Springer-Verlag is the second largest scientific publisher in the world. Until very
recently, their "flagship multidisciplinary journal," covering all of the
natural sciences, was Naturwissenschaften, founded in 1905 by a physicist.
Einstein published in Naturwissenschaften. As a multidisciplinary journal, they published
papers that cross field boundaries, and cold fusion is such a field. It's a chemistry
experiment, using the tools of chemistry (not those of physics), but the apparent result
is a nuclear reaction, traditionally the province of nuclear physics.
The most recent major review of the field was published in Naturwissenschaften,
"Status of cold fusion (2010)." (preprint.)
I'm mentioned on page 39 of the preprint.
Peters is correct. "Cold fusion" is not a "science," it is a popular
term for a phenomenon. The science that has opened up out of the discovery announced in
1989 is not called "cold fusion." It is generally called Condensed Matter
Nuclear Science, and it is still mostly a mystery. That review stands. It is merely the
most notable of sixteen peer reviewed reviews of the field published in the last decade or
so. There is a subpage of the Wikiversity resource that lists them, and most of them can
be accessed on line. If anyone would like to study this field, explore it, criticize it,
ask questions, etc., the Wikiversity resource is open for that purpose.
If this isn't science, we would appreciate correction. Maybe we will learn something.
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax (413) 584-3151 business (413) 695-7114 cell
I'm so excited I can't wait for Now.
________________________________
From: Jeffrey Peters <17peters(a)cardinalmail.cua.edu>
To: arbabian(a)gmail.com; Mailing list for Wikiversity
<wikiversity-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: Monday, December 23, 2013 10:17 PM
Subject: Re: [Wikiversity-l] Wikiversity-l Digest, Vol 67, Issue 2
Cold Fusion is not a science and it is obvious that Abd is fantasizing again just like on
cold fusion.