Probably because communication ways used were too mainstream... proper...

Quote from Shane D.

If it gets some attention, I am all for a little PR. Not sure it will work though. ICCF24 was as newsworthy an event as any, yet attracted literally no media interest. Not that the organizers did not do their part trying to make that happen. Always worth a try though.

Not sure what it will take to finally be noticed. Maybe a "sex sells" campaign? We already considered making LENR "glamorous", so why not take it to the next level?

Quote from Shane D.

Not sure what it will take to finally be noticed. Maybe a "sex sells" campaign? We already considered making LENR "glamorous", so why not take it to the next level?

Maybe just LENR that works?

Getting useful PR is very difficult, so hats off to whatever PR agency they are using. A week ago I write to Chris Simms a journalist working for New Scientist in response to his appeal for scientific articles. I told him about the LEC, a novel phenomenon in many ways, with commentary on recent revelations, historical mentions, and current papers mentioning the replicators by name and position. I finished up by saying I would make a LEC more or less while he watched. Frank Gordon really liked it, but NS doesn't deem it worthy of any reply at all.

Quote from Alan Smith

Getting useful PR is very difficult, so hats off to whatever PR agency they are using. A week ago I write to Chris Simms a journalist working for New Scientist in response to his appeal for scientific articles. I told him about the LEC, a novel phenomenon in many ways, with commentary on recent revelations, historical mentions, and current papers mentioning the replicators by name and position. I finished up by saying I would make a LEC more or less while he watched. Frank Gordon really liked it, but NS doesn't deem it worthy of any reply at all.

NS does not normally do articles on weird not fully understood scientific lacunae. (It would do articles on ball lightning - which is weird not entirely understood but a long-standing and very visible pop-science phenomenon).

It might do an article on "Could CF/LENR be real?" but the link between LEC and LENR is very tenuous and I'd doubt that anyone outside of this site would make it.

Quote from THHuxleynew

Maybe just LENR that works?

Oh come now. You know perfectly well that LENR works. You have never found an error in any major paper by Storms, McKubre, Miles, Fleischmann or any of the others. You have never ever looked! Neither has any other so-called skeptic. You are not fooling anyone with your pretend doubts.

Quote from THHuxleynew

NS does not normally do articles on weird not fully understood scientific lacunae

Maybe at one time they could dismiss LENR as scientific lacunae, but the game has changed. Now the DOE (via their ARPA-E) is involved with their "Partnering Teams", with funding to be provided those selected. That alone provides a safe "reason" for any news organization, or journalist, to report on LENR without being laughed at.

Making it even more so (reportable), we had the ICCF24 this past summer, where a new US Navy group presented some very promising results. They exuded confidence in what they were seeing. Also, at the conference the US Army went public that they have thrown their hats in the LENR ring, and already showing progress. There NASA also reported having 25 scientists involved in the research now.

All that and you would think the whole worlds news industry would be all over the story -and if real what it could do to address man made contributions to climate change, but alas, they seem to be afraid of it...still. Maybe if mainstream scientists like you started admitting there may be some "there, there", so worth checking out, that could change.

Quote from THHuxleynew

NS does not normally do articles on weird not fully understood scientific lacunae. (It would do articles on ball lightning - which is weird not entirely understood but a long-standing and very visible pop-science phenomenon).

It might do an article on "Could CF/LENR be real?" but the link between LEC and LENR is very tenuous and I'd doubt that anyone outside of this site would make it.

This is not quite right. New Scientist have written thoughtfully about LENR on a number of occasions. Moreover, they have specifically focused on SPAWAR's work. Given that the LEC is an outgrowth of the co-dep work, it doesn't feel like a stretch to suggest that somebody there might find it interesting. And given that it's a direct outgrowth of the co-dep work, 'tenuous' feels like a strong word to use.

Quote from orsova

New Scientist have written thoughtfully about LENR on a number of occasions.

2016..Michael Brooks

"Fast forward 25 years, and thaw is in the air.

You won’t hear the words “cold fusion”, but substantial sums of money are quietly pouring into a field now known as low-energy nuclear reactions, or LENRs.

Earlier this year, the US House of Representatives Committee on Armed Services declared it was “aware of recent positive developments” in developing LENRs and noted their potential to “produce ultra-clean, low-cost renewable energy” and their “strong national security implications”.

Highlighting too the interest of Russia, China, Israel and India,

it suggested the US could not afford to be left behind, and requested that the Secretary of Defense"

Cold fusion: Science's most controversial technology is back

The claim to have tamed the sun in the lab was debunked 25 years ago. So why are governments and investors now pouring money into it again?

www.newscientist.com

Maybe in 2023 the"thaw" is becoming mainstream

time for another article from Brooks? on cleanHME.....Clean Planet ...SO(4)...

.. last one I remember was on octonions

I see GEC shows Pam Mosier-Boss as an employee now. Checked the Wayback Machine, and as of August 2022 she was not listed.

Quote from RobertBryant

2016..Michael Brooks

"Fast forward 25 years, and thaw is in the air.

You won’t hear the words “cold fusion”, but substantial sums of money are quietly pouring into a field now known as low-energy nuclear reactions, or LENRs.

Earlier this year, the US House of Representatives Committee on Armed Services declared it was “aware of recent positive developments” in developing LENRs and noted their potential to “produce ultra-clean, low-cost renewable energy” and their “strong national security implications”.

Highlighting too the interest of Russia, China, Israel and India,

it suggested the US could not afford to be left behind, and requested that the Secretary of Defense"

https://www.newscientist.com/a…rsial-technology-is-back/

Maybe in 2023 the"thaw" is becoming mainstream

time for another article from Brooks?

.. last one I remember was on octonions

Display More

Thank you for this one. There are also two that Alan posted not long ago.

Quote from RobertBryant

time for another article from Brooks

reflecting on 'success in science'

resilience is better

An article about recent project funded by Nasa, found by Greg Gobble that I relayed

Lattice Confinement Fusion Could Melt Through Miles of Ice to Reach Possible Living Oceans on Europa | NextBigFuture.com

NASA has funded a phase 1 NIAC (NASA Innovation Advanced Concepts) study to get through about 24 miles (40 kilometers) of ice on Europa and other moons with

www.nextbigfuture.com

Lattice Confinement Fusion Could Melt Through Miles of Ice to Reach Possible Living Oceans on Europa

More about LCF Hybrid Cryobot project:

https://www1.grc.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/Forsley-and-Benyo-LCF-Hybrid-Cryobot-Presentation.pdf

No NASA lattice confinement is conventional cold fusion which mechanism is different from NASA explained. Conventional cold fusion is that covalent bond compression cause femto D2 to shelf coulomb repulsive force perfectly. In Lattice cold fusion is caused by the compression of D2 at very narrow space of metal nano particle which does nit absorb hydrogen.

https://ijisrt.com/assets/upload/files/IJISRT21AUG112.pdf

NASA Research

From ECat World.

NASA References LENR as Possible “Climate Solver” –

“Japanese LENR – The Japanese have apparently determined how to scale LENR, low energy
nuclear reactions, creating weak nuclear force reactions, not cold Fusion, at some 10,000 times chemical energy density.

Iwamura clearly explained when he was interviewed by @AlanSmith that he used the quantum chatting more acceptable vs "cold fusion " or some kind of "exotic nuclear reactions".

Quote from sam12

NASA Research

External Content youtu.be

Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.

Display all external content

Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

Quote from Cydonia

“Japanese LENR – The Japanese have apparently determined how to scale LENR, low energy
nuclear reactions, creating weak nuclear force reactions, not cold Fusion, at some 10,000 times chemical energy density.

Iwamura clearly explained when he was interviewed by @AlanSmith that he used the quantum chatting more acceptable vs "cold fusion " or some kind of "exotic nuclear reactions".

LCF is the bit of LENR that has understood & correct theories, that has clear experimental evidence - but where no-one knows (AFAIK) whether it will actually work* well enough to be useful.

Notice how the stuff from NASA tends to spend more time talking about space missions than about whether LCF works.

But - it would be great if it did work.

(* some bits actually work now - but you need a lot more more speculative stuff working as well for it to be a useful power source)

Dennis Bushnell talks about LENR

just past 8 minute mark in this interview.