Not exact matches
In some cases, it is embodied in areas of research like
cold fusion / LENR that simply will not go away, even when given up
on as false by a majority of scientists.
All the discussions about
cold fusion and LENR end that way: They always come back to the fact that no one has a commercial device
on the market yet, and none of the prototypes seem workable
on a commercial scale in the near future.
The DoE's first report
on the subject, published 15 years ago, concluded that the original
cold fusion results, produced by Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons of the University of Utah and unveiled at a press conference in 1989, were impossible to reproduce, and thus probably false.
The movie focuses
on the latter for plot, but it's the
cold fusion of the two that makes Loveless such a devastating tragedy because it extends the blast radius from personal ground zero, to universal, post-Nietzchean shock wave: God is dead, all over again.
Meanwhile Spock (Zachary Quinto), Kirk's second - in - command, tries to plant a
cold fusion device in an erupting volcano that could destroy the indigenous life forms
on the planet.
One would rather think that GW is a problem, and therefore studies
on it continue to be funded, unlike
cold / chemical
fusion studies (for which I would guess the funds would have died down).
Also
fusion power could be a lot more accessible than we think, if we establish Helium - 3 collection
on the moon (seems there's a good source of the non-radioactive ion up there) and then use it in reasonably
cold fusion into Lithium in orbiting power plants.
So, the oceans, unless they practice
cold fusion on the sly, can't «make» energy.
It just so happens that in the section
on proxy analysis I side with Wegman and I agree with him that the hockey stick is about as credible as
cold fusion.
Dr. Rapp's statement that «it just so happens that in the section
on proxy analysis I side with Wegman and I agree with him that the hockey stick is about as credible as
cold fusion.
It can do anything that
fusion can (unless you're planning
on technical miracles like
cold fusion), such as replacing coal - fired generation within a few decades.
Even when Pons and Fleishman were involved in the
cold fusion fiasco, and things got politicized, I don't recall any reports or complaints of gate keeping going
on during the contentious debate
on the issue.
Pat Frank: Even when Pons and Fleishman were involved in the
cold fusion fiasco, and things got politicized, I don't recall any reports or complaints of gate keeping going
on during the contentious debate
on the issue.
On the other hand, practical cold fusion finally ended our destructive dependence on fossil fuel
On the other hand, practical
cold fusion finally ended our destructive dependence
on fossil fuel
on fossil fuels.