home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
/ NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #16 / NN_1992_16.iso / spool / sci / physics / fusion / 1747 < prev    next >
Encoding:
Internet Message Format  |  1992-07-21  |  940 b 
  1. Path: sparky!uunet!ogicse!das-news.harvard.edu!cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu!andrew.cmu.edu!pk03+
  2. From: pk03+@andrew.cmu.edu (Paul Karol)
  3. Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
  4. Subject: Re: Laws of physics
  5. Message-ID: <ceP5a6C00WBMQ1v5ZK@andrew.cmu.edu>
  6. Date: 21 Jul 92 10:37:58 GMT
  7. Article-I.D.: andrew.ceP5a6C00WBMQ1v5ZK
  8. Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
  9. Lines: 11
  10. In-Reply-To: <MOSS.92Jul21102429@ibis.cs.umass.edu>
  11.  
  12. I think Eliot Moss has missed the point I was trying to make.  My
  13. understanding was that there was no known *mechanism* (pathway) to
  14. explain cold nuclear fusion at high rates within the confines of known
  15. laws of physics.  Laws and mechanisms are different. 
  16. "Superconductivity" needed a new mechanism (pairing) to be understood,
  17. but no laws of physics changed.
  18.  
  19. The question I had raised was, does CNF (forgetting the arguable
  20. experimental situation, please) violate any *laws* of physics?
  21.  
  22. PJK
  23.