivocal evidence for all of the above. It only takes some doing to see this for your-self, there have been ample recipes to follow for decades now. As one legendary Hollywood starlet once said, or was it an American president.. no difference really, “if you can’t cook get out of the kitchen”. Whether any of the active domains are sub-nano-dimensional is pure postulation by would-be cooks-advisors who only sit and **ink as opposed to stand in the hot kitchen at the lab bench and think.  My favourite physicist once advised me to just be patient and do the experiments and collect all the data possible then recite the following incantation, “Data speak to me.”

Richard Feynman, a great physicist and even greater physics lecturer once said, “

“In general, we look for a new law by the following process. First, we guess it (audience laughter), no, don’t laugh, that’s really true. Then we compute the consequences of the guess, to see what, if this is right, if this law we guess is right, to see what it would imply and then we compare the computation results to nature, or we say compare to experiment or experience, compare it directly with observations to see if it works. If it disagrees with experiment, it’s wrong. In that simple statement is the key to science. It doesn’t make any difference how beautiful your guess is, it doesn’t matter how smart you are, who made the guess, or what his name is… If it disagrees with experiment, it’s wrong. That’s all there is to it.”