Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

"Tabletop" Fusion Researcher Committed Scientific Misconduct

Posted by Soulskill on from the rebranding-doesn't-always-work dept.

Geoffrey.landis writes "A Purdue University panel investigated allegations against nuclear engineering professor Rusi Taleyarkhan, finding that he had in fact committed scientific misconduct in his work. Taleyarkhan had published papers in which he reported seeing evidence of nuclear fusion in the collapse of tiny bubbles in a liquid subjected to ultrasonic excitation — a finding that would be groundbreaking, if true, but one that apparently could not be replicated by other researchers. The allegations against Taleyarkhan were made in March of 2006. A local Indiana paper gives the full list of allegations against Taleyarkhan, and the resolution of each by the panel. The full report (PDF) is also available. Of the nine specific allegations, only two were found to comprise scientific misconduct. The committee 'could not find any other instances of scientists being able to replicate Taleyarkhan's results without Taleyarkhan having direct involvement with the experiments,' but notes that this comes 'just short of questioning whether Taleyarkhan's results were fraudulent.'" We've discussed this gentleman's work and the scrutiny it has received several times, and members of the scientific community seem to have given him the benefit of the doubt in many cases.

2 of 161 comments (clear)

  1. How disappointing. by jcr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I really want to see one of these fusion processes work. It would make a radical change in our society, by removing any reason for the US government to care what happens in the middle east.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    1. Re:How disappointing. by kestasjk · · Score: 4, Insightful

      To be honest there's no real reason to think fusion would be cheaper than coal, and nuclear fusion isn't much different to nuclear fission in most practical regards. It would be more like an improved form of nuclear fission than a revolutionary new technology.

      Fusion (in the most viable tokamak form) does produce radioactive waste products because of all the neutron flux, but (like lots of forms of fission) the waste isn't dangerous in the long-term. I also haven't seen any real data on how much fusion would cost on a practical level.

      So I don't see why fusion should be treated as anything more than a possible improvement to fission in the future; why aren't we going for fission as the technology to free us from the Middle East in the meantime?
      That's what the US did last time there was an oil crisis, and it worked out well, but this time our reactors are much better and safer for the experience.

      --
      // MD_Update(&m,buf,j);