Return to the INE Main Page

Hal Fox, Editor

From: NEN, Vol. 4, No. 5, September 1996, pp. 1-3.
New Energy News (NEN) copyright 1996 by Fusion Information Center, Inc.
COPYING NOT ALLOWED without written permission.

L. Hunter Lovins [1] lists three methods for effecting change: 1. Change the paradigm of those who have power over the rules. 2. Don't waste time trying to change the people who make the rules. 3. Advocate changes in the rules. In the socio-political world, following these three steps may be a big challenge. We who are working in science have a much easier job. Let's explore these ideas.


The first step is to determine who makes the rules. That is relatively easy: the scientific rule makers are the editors and the peer-reviewers of the scientific and technical journals. Behind the scenes are advisory boards to these journals, and are often peer reviewers. Another group of rule makers are those bureaucrats who oversee the distribution of the funds from the DOE, National Science Foundation, etc. However, we know that bureaucrats are very cautious about making decisions so they set up advisory committees. These advisory committee members often come from the advisors and peer reviewers of the journals.


Can you change the minds of these "rule makers"? Have you tried to convince any of the writers of anti-cold fusion articles that they made a mistake? One hundred years ago, scientists dealt with an energetic aether. Since about 1905-1915 the accepted scientific dogma has been that there is no aether. Now we call it zero-point energy and over 400 peer-reviewed articles have been published about ZPE (aether by another name). How many scientists accept the idea of ZPE alias aether? So why waste time on trying to change the minds of people who make the rules?

Boxed Insert:

Time wounds all Heals. - T.H. Bell.


A paradigm is an example, a pattern, or a model. The course of science is to discover, measure, suggest models to explain the discovery and the data, recycle and improve the model. If and when the model has excellent explanatory power, and the experiments are replicable, and the model is sold to peers so that it is taught in institutions of higher learning, then it becomes the current paradigm. What current paradigms needs changing? We suggest the following two paradigm changes:

* Nuclear reactions in a metal lattice differ from nuclear reactions in hot plasma physics.

* There is an energetic aether.

There is a difference between a new model (paradigm) based on new scientific discoveries and the acceptance of that paradigm. However, a scientific paradigm is based on scientific facts. A new paradigm for low-energy nuclear reactions is needed. We have many new scientific facts but not, as yet, an adequate model. The experimental data being presented at the second conference on Low- Energy Nuclear Reactions should provide additional data from which a better paradigm can be developed. The existing paradigm DOES NOT SUPPORT THE NEW DISCOVERIES! That is the first step to a paradigm shift. Now we must provide the new model and we must also be intensely involved in selling the concept that the old paradigm no longer has sufficient explanatory power.

Boxed Insert:

True Genius resides in the capacity for evaluating of uncertain, hazardous, and conflicting information. - Winston Churchill.


Consider advice number 3: "Change the rules." We have already established that the old paradigm is outmoded, therefore, the rule makers are now at a strong disadvantage, they know their paradigm is inadequate. In essence, we are close to accomplishing the first strategy. Now we need to explore what rules need to be changed.

Here are some rules to be changed:

* Change "Nuclear reactions in or on a metal lattice must be the same as found in hot-plasma physics," to "Nuclear reactions in or on a metal lattice can be produced at low-energy levels."

* Change "The vacuum is empty and has no energy," to "There is an energetic aether that is a potential source of energy."

* Change "The red shift is caused by an expanding universe," to "The red shift can be explained by an interaction between photons and the aether."

* Change "Any device that produces more output energy than input energy is against the Law of Conservation of Energy," to "A device which produces more output energy than input energy is admissible if the device is transforming available energy from the environment."

* Change "Government employees have the right to classify inventions developed using private funds," to "Government employees shall have the right to classify inventions only if such inventions were produced using government funds."

Boxed Insert:

Every dogma must have its Day. - H.G. Wells

It's time for SOME to go away. - Peter Gluck.

* Change "Articles from the New York Times and the Washington Post can be used by government agencies to deny constitutional rights to inventors," to "The U.S. Office of Patents and Trademarks shall use only peer-reviewed articles from respected journals as published evidence in responding to patent applications.


There is a tendency to treat the adversary as a powerful organized unit. Assume that is true. Organized action is their strength. Scientific truth is their weakness. The game to be played should be considered as a game between two opponents. They are organized, we are not.

Professor John O'M. Bockris and Dr. Guang H. Lin (both at Texas A&M) have suggested that it is time to form a professional membership organization, solicit dues-paying members, have a peer-reviewed journal, and become energetically involved in fostering important new scientific discoveries.

Boxed Insert:

Don't Mourn: Organize! - Joe Hill, Labor Organizer
(Advice to workers before he was shot by firing squad.)

It has been said, "There are three kinds of people: People that make things happen. People that watch things happen. People that don't know anything is happening." We must be numbered among those that make things happen. You may ask, "What can one person do? The answer is: "Something great." Lead if you can. Follow if you can't lead. If you can't follow, send money.

[If you can't send money, help me with these web page files! Patrick Bailey.]

What can a group do? CHANGE THE WORLD!

If we are energetically committed to changing the world, what are the rules that can really help us?

Here are some rules to use:

* Publish or perish. Publish in your own peer-reviewed journal.

* Academic tenure. Freedom of speech. Freedom of assembly. Meet and share information.

* Cite your sources. Quote each other often.

* Scientists will believe what they are paid to believe. Fund them.

* Use of academic consultants. Advertise availability in your Journal.

* Organize conferences. Appoint a conference committee, select the topics, and select the papers that support the new paradigm.

* Use the media. New scientific information from prestigious scientists is often welcome by the media. The media also likes conflict. Issue press releases.


Step One: Agree to organize a professional scientific organization with yearly membership fee, and a professional peer-reviewed journal, to support Low-Energy Nuclear Reactions.

Step Two: Pay your membership fees.

Step Three: Elect a president, a secretary, and a journal editor and ask them to serve as an organizing committee. Committee volunteers are welcome. Issue a press release on the name, purpose, and officers of the new scientific organization.

Step Four: File non-profit scientific and educational corporate articles.

Step Five: Committee to adopt bylaws and mail to existing members for suggested changes. Mail final copy of bylaws to all existing and new members.

Step Six: Every member will be asked to be pro-energetic (as contrasted with proactive) and be involved in active support of the organization.

Step Seven: Provide mutual support among members in obtaining grants, receiving awards, distributing press releases to the local media, contacting political leaders to support new scientific projects exploring low-energy nuclear reactions.

Step Eight: Redirect your professional research, publications, teaching, letters, etc., to the support of the chosen paradigm shift to recognize the fact of low-energy nuclear reactions. Advertise your availability as a consultant to government and industry on low-energy nuclear reactions.

Step Nine: Solicit and publish peer-reviewed papers on experiments and theory supportive of low- energy nuclear reactions. Avoid papers that are a rehash of previously published work. Cite liberally the work of other members and of papers that were presented in conferences. Insist on rapid response to requests to peer review papers. Speed up the process of submission, review, and publication.

Step Ten: Use the Internet. Establish a web site. Each member to have e-mail. Each member expected to act professionally in being mutually supportive of scientific fact. Avoid ridicule and "flaming" of contrary views. Ignore the pathological skeptics. Support all who publish and seek the scientific truth. Encourage all to join the professional organization either as professional members, associate members (lay persons), and especially student members.

Our strength and our tools are SCIENTIFIC TRUTH!

Our mission is to promote a paradigm shift.

Our reward is changing the minds and hearts of a new generation.

Our personal motives may differ but we have the ability and the opportunity to change the world, establish a new and more scientifically correct paradigm.

The result will be new science, new industry, new jobs, and a better world.

What can you do better?


[1] L. Hunter Lovins, Executive Director of Rocky Mountain Institute, in her editorial in the Rocky Mountain Institute Newsletter, Summer 1996. Lovins cites Dana Meadows (co-author of "Beyond the Limits") as providing several rules by which a system can be changed.

Return to the INE Main Page