Lattice Energy LLC-Philosophical Comment for 2012-Dec 21 2011


Published on

LENRs versus “cold fusion” and the search for scientific ‘truth’ --- A philosophical comment for 2012

Published in: Technology, Spiritual
  • Dear Kevin:

    Thanks for your comment.

    BTW – sorry that I haven’t had an opportunity to respond to your e-mail yet (Christmas and all) but the answer to your question is yes, I had already seen Dennis Bushnell’s NASA presentation that you referenced.

    Your Schopenhauer quote is a nice one. There is a very similar, much more cynical remark attributed to J.B.S. Haldane ca. 1963 as follows (quoting directly):

    Theories have four stages of acceptance:

    1. This is worthless nonsense.

    2. This is an interesting, but perverse, point of view.

    3. This is true but quite unimportant.

    4. I always said so.

    Thanks for your continued interest in our work.

    Happy New Year!

    Best regards,

    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • 'Every truth passes through three stage's before it is recognized, in the first it is ridiculed, in the second it is violently opposed in the third it is regarded as self evident'. - Arthur Schopenhauer
    Then those that those that opposed it will stand on the shoulder of the great men that discovered it!
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Lattice Energy LLC-Philosophical Comment for 2012-Dec 21 2011

  1. 1. LENRs versus “cold fusion” and the search for scientific ‘truth’ A philosophical comment for 2012 Lewis Larsen Lattice Energy LLCWhile the realm of religious faith may not be able to explain all the myriad objective facts comprising theinner workings of Nature uncovered in the gradual progression of secular science over time, the world’sgreat religions do have some very important things to say about the conduct of human beings engaged inthe pursuit of science and the ultimate goals of such work. Two such references are exemplary:"And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free," John 8:32 in the American King JamesVersion of the Holy Bible.A somewhat similar statement is made in chapter 7 verse 33 in a version of the Holy Qur’an translated byAbdullah Yusuf Ali where it is said that, “...things that my lord hath indeed forbidden are ... sins andtrespasses against truth or reason ...”Elaborating further in that vein, the devoutly religious Arab mathematician and brilliant polymath Ibn Al-Haytham (Arabic: ‫ ,) أب و ع لي، ال ح سن ب ن ال ح سن ب ن ال ه ي ثم‬considered by many historians of science tobe the father of the modern scientific method, said the following in his famous 7-volume treatise on optics,Kitab Al-Manadhir (written ca. 1011 - 1021, purportedly while under house arrest in Egypt):“We start by observing reality ... we try to select solid (unchanging) observations that are not affected byhow we perceive (measure) them. We then proceed by increasing our research and measurement,subjecting premises to criticism, and being cautious in drawing conclusions ... In all we do, our purposeshould be balanced not arbitrary, the search for truth, not support of opinions ... Hopefully, by followingthis method ... (we can find a) road to the truth that we can be confident in ...”Tracing that line of thought closer to the present era, in Chapter 3 of his secular 1781 book, “The Critiqueof Pure Reason,” the famous German philosopher and geographer Immanuel Kant commented that:“We have now not only traversed the region of the pure understanding and carefully surveyed every partof it, but we have also measured it, and assigned to everything therein its proper place. But this land is anisland, and enclosed by nature herself within unchangeable limits. It is the land of truth (an attractiveword), surrounded by a wide and stormy ocean, the region of illusion, where many a fog-bank, many aniceberg, seems to the mariner, on his voyage of discovery, a new country, and, while constantly deludinghim with vain hopes, engages him in dangerous adventures, from which he never can desist, and whichyet he never can bring to a termination. But before venturing upon this sea, in order to explore it in itswhole extent, and to arrive at a certainty whether anything is to be discovered there, it will not be withoutadvantage if we cast our eyes upon the chart of the land that we are about to leave, and to ask ourselves,firstly, whether we cannot rest perfectly contented with what it contains, or whether we must not ofnecessity be contented with it, if we can find nowhere else a solid foundation to build upon; and,secondly, by what title we possess this land itself, and how we hold it secure against all hostile claims?”Lastly, fast forwarding from the 1700s to the near-present, on page 216 in his fascinating and well-documented 1994 book, “Forbidden Science: Exposing the secrets of suppressed research,” sciencewriter Richard Milton commented insightfully that:“None of the facts of science - even though they have been arrived at empirically or inductively - canclaim to be rational in themselves ...That [an] effect is predicted by scientific theory does not make it arational fact - it merely confirms that scientists are thinking along productive lines ... But the facts ofNature themselves ... [are] ... often far from clear. Not unnaturally, scientists like to think that thepredictions of their theories are rational expectations. But only Nature is the [final] arbiter of what isand what is not.”Lattice Energy LLC Copyright 2011 All rights reserved December 21, 2011