I just found on academia.edu a new publication by Lawrence Forsley and Pamela Mosier-Boss, which present a list of key peer-reviewed CMNS/LENR papers, and patents, to challenge the usual claim that LENR experimenst are not replicated, and not peer reviewed.
Pamela Mosier-Boss is a famous LENR scientists in US Navy SPAWAR
Lawrence Forsley is today affiliated to JWK Corporation and GEC (Global Energy Corporation), beside U. of Texas.
GEC is a company created with ex-Spawar researchers trying to develop an hybrid fission/LENR reactor (see old thread http://www.lenr-forum.com/old-forum-static/f-86.html ).
https://www.academia.edu/17964…lear_Science_October_2015
Here is the conclusion which tells the main intents:
Quote
This comprehensive collection of peer-reviewed papers clearly defines the existence of, and many ofthe parameters associated with, condensed matter nuclear science. The palladium/deuterium co-deposition protocol has shown itself to be robust, replicable and repeatable. As such, it provides an accessible doorway to investigate this novel, nuclear phenomena.
It has the promise of controllable nuclear reactions without ionizing radiation; compact, green nuclear energy sources and a means to remediate existing nuclear waste. We ignore this new capability at our technological, environmental and commercial peril.
Here is extract from the Executive Summary, where I underlined statement that I feel important :
QuoteDisplay More
In the 26 years since the ill-named, and ill-timed, announcement of “cold fusion” by Drs. Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons at the University of Utah critics have consistently raised five concerns:
- Fusion neutron production isn’t commensurate with observed heat
- Lack of a theory.
- Counter to “all that’s known in nuclear physics”.
- Irreproducibility.
- Lack of independent replication
It can be argued that the phenomenon is neither “cold” nor “fusion”: but it is nuclear. Neutrons are not easily produced, nor, are they produced by purely chemical means. Hence, neutrons are the hallmark of nuclear reactions. Although neutron production isn’t commensurate with measured heat, several of our papers discuss neutron production.
There is an abundance of contradictory theories, and hence, we’ve shied away from theory until we had data. Although the mantra, “theory guides, data decides”, doesn’t preclude experimental data, several voices outside the field refuse to recognize the phenomena unless there is a theory. However, our modeling has provided guidance and suggests previously unrecognized magnetic and nuclear effects that clearly enable condensed matter nuclear reactions.
The major “cold fusion” criticism has been the need to overcome the Coulomb Barrier between two positively charged deuterons at room temperature, 0.025 eV, as opposed to the hot fusion ion temperature of 5 keV (55 million K). However, low energy accelerator experiments with metal deuteride targets demonstrate enhanced electron screening that significantly raises the Gamow Factor thereby increasing the low temperature deuterium fusion cross-section. Other nuclear theories have been suggested to lower the Coulomb Barrier, though few of these are consistent with our data.
Most important, the co-deposition protocol discussed in these papers has shown independent reproducibility and replication across multiple laboratories in four countries negating two primary criticisms of Condensed Matter Nuclear Science (CMNS): irreproducibility and lack of independent replication.
The significance of condensed matter nuclear reactions cannot be overstated.
The successful commercialization of the technology would be paradigm shifting, to say the least.
The most intriguing sentence is :
Quote
Our research and implementation is a few years ahead of what we have published. Contact us regarding our current work in hybrid fusion-fission reactors, energetics and compact power generation.
There is a paragraph about the replications of their co-deposition protocol:
QuoteDisplay More
Collaborative, International Effort
We have sought to identify, characterize and elucidate the underlying mechanisms. Ours has been acollaborative effort with colleagues around the globe. To date, the SSC-Pacific/JWK team and colleagues have published 48-refereed papers in 14 journals and book chapters, spanning 25 years. Our colleagues include 44 authors and co-authors from nine countries representing 33 institutions. We have given more than three times as many conference talks and briefings. This is a well-represented, international effort.
Several researchers have independently replicated our Pd/D co-deposition protocol, like Dr. Fran Tanzella et al, Dr. Kew-Ho Lee, et al and Pierre Carbonnelle; or modified it, including Dennis Letts and Dr. Mel Miles or, like Dr. Mitchell Swartz, independently developed their own. Drs. Peter Hagelstein and Dennis Cravens with Dennis Letts used co-deposition to create the gold-coated palladium structures they successfully laser irradiated.
Twelve of the papers are co-deposition replications, including researchers in the US, Belgium, Japan and South Korea.
The rest of the article include many information, like list of peer reviewed papers, their authors, patents, abstracts with link .
A document to use to break the denial.
