Slashdot Mirror

On a slightly off-topic note, for those who have not been following the details in the cold fusion field, some very persuasive evidence has emerged FOR the original cold fusion experiments (the Pons-Fleischmann style cold fusion using Palladium and Deuterium). The evidence was presented by researchers at the US Navy's SPAWAR labs late in 2006. The reserchers are highly experienced scientists who have taken their time and performed the experiments thoroughly. A description of the evidence is at http://www.newenergytimes.com/news/2006/NET19.htm# ee.

Some of the biggest problems in cold fusion experiments has been long incubation periods, perhaps weeks/months, difficulty in calorimetry experiments for determining if heat was being generated, and replication.

Two techniques have been detailed by SPAWAR. The first is the using chemical co-deposition methods to combine Palladium and Deuterium, allowing a solid Palladium structure to form with Deuterium already 'mixed' in with it. Previously, weeks were often needed to allow absorption of Deuterium into the Palladium. Using the co-deposition technique, cold fusion effects become apparent within minutes, such as anomalous amounts of tritium, low-intensity x-ray radiation, and increased heat. This happens on a highly repeatable basis.

The second, highly outstanding experimental result is the use of nuclear industry standard CR-39 nuclear track detectors, which look like small pieces of plastic and are permently etched with tiny impact craters whenever a high energy nuclear particle hits them. Chemical reactions cannot produce the craters or tracks. The experiment involved placing a CR-39 track detector physically next to the Palladium-Deuterium electrode.

What resulted was the detection of some of the highest density counts ever seen on the detectors of high energy nuclear particles. Independent nuclear experts who have examined the CR-39 detectors recognized the signature tracks of protons and alpha particles, which, to be ejected from the atoms where they reside, require millions of volts - at least 1,000,000 times more energy than can be produced by any known chemical reaction. As a control experiment, exposed CR-39 detectors in a lithium solution without palladium in it resulted in only a sprinkling of tracks, randomly distributed and so few in number that they could be accounted for by background radiation.

The only surrounding energy sources were a few volts from the current applied through electrolysis; the second is an applied external electric field of about 6,000 volts. The particle tracks look identical to tracks made by nuclear particles that have at least 2 million electron-volts.

The really nice thing is is that you can almost see the tracks with your naked eye. Take the detectors elsewhere, to conferences etc, show others later; the tracks are permently etched evidence of nuclear reactions occuring in a Palladium-Deuterium benchtop setup.

The evidence here for Pons-Fleischmann cold fusion is now getting to the point where the scientific community has to seriously consider that Pons-Fleischmann cold fusion DOES exist under the right conditions, whether people want to accept it or not. Hard to replicate is not the same as impossible to replicate.

Why we are going to wait another 20-30 years if there is another much better possibility?
Remember Cold Fusion?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_fusion

It's working!

SPAWAR scientists got simple, portable, highly repeatable, unambiguous, and permanent physical evidence of nuclear events using detectors that have a long track record of reliability and acceptance among nuclear physicists.
Forget your preconceptions, says scientist at Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center (SPAWAR). "We've done the experiments, and we have the data."

Using a unique experimental method called co-deposition, combined with the application of external electric and magnetic fields, and recording the results with standard nuclear-industry CR-39 polimer detectors, SPAWAR scientists: Pamela Mosier-Boss and Stan Szpak have produced what may be the most convincing evidence yet in the pursuit of proof of low energy nuclear reactions.

Read more here:
http://newenergytimes.com/news/2006/NET19.htm#ee

What independed experts say?
Gary W. Phillips, a nuclear physicist and expert in CR-39 detectors is similarly surprised by what he saw in SPAWAR's detectors. Phillips has used the detectors to record nuclear events for two decades.

He said that the tracks recorded in SPAWAR's CR-39 experiments are "at least one order of magnitude greater" in number than those in any other conventional nuclear experiments he's seen.

The evidence recorded in SPAWAR Systems Center's CR-39 detectors are "at least one order of magnitude greater" in number than those in any other conventional nuclear experiments he's seen in his 20 years of related experience.

"I've never seen such a high density of tracks before," Phillips noted. "It would have to be from a very intense source - a nuclear source. You cannot get this from any kind of chemical reaction.

Seems that Fleischmann and Pons should got they Nobel prize soon.

Is that end of The Fossil Fuels Era?

For more information about "Cold Fusion" (Lenr-Canr) please refer here:

        * Web repository with all documentation in that field (maintained by Jed Rothwell):
            http://www.lenr-canr.org/

        * An free E-book about Cold Fusion:
            http://lenr-canr.org/BookBlurb.htm

        * Last international conference in that field:
            http://www.iccf12.org/

        * Next conference about Cold Fusion:
            http://www.iscmns.org/iccf13/

So, putting money into Hot Fusion development looks like wasting of resources for me.

Happy reading!

Best regards, /Z

Simple, portable, highly repeatable, unambiguous, and permanent physical evidence of nuclear events using detectors that have a long track record of reliability and acceptance among nuclear physicists.
Forget your preconceptions, says scientist at Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center (SPAWAR). "We've done the experiments, and we have the data."

Using a unique experimental method called co-deposition, combined with the application of external electric and magnetic fields, and recording the results with standard nuclear-industry CR-39 polimer detectors, SPAWAR scientists: Pamela Mosier-Boss and Stan Szpak have produced what may be the most convincing evidence yet in the pursuit of proof of low energy nuclear reactions.

"Gary W. Phillips, a nuclear physicist and expert in CR-39 detectors is similarly surprised by what he saw in SPAWAR's detectors. Phillips has used the detectors to record nuclear events for two decades.
He said that the tracks recorded in SPAWAR's CR-39 experiments are "at least one order of magnitude greater" in number than those in any other conventional nuclear experiments he's seen.

The evidence recorded in SPAWAR Systems Center's CR-39 detectors are "at least one order of magnitude greater" in number than those in any other conventional nuclear experiments he's seen in his 20 years of related experience.

"I've never seen such a high density of tracks before," Phillips noted.

"It would have to be from a very intense source - a nuclear source.
You cannot get this from any kind of chemical reaction.

• Web repository with all documentation in that field (maintained by Jed Rothwell): Lenr-Canr
• An free E-book about Cold Fusion: Cold Fusion and the Future
• Last international conference in that field: ICCF12
• Next conference about Cold Fusion: ICCF13

"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

I strongly suggest reading all of the papers presented here to get a more accurate view of the conclusions reached by the reviewers.

"In June Professor Brian Josephson gave a remakable lecture during the 54th meeting of Nobel Laureates in Lindau, Germany during which he ridiculed the attacks on Cold Fusion, likening the situation to the initial rejection of Alfred Wegener's continental drift proposal, despite the overwhelming evidence for it."

PDF of the lecture:
http://www.newenergytimes.com/library/2004Josephso nB-LindauLecture.pdf

Dr. Robert Park has some fair commentary on the matter of "bogus science", however, his perspective causes him to categorically reject (without inquiry) that which he does not understand or have laws with which to explain. That he thinks that we humans in the year 2003 should have scientific laws to explain everything that exists, or else it "doesn't" exist, makes me laugh. I'm sure a few hundred years ago he would have insisted that the earth was flat. Take a look at an intelligent viewpoint of the scientific process, Dr. Edmund Storms