Slashdot Mirror

Some second-rank labs reproduced the results, but the best ones couldn't find anything.

Maybe?

Take, for starters, the Energy Resources Advisory Board (ERAB) panel appointed during the Bush administration to look into the cold fusion claims made by Pons and Fleischmann. That panel leaned heavily on an experiment done at MIT that found the field unworthy of financial support. Since then, however, Dr. Eugene Mallove, the chief science writer at MIT at the time, has come forward to denounce the MIT study, citing irregularities in the way MIT's results were presented.

Mallove contends MIT's researchers did generate excess heat in their cold fusion experiment, and then fudged that finding in their final report. As evidence, Mallove has produced a copy of the original heat-measurement graph used in the MIT experiment, which showed slight heat production above the expected level. That graph did not appear in the final MIT report. In its place, the MIT team published an "adjusted" graph that showed no production of excess heat.

Mallove resigned in protest and demanded an investigation.

In addressing Mallove's complaint, MIT did not dispute that the original graph had been altered. Instead, one of the 15 authors of the MIT report was permitted to take the unusual step of changing the description of the experiment's purpose *after* the paper describing it was published.

According to an appendix added to the report as a result of the investigation into Mallove's charges, the experiment was redefined to have been a search for a sudden onset of released energy, rather than to determine if unaccounted-for heat was being generated in cold fusion cells. No such claim was made at the time the report was originally published and presented to Congress. Mallove contends MIT's handling of the matter was fatally flawed. "In science, we don't usually allow anyone to redefine the purpose of an experiment to match the results," he says.

it took inventor Stanley Meyers a full 15 years before he could get someone from the known scientific community to even look at his prototype

"End of Road for Car That Ran on Water," London Sunday Times, 1 Dec. 1996.
  An Ohio court ruled against inventor Stanley Meyer, in a case brought against him by disgruntled investors recently.
  Meyer had sold "dealerships" and licensing rights in his Water Fuel Cell technology to interested investors, in anticipation of the day when it would power electric vehicles or even aircraft.
  That dream was shattered as Meyer was found guilty of fraud when his Water Fuel Cell failed to impress three "expert witnesses" who decided there was nothing revolutionary about it, rather that it was simply using conventional electrolysis.
  The Sunday Times article also stated that when one of the court experts went to examine the Water Fuel Cell driven car, it was impossible to evaluate because it was not working.

Maybe.
But that is *no* reason to ignore him completely.

The article was quite comprehensive and looks like quite a bit of big guys are behind it.
I do agree that a distinguished list also stood behind ramar too, and which was disproved completely, but I believe we should keep an open mind towards these.

Maybe his deduction is wrong, but if his invention _works_, it means something else (currently unknown) is there.
maybe..

I saw only one link to the tin-foil-hat sites. I can't believe /. has neglected this opportunity!

http://www.crystalinks.com/haarp.html
http://www.kalamark.com/Kal_Dir/haarp.html
http://www.padrak.com/ine/HAARP97.html
http://www.jerryesmith.com/includes/store.php?p=1

There, now this thread is complete. Of course, anything related to tin-foil-hats simply must be posted AC. :)

The "Cold" in Cold fusion relates to the fusion phenomenon occuring at temperatures way colder than current (working) fusion reactors work at.

Normal thermonuclear fusion reactors operate at around 100 million degrees Celsius. (see abstract at http://www.osti.gov/energycitations/product.biblio .jsp?osti_id=7146984)

In the sun, at extremely high densities, thermonuclear fusion is able to take place at much colder temperatures, around 15 million degrees Celsius. (see http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/astro/p rocyc.html#c1)

Cold fusion refers to fusion taking place at temperatures almost a million times colder than that - around room temperature, 25 degrees Celsius.

An interesting cold fusion product is available from Clean Energy Technologies Inc. A news article about is found here: http://www.padrak.com/ine/CFARNOSIX.html.

HTH.

We keep hearing about all these ultra high-tech hydrogen cars of the future.

Did you ever hear the rumour about the Patterson Power Cell? I saw a documentary about it on television (I think this was it) and the guy actually had a car running on it. Ofcourse you have to be sceptical about this sort of thing, but it is fun to explore the possibility.

5 min of Google got me this, but I can't find a company or email address yet. I'd like to learn more about this thing.

My recommendation is: those who are uncertain of their HTML coding abiliities should stick to plain-text and simply give the URLs:

• NASA BPP, proposal summaries (not sure if that was the intended link -- but you can search NASA yourself I suppose>)
• LLNL: Condensed Matter, abstract
• AntiGravity Research Conference
• Ning Lees Research (actually "Skeggs & Ning Li on Gravitational Modification")
• Nasa pumps 600k into research and has had tests
• AEI: John Hutchinson's Theories
• Japanese Anti-Gravity Experiment

That's all I have to contribute. Despite all the debate, "build your own UFO" looks like a fun thing to distract myself with some weekend.

We do have anti gravity.Scientists call it super conductivity. Super Conductivity
A technology NASA has right now which is called gravity shield. NASA only spent 600k on research, but the military could have spent hundreds of millions researching this.

QuoteIn response to the propulsion challenges specified by NASA's Breakthrough Propulsion Physics (BPP) program, the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center proposes to empirically explore the possibility of iinducing gravity modification through Josephson junction effects in magnetized, high-Tc superconducting oxides. Our technical goal is to critically test emerging physical concepts and provide rigorous empirical confirmation (or refutation) of anomalous effects related to the manipulation of gravity by magnetized type-II superconductors. Because the current empirical evidence for gravity modification is anecdotal, we propose, as a first step, to design, construct, and meticulously carry out a discriminating experiment. Our approach is unique in that we will construct an extremely sensitive torsional gravity balance to measure gravity modification effects by radio-frequency-pumped type-II superconductor test masses. Analysis indicates that an effective change in mass of less than 1 percent would be readily detectable by state-of-the-art differential capacitance transducers. The entire project is to be completed in 12 months. If uncontested positive effects can be detected, it would seem to imply a fundamentally new method for creating motion without propellant. This goes directly to the heart of BPP goal 1 which has the stated aim of reducing or eliminating the need for mass ejection from spacecraft propulsion systems."

This was in 1999. Its 2002. That was NASA, a government entity, so if NASA has anti gravity, the military has it too.

Gravity can be manipulated provided you have enough energy to do so, in lab experiments we've shown anti gravity works

Examples
Nasa



Ning Lees Research
Nasa pumps 600k into research and has had tests
Theories

http://www.totse.com/en/fringe/gravity_anti_grav it y/antigrv1.html

As you see, theres many anti gravity experiments which have been done in labs, its its done in a lab, chances are the military has prototype aircraft based on it. With so many theories of how it can be done, do you actually think none of these theories were successful? If any of them were our government would classify it.

http://www.research.ibm.com/quantuminfo/teleportat ion/

http://www.its.caltech.edu/~qoptics/teleport.html

http://www.ibm.com/news/ls960202.html

http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,47191, 00.html

http://www.padrak.com/ine/NEN_6_5_5.html

It's been more than 10 years since the original Pons and Fleischmann anouncement of [sic] cold fusion. These guys (Blacklight) are one of the myriad branches from that bizarre root. Personally I find it amusing that they deny a relationship with cold fusion, while the cold fusion advocates point to them as a success story.