Mitch’s chemical forums have also been wrong about other dogmas in the past.Like the arrogant username “borek” and others falsely claiming that you can’t cause chemical reactions with radio waves according to formula E=hv(although many major companies out there have already been doing it for a long time),or that the amazing “outside-the-box” thinkers like Frank Pringle of Global Resource Corporation have just been doing ordinary pyrolysis when “cold-cracking” hydrocarbons with microwaves.

Such closed-minded,narrow-minded dogma should not even belong in science.Some arrogant people and narrow-minded skeptics even go as far as to claim that science does not have to be open-minded.But apparently it does.To be truly logical and scientific-minded,it takes the right balance of BOTH open-mindedness about unlimited possibilities(uncertainty of nature has surprises),and ALSO putting things to the test of scrutiny to see how well they hold-up.

another way to “get it” with chemistry…

Subject: RE: absence of gamma-rays in your experiment, and neutron’s background
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 10:29:47 -0700
From: pam.boss@navy.mil
To: wladimirguglinski@hotmail.com
CC: m_bernstein@acs.org; hestenes@asu.edu; canmarrai@gmail.com
Dear Wladimir,
Like many, we have very few funds and resources. But we will consider your suggestions and see what we can do as time and money permits.
Regards,
Pam

RE: absence of gamma-rays in your experiment, and neutron’s background‏
From: Wladimir Guglinski (wladimirguglinski@hotmail.com)
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 10:35:59 PM
To: PAMELA MOSIER-BOSS (pam.boss@navy.mil)
Bcc: JOHNATHAN CHAN (coldfusion111@gmail.com); jnaudin509@aol.com
Hi, Pamela
Be careful, and take care.
If all the deuterium of the Pd lattice aligned in the same direction get resonance and have fusion at the same time, perhaps it can occur a small explosion in your electrolytic cell.
Also, I recommend you to put a loadstone externally in the cell (like in the Letts-Cravens experiment), in order to help to keep a lot of deuterium aligned toward the same direction (that of the external magnetic field applied)
Good luck
WLAD

See the article in Peswiki:
How zitterbewegung contributes for cold fusion in Pamela Mosier-Boss experiment:
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Article:_How_zitterbewegung_contributes_for_cold_fusion_in_Pamela_Mosier-Boss_experiment

However cold fusion is theoretically impossible because Quantum Mechanics does not consider the zitterbewegung (zbw) as a helical trajectory of the electron (the zitterbewegung appears in the Dirac equation of the electron, but the quantum physicists did not interpret the zbw as a helical trajectory).

By interpreting the zitterbewegung from a new viewpoint, by considering it as a helical trajectory of the electron, cold fusion becomes theoreticall possible, as Guglinski has shown to Mitch Andre Garcia, along a discussion in the topic “THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN COLD FUSION AND COLD FUSION”, which can be seen in the link:
http://www.chemicalforums.com/index.php?topic=17140.0

Look at the Guglinski’s « Reply #8 on: September 24, 2007 ».

So the chemists are now getting knowledge that cold fusion is theoretically possible thanks to the adoption of the new interpretation for the zitterbewegung, and they are undertaking the performance of cold fusion experiments, because it seems that they dont trust in the viewpoint of the physicists.

Clearly, there is a dispute “CHEMISTS vs PHYSICISTS”, and it seems that the controversy on cold fusion will be finally resolved, but not by the physicists.

The new duel chemists vs physicists has ideological origin. The physicits keep their loyalty to Quantum Mechanics, because they dont accept to change their interpretation on the zitterbewegung, since such a changing requires a very deep modification in the foundations of Modern Physics (the zbw cannot be considered as a helical trajetory in Quantum Field Theory, which is the successor of Quantum Mechanics).

Unlike, the chemists keep their loyalty to the scientific method, according to which any experiment cannot be neglected only because it defies the principles of a theory, as happens now in this duel between Quantum Mechanics and cold fusion.

Such new participation of chemists is healthy to science’s develolpment. Because as the physicists have some dogmas which they consider unsourmantable (as for instance their interpretation of the zitterbewegung in Quantum Field Theory), the development of cold fusion requires scientists free of dogmas of Physics, as the chemists.

In few words, we have to consider the following situation:

1- as cold fusion is impossible by considering the interpretation of zitterbewegung in Quantum Field Theory…

2- … but as the experiments prove that cold fusion really occurs, as confirmed now by the experiments made in the US Navy…

3- … then there is need to change the interpretation on the zitterbewegung (a new alternative that chemists probably will take in consideration starting from now)…

4- … instead of neglecting the cold fusion experiments (as the physicists insist to do).