Feb 202013
 

LENR Research Scientific Mystery
Feb. 20, 2013 – By Steven B. Krivit –

[This is Part 1 of a Four-Part Series]

On Jan. 14, I reported that New Energy Times had completed an update of our low-energy nuclear reactions conference proceedings pages. This update included the upload of our digitized copies of the front matter and table of contents of all the International Conference on Cold Fusion series proceedings. As far as I know, this is the first time that these indexes have been placed in the public domain.

A lot of significant work happened in the first decade of LENR research. Some of this research appears to have been forgotten, and it is surprisingly applicable, especially today. Much of it is just as significant as the more recent work. The digital indexes of the conference papers will help researchers be aware of the full body of information available in this field. I hope we will also digitize the remaining proceedings.

As I was digitizing the table of contents from ICCF-6 (1996), ICCF-7 (1998) and ICCF-8 (2000), I glanced through them for papers that caught my attention. I looked at two dozen papers. Only two of them were available to download from the LENR-CANR.org site, and most of the others were not listed there.

I found interesting things in 14 of these papers. Some of the remaining papers from the group I selected may have had notable findings; however, some of them were so poorly written that I was not able to draw out clear meaning or conclusions.

I hope that these papers will shed more light on the past and the present and illuminate the future, as well. In this four-part series of articles, I present a listing of the 14 papers along with the highlights from each of them.

1996 was a particularly rich time for creative research and occasionally stunning results in LENRs. In many ways, the LENR research community in 1996 was far truer to the scientific method, unencumbered by ideology or commercial interests, than in the years that followed. These researchers were doing their best to observe something new and unexpected, yet they were constrained by their limited abilities of observation and experience of something science had never seen. The parable of blind men each examining a unique part of an elephant, with each man (and, occasionally, woman) concluding with absolute certainty that he or she knew the precise characteristics of the elephant is parallel to what happened with LENR in the early days.

 

____________ Article continues for subscribers. Click here to subscribe. ____________


lock

Sorry, this content is for subscribers.

Click here to get access.

 

Already a subscriber? Login below

Email
Password
 
Remember me (for 2 weeks)

Forgot Password