What would be the best first struggle to make LENR technology a reality? 12
Work experimentally, with instruments, to discover the nature of the phenomenons during LENR effect. (6) 50%
Develop reliable labrats that would be usable by any competent mainstream lab to be convinced (5) 42%
Work to understand the parameters that make the LENR phenomenon happens or not (4) 33%
Set up experiments and publish papers, that will be convincing for mainstream academic (2) 17%
Develop an industrial application, even without any vision of the mechanism. (1) 8%
I've heard many positions about what to do to make LENR a reality, not a scientific phenomenon as one see if one read the papers or work in labs, but something that is well funded and will after much work from mainstream, produce applications.
I've evolved myself, and I'm no more certain of any option.
- First option is to ignore the scientific question first, and try to develop a working technology, to sell it, and convince the population of LENR interest. The problems raised is that without a vision of the mechanism, there is no way to optimize the technology, and as Jean-François Geneste said, without even a phenomenological theory, you cannot start an industry.
- Second option is the one that seems to have been followed by LENR scientists from the early days : to make experiments, and publish results, proving to mainstream scientists that the phenomenon is real, which is scientifically astounding. The problems are that it have been done with hundreds of papers and thousands of experiments, without any success in mainstream circles. Much energy have been used, and reused, and used again, probably wasted, while the mystery of the parameters and the explanation was not enough investigated.
- Third option is a variation, and is promoted in some conferences (ICCF, RNBE) : to develop a very reliable experiment that can be replicated by any lab, and would convince mainstream researcher of the reality of the phenomenon. First it is very hard today, without a vision of what is happening and not enough data on the key parameters, and finally it seems mainstream community is not much more open-minded to LENR as flat-earthers to Newtonian mechanics.
- Fourth option is to work experimentally to detect signature of what is happening during LENR, with instruments, so a theoretical proposal can be initiated. Theoretical proposal is not only a result of research, but it is also the key ingredient of the design of a lab experiment (Edmund Storms is clearly explaining that point), so it seems a good idea too. But There is still no theory that is accepted by peers, despite dozens of proposals.
- Finally, fifth proposal I've heard is the modest idea, not to convince mainstream scientists, nor to really find a theory, or make a lab-rat directly, but just to start to work between LENR scientists to understand the parameter space, the key factors, the conditions and inhibitors, for the LENR phenomenon. Some have done that on few points, and there is for example a very interesting debate between Edmund Storms and Michael McKubre, whether loading or temperature is key throttling factor of PdD LENR. There is also key question on cracks, vacancies, , THz radiation, Laser correlated or not with LENR power. Problem is that it often move into a theoretical debate...
Each point can be defended, and sure every point will be done during LENR technology inception.
The real question is what to do first, to allow the pursuit of the other 4 points.
Multiple vote are allowed.