MFMP member Mathieu Valat has been awarded a share in the Antonio Meneghetti, Scientific and Humanistic Research Foundation's physics prize for the work that he is undertaking to advance the concepts of Live Open Science via its application to LENR research.
We understand that both the concept of Live Open Science and the notion of moving towards a solution to the worlds energy problems are in-line with the concepts of Onto-psychology and we thank the foundation's international committee for recognising that.
We had been struggling to conduct our planned research, with only a few hundred dollars in donations in the last three months, things were looking a little tough. The prize money - of around $10,000, will help Mathieu to run his lab this year and to allow us, as a group, to further the concepts of Live Open Science with a view to bringing its benefits to other fields of research.
We must first thank Francesco Celani for being instrumental in helping this whole project to get underway by allowing his technology to be tested. We thank him again for suggesting we apply for this award, though extremely challenging to apply for, requiring understanding of Onto-psychology, it has had a positive outcome.
http://www.fondazionemeneghetti.ch/pages/164/Awards-Winners-2014.html
This is an important moment for the MFMP as we have applied for 4 other grants/awards in the past 9 months, some of which took great effort, without success.
Onwards and Upwards!
Comments
TIA
Ken
Science is an iterative process of test, observe, analyse, challenge repeat ... until only consistency remains.
LENR is unbelievably multidisciplina ry, here at the MFMP we are testing the claims of others, ideally with their support and all can get involved with the process, no one need sit on the sidelines.
Even when a technology is proven, real products can take extreme ingenuity, massive human and capital resources to distill into a useable product as anyone that knows the process will attest to.
The great thing is that humans right now want better access to clean energy solutions and the more active research done on a range of competing threads the better.
The volunteers, donors, collaborators, contributors and supporters of our efforts are trying to help make this particular thread valid or invalid, the truth is the important outcome.
Are we just going to continue stumbling along, or is there any real hope for the future?
You are not to me and I doubt you are to the others :)
You fully participate in the experiments when you study the data, come up with new ideas and are expending considerable time and effort in this project. I say that makes you a big and valuable contributor and in my view also a scientist.
@Zeddicus Zul Zorande: I'm really not much more than an armchair commenter, though.
I admire you guys deeply for the amount of personal time and sacrifices you have to make for something you believe in with, as yet, so little recognition. Though I have no doubt what you are doing is *real* science and a model for future (young) and independent scientists. It is what the, in some ways quite narrow-minded scientific community needs in order to investigate the extraordinary which would otherwise not be questioned and therefore missed as possible benefit to mankind.
So with a deep bow I salute the real scientists!
(and that specifically includes Ecco and the other great contributors to the project)
One time we basically got a flat out rejection of our application for grants because of what we were researching - we hope the tide is turning.
RSS feed for comments to this post