Slashdot Mirror

be awarded with such prize??
Isn't it based on Hydrogen isotope (Deuterium)??

Lenr-Canr
Cold Fusion wiki

/Z

Closed-cell calorimetry has been done - a ton by the people at Stanford Research Institute. That criticism was taken up pretty quickly. :) The really intriguing results were when a calorimeter was modified to allow gas spectrometry to look for helium. Granted, that sort of thing is really really hard, but they did find helium, though there were criticisms that pointed out that it could be from lab room contamination. Still, this is one of those things where you're starting to grasp at straws.

The DOE review is pretty good: here. Note that a lot of LENR-CANR is, shall we say, just a tad bit biased and crank-worthy, but they've got a lot of documentation, so they're at least useful for that.

The DOE anonymous reviewers are particularly noteworthy: it's amazing how bad some of the reviews are, which, to be honest, is fairly insulting. The DOE paid these guys. They had a responsibility to be critical and honest, and several simply weren't (specifically 1, 2, and 15 were very bad). Conversely, however, Review 4 is excellent, as was Review 7, and Review 10 and 11, and 16 (really excellent). On the whole most were pretty good, but 1 and 2 leave a definite stink. It's interesting to read, however, because it's a completely independent and unbiased set of opinions. At least one reviewer was completely convinced.

Review 12 has a great summation of the field: "The quality of work is so inconsistent in this field, including the work of some key players, which
makes it difficult to clear the black cloud and to increase the credibility of the field. Repeated retractions and conflicting experimental results in the past certainly did not help. Hopefully as time on, a few careful studies will provide a definitive conclusion. Unfortunately, that has not happened yet, although some
progress has been made."

However, the review does make for interesting reading. Several of the reviewers do point out that there are possibilities for an actual theoretical basis for it, in particular results from German beam tests that show that anomalous screening can occur in deuterated metal films.

Cold Fusion And The Future, by Jed Rothwell, published by LENR-CANR.org, December 2004, 186 pages, 41 illustrations and figures.

The reality of cold fusion is growing and has spawned a series of books that describe the phenomena in ways a general reader can appreciate.
This is the latest entry. It shows how this controversial energy source might change our future. The book describes how many nightmare problems that seem beyond any present solution, such as global warming, invasive species, and providing clean drinking water and sanitation to billions of poor people, may be remedied with cold fusion combined with other technologies.

The future might be better than you think.

Just check the Jed's Rothwell site about Cold Fusion:
http://www.lenr-canr.org/
In my opinion there is some kind of scientific revolution which we will see in coming years.
All that "Cold Fusion" stuff is just a humble and unnotified beginning.
Soon the "Nuclear Chemistry" will come.
It will be about synthesizing the elements as we do with ordinary chemical compounds today.
Just check results from Iwamura experiments published on the site.

/R

Watch this space for important papers and articels about cold fusion.
http://www.lenr-canr.org/

One of the more recent papers have a sound explanation of why the coloumb barrier can be circumvented at low temperatures.
Quite interesting.
The scientific community over there keeps growing and there are now hundreds of experiments which find seemingly "unexplainable" effects like excess temperature etc.

For more information about Cold Fusion please check Lenr-Canr site.
It seems that it's bigger far beyond the "clean unexhaustible energy source" thing.
Sir Arthur C. Clark considers that as a modest introduction to "Nuclear Chemistry" - just see results obtained by Iwamura.
The international conference ICCF-12 was held in Japan recently.

The story of this guy's discovery and his fight agains established better judgment (and established business) is reminiscent of the treatment reserved to cold fusion. (http://www.lenr-canr.org/) . Lots of money invested in the status quo, so we need to discredit any upcoming theory on the off chance that it might actually hold water... and never mind the mounting evidence. Even in slashdot, comments such as this one keep being modded down to oblivion... can't risk people starting to think about the evidence rather than accepting blindly the condemnation by the high priests of nuclear physics who couldn't be bothered by evidence that contradicts their models... which were built as all models with a number of simplifying assumptions.

"The Nobel citation praises the doctors for their tenacity, and willingness to challenge prevailing dogmas"
It's now obvious for me that Cold Fusion is real but the researchers still have to fight with similar dogmas.
Hope, that in a few years this case will be finally clarified.

Documents library:
http://www.lenr-canr.org/

Recent news:
http://www.newenergytimes.com/news/NET12.htm

Book about CF:
http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJcoldfusiona. pdf

There is conference planned in Japan (November 27 - December 2):
http://iccf12.org/

Have a nice reading!
/Zdzich

"The Nobel citation praises the doctors for their tenacity, and willingness to challenge prevailing dogmas"
It's now obvious for me that Cold Fusion is real but the researchers still have to fight with similar dogmas.
Hope, that in a few years this case will be finally clarified.

Documents library:
http://www.lenr-canr.org/

Recent news:
http://www.newenergytimes.com/news/NET12.htm

Book about CF:
http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJcoldfusiona. pdf

There is conference planned in Japan (November 27 - December 2):
http://iccf12.org/

Have a nice reading!
/Zdzich

Hot Fusion development had already taken 30 years of generous US govt funding and with mere effect. They will need next 25 years of such funding to get this technology useful.

There is another, better way. The Cold Fusion development during past 16 years lead to great improvements. At the present more than 80% of all experiments produce significant amounts of surplus energy. They are planning to build first WORKING PROTOTYPES soon.

Ubelievable?? Just check the main LENR-CANR site for more info: http://www.lenr-canr.org/
The will be international conference held November 27 - December 2, 2005, Shizuoka, Japan: http://iccf12.org/

Peer review is not the only measure of a thing's veracity. Unfortunately, there is a great pressure to conform to what is accepted by the peers (or be discredited). It does not always happen that scientists will only base their opinions on recorded data. Preconceptions, credibility and politics come into play.

Cold fusion is an excellent example of it. Fleishman and Pons were not physicists but electrochemists. Controlled, fusion (by conventional high energy means) producing more energy than it consumed is still elusive (although correct me if I'm wrong, I think they managed to get slightly passed breakeven). Imagine the politics of having "newbies" in the field (as any physiscist would put it), manage with much less material investment what the best minds in the field haven't managed for decades and enormous investments. Before "peers" (or in this case, physicists, not their electrochemist peers) would accept it officially, they needed to have a theory... the numbers could not be accepted without a theory (which goes against the tenets of science, where if your observations do not match what the theory says, you have to start thinking if your theory is OK).

It wasn't trivial to reproduce the results. The proportion of electrode atoms and deuterons in contact had to be exact or from a 100% reproducibility you quickly fall to 10% reproducibility if you only have 90% saturation. But in the early days, much was still to verify... and because the peers couldn't accept the numbers you couldn't get favourably peer reviewed, although enough others got similar results to suggest that something was indeed happening, although it might not be trivial to reproduce. If it hadn't been for the media coverage, the whole thing would be dead now. Nobody would have heard of it, since it would have been killed before being published in a peer reviewed journal.

It does have striking similarities to the problems with fission. At first, uranium nuclei were bombarded with accelerated protons, but the energy threshold required to cause fission was too high. It was because of Leo Szilard's idea to use the neutrons to cause a chain reaction that fission was eventually made useful. Because Szilard was a physisist, and he had come up with the mechanism first his ideas were more readily accepted. The relative investment of time and money into fission was not comparable to the amounts invested in fusion. Other than that, the problem is similar. Breaking even is difficult when you ar trying to push protons together. finding a way to lower the threshold is the key.

For more info on Cold Fusion and current theories as to how this could be, check: http://www.lenr-canr.org/

For those wanting pictures and diagrams: http://www.lenr-canr.org/Experiments.htm

He could submit it to one or more legitimate scientific journals. Or he could present the work to a qualified physicist and try to get them on board.

Right, he'll present it to people who are pathological disbelievers like yourself and it will be ignored instead of being reviewed. Catch-22, as I said.

It's Toyota Prius. I have one, and I love it. It cost a lot, but it's still cheaper than the SUVs that use 4x more fuel and produce substantially more pollution. Well, SUVs are great and actually are more fuel efficient when transporting a full load than other vehicles, but the SUV owners don't use them in this way, so they're wasting a lot of fuel. Honda has two hybrids on the market in America - Insight (2-seater pure hybrid), and Civic (4-seater sedan with a hybrid option). I'm very interested to see how long it takes before people (not just small pockets, but more globally) start believing in LENR-CANR (Low Energy Nuclear Reactions - Chemically Assisted Nuclear Reactions) http://lenr-canr.org/ ... known to the layman as cold fusion, which has been shown to produce anomalous surplus energy in over 1000 experiments since 1989.

Well, my take on cold fusion is that it's somewhat improbable, but it's fun to dream.

Except that you have to wake up and face reality some times, too. Especially when talking about what you think the taxpayers money should be spent on.

Currently, many researchers claim to have semi-succesfully fused deuterium resulting in helium and heat energy

But far fewer have actually done so.

That site you linked to is a typical example of pseudoscience. Confusing and unintelligble, filled with bogus references on irrelevant matters, and nothing at all supporting the stranger claims.

Just to pick an example: This phase diagram. What is that? Well the text will have you believe it's the Palladium-deuterium system. It is not. Nor could it even possibly be that. Because you can't plot a binary system on a two-axis plot like that. Where's the relative Pd/D concentration plotted? Nowhere.

I'll even tell you why: That is NOT a phase diagram of a metal-hydride(deuteride) system. It isn't even a phase diagram of a binary (2-component) system.

It's a phase diagram of a single gas in it's gas and liquid states, as seen in any chemistry textbook discussing gas laws.
(See for instance the exact same thing plotted for carbon dioxide in Atkins, "Physical Chemistry", chapter one, figure 1.23)

The dashed line indicates the area in which the substance is a liquid, the critical isotherm (that's what the lines are called) around 275 degrees in the graph is the critical point above which the substance cannot exist in liquid form.

This is an example of what a phase diagram in a binary system can look like.

That site is just incoherent blathering and some images stolen from chemistry textbooks and a bunch of irrelevant links thrown in for good measure.

It is not science. It just looks like it.

Well, my take on cold fusion is that it's somewhat improbable, but it's fun to dream.

Except that you have to wake up and face reality some times, too. Especially when talking about what you think the taxpayers money should be spent on.

Currently, many researchers claim to have semi-succesfully fused deuterium resulting in helium and heat energy

But far fewer have actually done so.

That site you linked to is a typical example of pseudoscience. Confusing and unintelligble, filled with bogus references on irrelevant matters, and nothing at all supporting the stranger claims.

Just to pick an example: This phase diagram. What is that? Well the text will have you believe it's the Palladium-deuterium system. It is not. Nor could it even possibly be that. Because you can't plot a binary system on a two-axis plot like that. Where's the relative Pd/D concentration plotted? Nowhere.

I'll even tell you why: That is NOT a phase diagram of a metal-hydride(deuteride) system. It isn't even a phase diagram of a binary (2-component) system.

It's a phase diagram of a single gas in it's gas and liquid states, as seen in any chemistry textbook discussing gas laws.
(See for instance the exact same thing plotted for carbon dioxide in Atkins, "Physical Chemistry", chapter one, figure 1.23)

The dashed line indicates the area in which the substance is a liquid, the critical isotherm (that's what the lines are called) around 275 degrees in the graph is the critical point above which the substance cannot exist in liquid form.

This is an example of what a phase diagram in a binary system can look like.

That site is just incoherent blathering and some images stolen from chemistry textbooks and a bunch of irrelevant links thrown in for good measure.

It is not science. It just looks like it.

Well, my take on cold fusion is that it's somewhat improbable, but it's fun to dream. Currently, many researchers claim to have semi-succesfully fused deuterium resulting in helium and heat energy, but no or little gamma radiation. Semi-succesful meaning the reactions haven't been sustained or have been troublesome to reproduce. For googling, there's an acronym I ran across re Cold Fusion: LENR (Low-Energy Nuclear Reaction). Check out LENR-CANR.org. LENR in a nutshell: If you bring two hydrogen or deuterium atoms close enough together, they will fuse into helium and release energy in the form of heat and gamma radiation. The problem is the atoms have a strong repulsion to each other. Rather than the high-energy approach LENR researchers are looking at less intensive ways of achieving this. Sort of like working smarter, not harder. Perhaps the solution in the end is a hybridization of the two approaches?

BTM

Have an open mind.

This should have been the link

in other words, don't wake me up. For all you optimists out there, here's a good pro-cold-fusion website to pour over whie I sleep. It has plenty of info

New Scientist article earlier this year featured the article with the synopsis "No sooner had cold fusion surfaced than it was written off, and the idea of extracting virtually limitless free energy from water became taboo. So how come a small band of experienced researchers working for the US Navy just can't let it drop? Bennett Daviss takes up their strange story"

You'd think that some smart person would figger out a way to take advantage of that fact.

Doh! I got the <p> in the wrong place; please see www.lenr-canr.org first.

www.lenr-canr.org

(please see first) www.bovik.org/codeposition

www.bovik.org/codeposition/best.gif (confirmatory experiment you can do at home for less than the cost of building a Farnsworth fusor.)

The big debate was that the experiments were very hard to conduct and the evidence was from caloromic readings while the physicists wanted various nuclear reaction evidence. The problem was that while caloromic readings were very persuasive scientists had no idea what was going on inside the palladium.

Probably the best papers are by Michael McKubre over at Stanford. Here's a good transcript of his talk at this year's conference on cold fusion. He's written a lot on the topic and gave a fascinating hour long interview to KUER in SLC. I'll not post the link to avoid slashdotting a small NPR station. For peer reviewed papers I was looking at LANL, but the links I had appear to have been moved behind a firewall. HEre are some I found doing a bit of looking:

Anomalous Behavior of the Pd/D System

Correlation of Excess Power and Helium Production During D2O and H20 Electrolysis Using Palladium Cathods

The Emergence of a Coherent Explanation for Anomalies Observed in D/Pd and H/Pd System

Some Thoughts on the Nature of the Nuclear-Active Regions in Palladium

I'm sure there are more if you do a little searching.

The big debate was that the experiments were very hard to conduct and the evidence was from caloromic readings while the physicists wanted various nuclear reaction evidence. The problem was that while caloromic readings were very persuasive scientists had no idea what was going on inside the palladium.

Probably the best papers are by Michael McKubre over at Stanford. Here's a good transcript of his talk at this year's conference on cold fusion. He's written a lot on the topic and gave a fascinating hour long interview to KUER in SLC. I'll not post the link to avoid slashdotting a small NPR station. For peer reviewed papers I was looking at LANL, but the links I had appear to have been moved behind a firewall. HEre are some I found doing a bit of looking:

Anomalous Behavior of the Pd/D System

Correlation of Excess Power and Helium Production During D2O and H20 Electrolysis Using Palladium Cathods

The Emergence of a Coherent Explanation for Anomalies Observed in D/Pd and H/Pd System

Some Thoughts on the Nature of the Nuclear-Active Regions in Palladium

I'm sure there are more if you do a little searching.

The big debate was that the experiments were very hard to conduct and the evidence was from caloromic readings while the physicists wanted various nuclear reaction evidence. The problem was that while caloromic readings were very persuasive scientists had no idea what was going on inside the palladium.

Probably the best papers are by Michael McKubre over at Stanford. Here's a good transcript of his talk at this year's conference on cold fusion. He's written a lot on the topic and gave a fascinating hour long interview to KUER in SLC. I'll not post the link to avoid slashdotting a small NPR station. For peer reviewed papers I was looking at LANL, but the links I had appear to have been moved behind a firewall. HEre are some I found doing a bit of looking:

Anomalous Behavior of the Pd/D System

Correlation of Excess Power and Helium Production During D2O and H20 Electrolysis Using Palladium Cathods

The Emergence of a Coherent Explanation for Anomalies Observed in D/Pd and H/Pd System

Some Thoughts on the Nature of the Nuclear-Active Regions in Palladium

I'm sure there are more if you do a little searching.

The big debate was that the experiments were very hard to conduct and the evidence was from caloromic readings while the physicists wanted various nuclear reaction evidence. The problem was that while caloromic readings were very persuasive scientists had no idea what was going on inside the palladium.

Probably the best papers are by Michael McKubre over at Stanford. Here's a good transcript of his talk at this year's conference on cold fusion. He's written a lot on the topic and gave a fascinating hour long interview to KUER in SLC. I'll not post the link to avoid slashdotting a small NPR station. For peer reviewed papers I was looking at LANL, but the links I had appear to have been moved behind a firewall. HEre are some I found doing a bit of looking:

Anomalous Behavior of the Pd/D System

Correlation of Excess Power and Helium Production During D2O and H20 Electrolysis Using Palladium Cathods

The Emergence of a Coherent Explanation for Anomalies Observed in D/Pd and H/Pd System

Some Thoughts on the Nature of the Nuclear-Active Regions in Palladium

I'm sure there are more if you do a little searching.

The big debate was that the experiments were very hard to conduct and the evidence was from caloromic readings while the physicists wanted various nuclear reaction evidence. The problem was that while caloromic readings were very persuasive scientists had no idea what was going on inside the palladium.

Probably the best papers are by Michael McKubre over at Stanford. Here's a good transcript of his talk at this year's conference on cold fusion. He's written a lot on the topic and gave a fascinating hour long interview to KUER in SLC. I'll not post the link to avoid slashdotting a small NPR station. For peer reviewed papers I was looking at LANL, but the links I had appear to have been moved behind a firewall. HEre are some I found doing a bit of looking:

Anomalous Behavior of the Pd/D System

Correlation of Excess Power and Helium Production During D2O and H20 Electrolysis Using Palladium Cathods

The Emergence of a Coherent Explanation for Anomalies Observed in D/Pd and H/Pd System

Some Thoughts on the Nature of the Nuclear-Active Regions in Palladium

I'm sure there are more if you do a little searching.

Be careful what you make comparisons to ridicule.

Don't believe me? Try it yourself!