Current Science (India) scientific journal publishes many LENR article

  • The new issue of Current Science, an Indian peer reviewed scientific journal open a special section on Low Energy Nuclear Reactions, and propose already many reference articles, reviews, in the domain.
    This is an historical moment, and it is in india.


    [news=69,meta][/news]

  • 22passi have gathered the abstract of the 33 Articles
    http://22passi.blogspot.nl/201…cenerentola-della_24.html


    the list is fascinating and show a good coverage of the subjects.
    There are many gems in those articles... timer bombs.

  • There is a need for recognized peer reviewed mainstream LENR journal.
    JCMNS have tried to enter that domain but was flagged fringe... maybe it can change ?


    If India his interested, Current Science have vocation to became a local reference journal...
    to become the world reference journal, there will be a battle when LENR is recognized...
    Naturwissenschaften, JCMNS, Journal of electroanalythical chemistry...
    the battle will be fierce

  • It will be such a hugely important and diverse field with several distinct facets. There will doubtless be several strong specialist journals. Since Science and Nature early on participated in the rather shameful blackballing boycott, they have some special obligations to right that ongoing wrong. Naturwissenschaften has shown the way.

  • Abd ul Rahman Lomax on nVortex explain how happened the review of his paper, and it was classic, docn by open skeptic who ordered some change as it happens normally...
    There is a copy of this message there:
    http://rmforall.blogspot.fr/20…ld-fusion-experiment.html



    Inside you find two important informations, to raise credibility of the work.


    First the journal is a journal linked to the Indian Academy of science:

    Quote

    Current Science is a multidisciplinary journal established in 1932, published by the Current Science Association in collaboration with the Indian Academy of Sciences.


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Academy_of_Sciences



    and on the review process, of his paper: "Replicable cold fusion experiment: heat/helium ratio"
    Abd explain the process was normal, done by non LENR expert


    Finally he recommande the paper of mcKubre on the state of scientific proof:


    Quote

    There are some very good papers in this collection, and others that are brief reports on activity in various nations or organizations.


    I specially recommend McKubre's paper,
    "Cold fusion: comments on the state of scientific proof"


    But there are *many* excellent papers.
    ...


    This looks very mainstream. Something is changing, and this is now public.

  • An indian Article refers top that publication in Current Science
    http://www.daijiworld.com/news…2700#.VP8DPdcprZ4.twitter

  • Infinite Energy publish an article on the story behing that publication
    http://www.infinite-energy.com…s/pdfs/CurrentScience.pdf


    Cold Fusion Now publish another article
    http://coldfusionnow.org/curre…-indian-interest-in-lenr/
    about the BARC work on cold fusion, why it slowed down, and recent interest raised by Current Science publication.

  • Among the controversies, Sylvie Coyaud of occasapiens disinformation agency, try to spread FUD about the peer review process.


    What Abd ul-Rahman Lomax explained is confirmed by multiple scientists, and by recent article of Infinite Energy :
    http://www.infinite-energy.com…s/pdfs/CurrentScience.pdf


    The process was started by selecting author by non-indian scientist experienced in LENR, and this was then reviewed by Indian scientist with no experience in LENR (nearly no Indian scientists have that experience today, beside Mahadeva Srinivasan). Some delay to publish was induced by reviewer asking for much more details, as one can expect. Current science keep the archive of the exchanges as usual.


    Here is the key statements about the peer review process, in Infinite Energy article.



    I hope to make a post on that, with more statements, to answer the merchants of FUD.