Cold Fusion Is Hotly Controversial
Regarding my piece earlier on cold fusion, my old school friend Duke Brooks writes, “I thought the idea of cold fusion died in the 1990s with Pons and Fleischmann.”
Cold fusion, while fantastically controversial, is definitely not dead. To summarize the best and worst that can be said about it in a few words:
The “pros” say it was simply an intellectual error to assume that fusion can only happen in 10^-22 seconds at hundreds of millions of degrees, that the initial experiments of Fleischmann and Pons have indeed been replicated at places that include Cal Tech, MIT, the US Navy, and Lawrence Livermore Labs — and that there is clear evidence that this has been covered up by the normal powers that oppose breakthroughs generally, i.e., the incumbents.
The “cons” deny all of the above, while pointing out that there is no theory that explains cold fusion, i.e., a rationalization of how the repulsive forces could be overcome at low temperatures. As my esteemed friend Glenn Doty writes, “Cold fusion is more appropriate to seances than sciences.”
The longer I stay in the clean energy game, the more credible people I meet on both sides of the aisle. I’ll keep you posted.
At one time, many doctors ignored the germ theory of disease, the result being that thousands of people died unnecessarily.
Whether cold fusion exists or makes sense, I don’t know. But it seems to me that it would be unwise to dismiss it without an adequate investigation.
Frank is wise, Tomatos used to be poisonous and the Automobile was going to kill the economy by eliminating horses hay livery and poop scoopers. Computers were going to un employe everyone and women pumping their own Gas was going to cause explosions across the country…. Women voting was going to kill the military and Blacks voting was going to ruin America. Prohibition was going to save the country from the devil and on and on… Oh yea, photographs were going to take your soul. We were going to be something weird in 1984 and Y2K was the end… Sorry I got carried away but my point is keep an open mind.
Greg Chick
I clearly remember a cover of “TIME” shortly after Pons & Fleishmann’s initial experiments and announcements. It featured a futuristic drawing of a sexy chick standing next to an equally sexy car, which was plugged into a heavy cable while recharging. Oh, let it be so. PLEASE, somebody, tell me that cold fusion is an actual possibility, at least from the theoretical physics perspective. And, if so, one might presume that it would offer many, many times the potential energy of a gallon of gasoline at a lower cost. IF SUCH A POSSIBLITY actually existed…I would defy anybody, including the U.S. government, to keep that genie inside its bottle. Greg is right about all the ideas that were misunderstood (no comment on which ones may have turned out to be correct after all); Edison’s electrification of NYC was resisted by those with interests in gaslight. We should have a way of taking about half-a-square mile of the Sun and transporting it back to Earth, but, I digress…
I would suggest that if Exxon or BP find a way to profitably create and sell cold fusion, their oil derricks will be decommissioned in about two seconds. One could only hope that such technology would NOT be shared with anybody else on earth until WE get a decade of exclusive use for a head start.
Duke,
You asked someone to tell you that cold fusion is possible from a theoretical physics perspective… But that’s the problem, it isn’t.
There’s no theory to support the possibility in the slightest. This is a group of people making “demonstrations” in their own lab that they set up… they won’t allow someone ELSE to set up a lab to check these magic reactors of theirs (invariably whenever someone does allow another team to set up the lab, the results are not replicated).
This isn’t science. It simply doesn’t have any more to do with science than telepathy or clairvoyance. You can believe in it if you wish… but there’s no claim that this is a scientific field of study. It fails on 4 out of 6 requirements for scientific inquiry.
Craig,
“Cold fusion’, is not ‘controversial’, it’s ludicrous !
Along with 1000 mpg carburettors,perpetual motion, and magic pills to put in your fuel tank, it’s at the best a group of people who have hoaxed themselves,at the worst a deliberate fraud !
These ‘researchers’ are not scientists, they are alchemists !
But hey, as long as they spend only their own money, who cares ?
I can heat seawter to 70C and more with just a flick of a switch.
I get readings that energetice charged particles are registering on my giger muller tube. So what is it then if not “cold fusion”
HOT WATER can turn a trubine. turbines make electricity
I think we have sun and seawater for a few more years. No carbon emissions.
MarcoPOlo is an ass he hasn’t gotten his hands dirty in a while I guess. Pick a side and lets fight with facts.
Would you believe NASA and our DOE they think its real who do you have on your team?
Don’t hate educate yourself.
Unless your a tax cheat they are using your money as we speak.
2012
Albert Opendaker DOE office of Fusion energy sciences
Dr Dennis Bushnell, Chief Scientist for NASA, Langley
plus about a hundred teams of scientists around the world
The USSR in 1960’s
The USA “project Sherwood” 1951-1958
Apendix II (Low Tempature Fusion)
“If however the charge of one of the interacting particles could be effectively neutralized, the need for high tempatures would be obviated. A bueatiful demonstartion of this fact was provided by the work of Alvarez Brander, and others at the UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA BERKELEY, who showed experiemntaly that fusion reactions can be produced at low tempatures with the aid of mu-mesons.” p.177
Amasa Bishop, Former head of the Controlled Thermonuclear Branch, Division of Research USAEC @1958
you are forgiven for your ignorance.
And your response sir.
You would have to be 79-80 years of age MarcoPolo for your money$$ not to have already gone for this reasearch.
425 Watts per hour and with 4 min heated 500 ml about 10 degrees F
Thanks for the visit
Here are my calcs: 425 watts for 4 minutes = 30 watthours = 18000 calories. Heating 500 grams of water 6 degrees C only requires 3000 calories.
Btw, there is no such thing as “watts per hour.” Watts are a rate already, the rate at which energy is transferred from one kind to another.
I enjoyed the visit, but, per my notes below, you’re not demonstrating what you think you’re demonstrating.
You wore shorts and a T-shirt? to a physics experiement that produces…??
I think your a greenwasher for an oil company.
I think your not smart enough to understand.
The tempatures were taken with an IR tempature gun-so that was the outside of the vessel NOT THE WATER TEMP!
you dont know enough about science to be looking at technologies-go back to marketing
I was just testing you. I dont give it away for free.
ciapoli-the atom unexplored- UTBUE IT GRAMPS
The tempature kept rasing after the power was decreased, with a certian type of metal catalyst(It would have iradiated you in yoru shorts). Of course you would have had to watch for at least 20 mins or more.
I demonstrated that you are in need of a physics saftey lab.
Please read the 2006 report by Purdue university and DO NOT contact me anymore. You are not welcome at my adress.
.
I can take $30.00 of MO and turn it into $550.00 of RU
one liter of seawater and 2 hours or less
RU is anti-cancer drug activated by light that is less toxic than cisplatin.
THE NUETRONS, I asume you saw the GM tube registering at between 70-80F?? at 1,800 watts or what ever you say still makes a nice tidy profit for you and MarCOpolo.
NO ONE in published papers has solved the alpha sticking problem of cold fusion to generate nuetrons at that tempature(up to boiling says the meter) The heat you saw was measured by an IR thermometer the OUTSIDE SURFACE TEMP of the beaker not the internal water temp. The record to date has been slightly above 0C and no more in Duterium oxide no less!
I still have the full spectrum photos of the cool looking photon emissions. Just like little nuclear implosions, Circular white 9IR) light with a ring of (UV) purple radiation.
Now if you can just learn physics, and chemsitry you would know what the heck I am talking about.
Where and what year did you recieve your undergrad in Physics may I ask?