Slashdot Mirror


1 MW Cold Fusion Plant Supposedly To Come Online

First time accepted submitter Jherico writes "Andrea Rossi (covered here a few times before) is scheduled to bring his 1MW plant online Oct. 28th. This will likely either be the point where 'unexpected technical difficulties' unmask this for the scam it is, or the presence of an actual 1MW plant with no chemical fuel source will silence a lot of skeptics. What would you do if it were real?"

87 of 828 comments (clear)

  1. Oblig xkcd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Oblig xkcd:

    http://xkcd.com/955/

    1. Re:Oblig xkcd by CaptSlaq · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I suspect this is feeding a troll, but I also suspect more than this one actually shares this view.

      Believe it or not, the motorheads that actually look into this stuff WANT electric cars. Having full torque from rev one all the way up to the maximum potential of the engine would be a panacea. Neck snapping acceleration could be the NORM, not the exception. The simplification that the electric drivetrain would bring would also be wonderful. Assuming the packaging of the power plant is small enough, or can be flexibly packaged, you put the thing anywhere you want and put electric motors at the diff or on the wheels. You don't have to worry about where to store a cubic meter of engine/transmission in one place. The properly designed electric car brings HUGE design advantages. You can make truly beautiful and/or functional things with much less concern about "how can I shoehorn enough engine in here?".

      The current problem with the electric car is energy storage. Batteries suck compared to petrol/diesel. Gas/go doesn't happen with batteries. Range is problematic, and even if you did get 300 miles out of a single charge, it's still 2-4 hours (in an ideal world, even) to do it again. Weight is problematic.

      And finally, The US doesn't have the corner on petrol powered vehicles. Last time I looked, most of the most desirable cars came from Germany (Mercedes, BMW, Bugatti, Audi), England (Aston Martin, Rolls Royce), and Italy (Alfa Romeo, Ferrari, Lamborghini). I don't recall ANY of them making electric cars either. As a matter of fact, the only "mass production" electric cars that I'm aware of have come from US companies: GM (EV1) and Tesla (Roadster). I could be wrong on the latter, tho.

      But, yaknow... if all you want to prove is how witty you can (not) be by taking shots at people who love cars and happen to be from a certain country, that's fine too.

    2. Re:Oblig xkcd by dorfl68 · · Score: 2

      Wrong formula. With m as the RESTING mass, you get E=mc^2 / (sqrt(1-(v^2/c^2)) , which is infinite for v=c. One way to look at this is that as an object approaches the speed of light, its mass becomes (almost) infinite. In order to accelerate more, you need (almost) infinite energy. The formula explodes into infinity exactly at the speed of light.

    3. Re:Oblig xkcd by Lumpy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Range is problematic, and even if you did get 300 miles out of a single charge, it's still 2-4 hours (in an ideal world, even) to do it again. Weight is problematic.

      Not for me. I will buy an electric car that can reliably get 150 miles per charge when the temperature is -10F and the battery pack is 5 years old. THis easily will cover my needs for a 40 mile one way commute and associated driving that day. I will GLADLY plug in everynight and let it charge for 8 hours.

      Problem is the Nissan Leaf in cold weather will get 1/2 the quoted range and it's battery is wearing faster than most people though. a Lot of owners lave lost 15% of their battery capacity after 1 year of ownership.

      I would buy one now, but then I'm not the typical idiot that has to drive a v8 400hp 5800pound 8 foot wide SUV all alone to and from work every day... I currently drive a civic as it gets the best gas mileage/cost ratio out there.

      Chevy Volt is a joke. it's so overpriced that I might as well buy the same size car (civic) and pay for gas because the price difference is the gas cost for 10 years of driving.

      Most people will buy electric if the math ads up and there is savings. Almost nobody buys a car to be "green" I dont give a rats ass about being green, I'm a cheap bastard that barely makes enough to begin with. I need a cheap small car that controls my cost of commuting to work.

      And for you idiots that say "move closer to work" I say, I would love to, tell work to pay me 2X my salary so I can afford the rent near them.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    4. Re:Oblig xkcd by CaptSlaq · · Score: 2

      Might I submit that you don't want a *currently produced/produceable* electric car, for all the reasons I lined out in my post?

    5. Re:Oblig xkcd by Applekid · · Score: 2

      The current problem with the electric car is energy storage. Batteries suck compared to petrol/diesel. Gas/go doesn't happen with batteries. Range is problematic, and even if you did get 300 miles out of a single charge, it's still 2-4 hours (in an ideal world, even) to do it again. Weight is problematic.

      There seems to be this huge drive (ha, pun!) to use electric cars like one uses gasoline cars in that we ought to take a tube of something and shove it in a port and after a few minutes potential energy has filled the stores, be it electrical or chemical. I don't see why we couldn't have gas stations replaced with battery stations where you pull into a booth (like an automated car wash), push a button on your dash, and your existing battery releases it's locks so that a machine underneath can detach it the rest of the way and swap it out for a fully charged battery. The used battery goes off to a charging bank. When charged, it queues up in the outbox to get swapped in for the next guy. Batteries too old to hold a good charge are pulled aside for recycling and some new ones are cycled in every now and then.

      If highly trained humans can refuel, change all the wheels, and do all sorts of less visible things on a Formula 1 racer during a pit stop in less than 5 seconds, imagine what a machine, being careful and methodical, could accomplish in 5 minutes.

      Obviously this needs agreement over some standardization, but there's already some level of standardization that allows any model consumer car to refuel at any branded gas station, after all.

      --
      More Twoson than Cupertino
    6. Re:Oblig xkcd by pixelpusher220 · · Score: 2
      You're issue isn't with electric or gas, your issue is with energy storage/refueling ability.

      How about a vehicle with electric motors that run off a gas generator? That would do exactly what you ask for and still be much more efficient. Sort of like how diesel electric locomotives work. The electric motors are MUCH more efficient that ICE's, so you use a gas generator to power the electric motors.

      Electric cars might get there, but it'll be a while.

      I could turn this statement around and say, Oil/Gas might be ok for now, but they will run out. Let alone the environmental damage they are doing.

      So we can either spend the time twiddling our thumbs until fossil fuels are much more expensive, or we can start investing and researching in electrics now so that the time when they do 'get there' gets here quicker and we don't have to pay $10/gallon for gas.

      --
      People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people :-D
    7. Re:Oblig xkcd by Teancum · · Score: 4, Insightful

      From my study of cold fusion, it is at best an intellectual curiosity where it might rival the Farnsworth-Hirsch Fusor as something to produce a neutron radiation source that can be turned on and off with a light switch. There certainly are some applications for a device like that, even if you don't have "net energy", and indeed with the Fusor such devices are sold commercially. It is a niche product that only a nuclear physics researcher or some applications in nuclear medicine would have a use for such a device.

      One of the better run studies conducted a study of "cold fusion" where they were checking for radioactive products (as opposed to a calorimeter) and they were able to measure a significant statistical deviation from the "background radiation" of the environment of the laboratory where the experiment was being made. In other words, real fusion was taking place, but the amount was so low as to be something only for a research paper or to discuss at a fusion conference. The problem is that Pons & Fleischmann made such a circus out of the concept that anybody saying "slow down a minute.... it isn't really that big of a deal" were dismissed as crackpots and the entire concept was shot down.

      Where Rossi and his "fellow researchers" are coming off as completely off their rockers isn't that they've discovered a repeatable way to create fusion through packing Palladium with Hydrogen (a known property of Palladium), but that they have basically said that Pons & Fleischmann are just pikers and didn't know how to generate manly amounts of energy from their device. The claims for the amount of fusion, that the reaction is aneutronic, and method of presenting their discovery via press conference (like Pons & Fleischmann) instead of through scientific journals is what makes those in the field look at Rossi as a crackpot or even a flagrant fraud.

      Either the guy is a stinking genius and has discovered the cure to world peace (depending on how it works out), or the guy is a brilliant con artists that would make Frank Abagnale look like a rank amateur. From what I've seen of the thing, I put it more like 80% likely he is a con artist, but I'm still giving that 20% wiggle room he might be telling the truth. He isn't violating thermodynamics or even basic principles of physics, but it does seem unlikely that he has discovered a genuine power source based upon current knowledge of materials and previous attempts to generate power.

      On the other hand, because it seems like Rossi doesn't have a firm scientific theory on how his device works (he sounds more like a tinkerer along the lines of James Watt or Thomas Edison), if this device does work out it will unlock a whole new field of scientific exploration with real money. I expect it will be something more akin to room-temperature superconductors, where new classes of materials can be discovered to incorporate the basic principles and perhaps even get higher efficiencies than what Rossi has discovered. But that is a big "IF" the device actually produces energy in the manner that he claims it does right now. At some point this device is going to need to be dropped on the desk of some competent nuclear energy researcher at Los Alamos, and likely other major labs, where it will be tested, dissected, poked, rebuilt, and critically examined just to see if it works before it gains any real credibility.

    8. Re:Oblig xkcd by pixelpusher220 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't like the added complexity and maintenance vs. the simple vehicles I currently own that are cheap to own, operate, and repair.

      Electrics are significantly less complex and cheaper to operate than conventional vehicles. No transmission, no belts, no oil changes, no filters etc. Again your issue seems mostly to be the range of the 'tank' not the system itself. Your hybrid boat examples are about what the Volt is now. Electric capable but still gas propelled at some times. I assume there's still some sort of linkage from the engine to the prop yes? One step further and you decouple that link and just have a gas generator running an electric motor that drives the prop.

      We won't run out in my lifetime and I think any environmental damage is overstated

      You have kids? What about their kids? Even the uber anti-climate-chage Koch brothers funded study just found that global warming is happening - they verified the data and methods used by the people saying climate change is happening and came to the same conclusions using that data.

      It's real, it's happening and it's going to be pretty damned expensive when it comes due if we don't start fixing it now.

      --
      People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people :-D
    9. Re:Oblig xkcd by fyngyrz · · Score: 2

      There is a Doctor Cravens that showed clod fusion

      Clod fusion? What's that, where you rub a Hatfield against a McCoy and get heat?

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  2. What would I do? by MagusSlurpy · · Score: 2

    I guess I'd have to start paying attention to self-published papers after they were rejected by peer review.

    --
    My sister opened a computer store in Hawaii. She sells C shells by the seashore.
    1. Re:What would I do? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's a load of nonsense. If there's anything to the claims, and if the writer isn't completely incompetent explaining them, there's no reason a paper shouldn't pass peer review. Peer review isn't some kind of insurmountable obstacle to getting radical ideas published. It's more challenging than if something is more conventional (extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence), but, sheesh, we just had research published that makes the audacious claim that neutrinos might be traveling faster than the speed of light, and I've seen some pretty bold and silly things appear in peer reviewed journals (it's not *that* harsh a filter).

      When someone making a bold claim can't get their work published in a peer reviewed journal, it tells me that either their claim is bogus or they don't know how to put a series of decent sentences together into a logical explanation of what they have done.

      I'd love it if these claims were valid. But the fact that a paper couldn't get past peer review is a very bad sign and always will be.

    2. Re:What would I do? by foobsr · · Score: 2, Informative

      there's no reason a paper shouldn't pass peer review

      Right.

      ""Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity"

      CC.

      --
      TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
    3. Re:What would I do? by eggstasy · · Score: 2

      Well, I'm a researcher, one of my colleagues got a PhD grant solely on the merits of his self-published papers, and everyone here has had plenty of stuff rejected after peer-review. That's why any normal person only publishes 2 or 3 times per year after applying to a dozen places. Regardless, one should always be wary of extraordinary claims, such as future cities being built to accomodate the Segway :)

  3. Upsetting the market with cheap copper by Circlotron · · Score: 2

    Big Copper will probably kill it off.

    1. Re:Upsetting the market with cheap copper by JazzLad · · Score: 2

      We call it 'Big Coppa' these days, gotta change the spelling of what you're putting 'Big' in front of.

      --
      "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear." - Every fascist, ever
  4. Better link by Sockatume · · Score: 4, Informative

    The discussion for events happening today has been moved onto its own thread:

    http://www.e-catworld.com/2011/10/e-day-thread-rossis-1-mw-e-cat-plant-tested-by-first-customer/

    PES Network is going to be tweeting about it:

    https://twitter.com/#!/PESNetwork

    Prepare for some real-time cognative dissonance from Rossi et al.

    --
    No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    1. Re:Better link by Sockatume · · Score: 4, Informative

      So, now the Twitter feed says they've been asked not to report until the test concludes. Which is midnight. Allegedly that's also when the video of the test will be released but I'm going to have to assume that we won't hear anything at all until they come up with an excuse and get their story straight.

      With any luck the AP will write something informative about it, but maybe they'll be kicked out.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    2. Re:Better link by alphatel · · Score: 2

      This will certainly mark the most important day without conclusion. Enormous investors will have enthusiasm which will not be unbridled as a new dawn is heralded by the coming of the next chapter in these events. Surely those that did not believe will come to the crucible and be altered before God with unsavory tenderness!

      --
      When the foot seeks the place of the head, the line is crossed. Know your place. Keep your place. Be a shoe.
    3. Re:Better link by Sockatume · · Score: 2

      Rossi has been turning the press away. Only an AP writer he personally trusts has been allowed in. No-one is allowed to publish photos or videos of the site, ostensibly to protect the organisation doing the testing. Allegedly self-sustaining now but we have no reason to believe it at all.

      Surprise surprise, the big public test isn't public and probably isn't a test.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
  5. open up the shorts by DarkOx · · Score: 4, Insightful

    take short positions in oil and gas?

    --
    Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    1. Re:open up the shorts by WrongSizeGlass · · Score: 2

      open up the shorts

      Investors in this venture are going to take it in the shorts.

    2. Re:open up the shorts by Dunbal · · Score: 2

      Why? It's not as if the demand for oil would die overnight even if this was legit, which it isn't.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  6. It's a scam by tibit · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This will not work. There's absolutely no reason not to publish such stuff in respected journals -- if it really works, it will pass the muster. The guy is a scam artist with a long history, it's irresponsible to expect anything else from him without a lot of due diligence. Since he doesn't let anyone do their due diligence, I say it's still a scam.

    --
    A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    1. Re:It's a scam by MagusSlurpy · · Score: 2

      This will not work. There's absolutely no reason not to publish such stuff in respected journals -- if it really works, it will pass the muster. The guy is a scam artist with a long history, it's irresponsible to expect anything else from him without a lot of due diligence. Since he doesn't let anyone do their due diligence, I say it's still a scam.

      He did let people do their due diligence (i.e. peer review), and his papers didn't pass muster. That's why he had to start his own journal, so he could get "published" anyway.

      --
      My sister opened a computer store in Hawaii. She sells C shells by the seashore.
    2. Re:It's a scam by craznar · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I have a computational linguistics invention ...and have had for around 15 years now.

      I'm NOT ALLOWED to publish as I don't hold qualifications, nor do I have the wealth to patent it.

      Believe me - getting ideas to the public is way more complicated than you may imagine if you don't have money.

      --
      EMail: 0110001101100010010000000110001101110010 0110000101111010011011100110000101110010 0010111001100011011011110110
    3. Re:It's a scam by rjstanford · · Score: 2

      No its not. Create a website. Put an eBook on Amazon. There are any number of ways to get ideas to the public.

      Getting ideas to the public while at the same time keeping them trade-secrets is hard... but if you're looking for peer review, making them public is a really, really good start. Advertise them. Someone will read it and, if there's anything there, will share it, and you'll find a publication willing to take it.

      Or you can just whine loudly about how nobody will listen to that thing you're not actually saying.

      --
      You're special forces then? That's great! I just love your olympics!
  7. Re:Slashdot is posting blatant scams now? by Sockatume · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Entertaining scams about pseudoscience are still "news for nerds", IMO. I realised more about the importance of being a good scientist from watching bad ones than anything else.

    --
    No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
  8. Re:Slashdot is posting blatant scams now? by black_lbi · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Sometimes it's desirable to put these scams under a spotlight, don't you think?

  9. Have a party by Dr_Barnowl · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If it works? Have a party of epic proportions. Or possibly just epic intensity with a few select friends.

    Given the history of the man, I don't hold out MUCH hope. But the prize is so great that I can't help but hope a little.

    If it works, the future for my daughter will be more likely to be safe and secure. We might even have a stab at world peace.

    If it doesn't work... well, it's a shame. It gives the people who are really trying a bad name, and fewer chances at funding.

    1. Re:Have a party by dcollins · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "But the prize is so great that I can't help but hope a little."

      And that is how a truly great scam works. "They more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie," as it says in Mein Kampf. And likewise how religion benefits from Pascal's Wager.

      --
      We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
    2. Re:Have a party by eepok · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's also how science works. Every a lab lights up a CERN lights up the merry-go-round, they know the likelihood of finding the Higgs is incredibly small, but they hope... and they try.

      So "the hope" isn't really a great way to peg a scam. Instead, you just have to wait for proof. Tonight's the night... so just wait and see.

  10. Why Mr Bond, he would have to die! by queazocotal · · Score: 3, Interesting

    /me strokes evil white pussy.

    And it's not quite true that 'he would have published if it was real'.
    If you have sufficiently ridiculous claims, journals may not accept your paper.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Shechtman - as one example of work ridiculed at the time that went on to win a Nobel prize.

    Unfortunately, for example, there are also people that write letters like this: http://www.snopes.com/humor/letters/smithsonian.asp

    If it is true, I would send the guy my heartfelt thanks, and not buy the expensive heatpump for this winter.

    1. Re:Why Mr Bond, he would have to die! by Rogerborg · · Score: 2

      Unfortunately, for example, there are also people that write letters like this: http://www.snopes.com/humor/letters/smithsonian.asp

      Can you point at someone who actually writes letters like that? I ask since the Snopes page that you linked to says that it's a hoax.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    2. Re:Why Mr Bond, he would have to die! by MagusSlurpy · · Score: 2

      And it's not quite true that 'he would have published if it was real'.
      If you have sufficiently ridiculous claims, journals may not accept your paper.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Shechtman - as one example of work ridiculed at the time that went on to win a Nobel prize.

      Except that 1, Shechtman was already an established scientist, unlike Rossi; 2, Shechtman was proposing something totally new, not something that has been the focus of several hoaxes over the last few decades; and 3, it only took two years for Shechtman to get his controversial paper published. Many non-controversial papers take longer to get published, just from minor editing and additional research requirements from the peer reviewers. Hell, he won a prize from the APS five years after he first wrote the paper. Initial reaction was negative, but when others reproduce your results, it's hard to ignore them. This douchebag has done nothing of the sort.

      It's great that Shechtman won the Nobel, especially after the father of crystallography came down on him so hard and so publicly, but it's not like he was Rosa Parks, overcoming a lifetime of oppression.

      --
      My sister opened a computer store in Hawaii. She sells C shells by the seashore.
    3. Re:Why Mr Bond, he would have to die! by RubberChainsaw · · Score: 2

      /me strokes evil white pussy.

      Note to self: Always read the title of the thread first. Now I am off to clear this terrible mental image.

      --
      I welcome our new 99% overlords.
  11. Re:Slashdot is posting blatant scams now? by Sockatume · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There are a lot of people with money who either have too much ego to defer to expertise, or too little intelligence to even think of doing so.

    --
    No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
  12. Re:So many nay-sayers here by Sockatume · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You know who did those things? Scientists.

    You know who didn't do those things? Shamans mixing pastes in sheds according to arcane rules.

    Rossi's work falls into the latter category.

    --
    No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
  13. Re:dear moron by Sockatume · · Score: 2

    If you're thinking of the zero-point energy, quantum mechanics actually makes it pretty clear that it's completely unavailable, even in principle. If you could extract the zero-point energy - hypothetically - you would cause a vacuum metastability event, which would destroy the observable universe.

    --
    No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
  14. Re:dear moron by maxwell+demon · · Score: 2

    "Free energy", when used in a scientific (not pseudo-scientific) context, refers to a thermodynamic quantity, basically an entropy-corrected energy. It doesn't mean "Energy for free".

    "Zero energy" means just that, an energy value of zero (depending on the context, it doesn't need to mean the minimal energy, e.g. for bound systems the energy scale is usually taken so that the bound states have negative energy).

    Maybe you meant "zero point energy", which is basically the energy of the vacuum. Since effects like the Casimir effect can locally suppress some vacuum fluctuations, some people dream of extracting that energy from the vacuum. But generally the vacuum state is considered the lowest-energy state possible.

    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  15. I predict.... by Lumpy · · Score: 2

    It will work for a short amount of time....

    and then slowly drop in output and fail.

    Because all the AA batteries that are hidden inside all the equipment will have been drained.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:I predict.... by bhlowe · · Score: 2

      I've been following this for over a year and there are no batteries. No hidden wires. No secret lasers. No induction coils. Almost every demo has produced more energy than what could be stored in any known chemical battery. All this uninformed commenting is disgusting.

    2. Re:I predict.... by SoupIsGood+Food · · Score: 2

      You're describing a classic "salt" con - You buy an abandoned mine, salt it with uncut gemstones or precious metal ores, and let the investor "discover" that the old mine isn't played out after all. You can then sell him a worthless hole in the ground for millions.

      A variation of the scheme is the "counterfeiter machine" - You sell the mark a machine that takes ordinary newspaper, and prints perfect counterfeit 100 bills! It even "distresses" them to make them look like real circulated money! It pops out a new bill once every half hour. Yours for only thirty grand! Of course, you don't tell them there's only a timer-controlled release mechanism and a thousand dollars worth of real money inside and not a magic printing press...

      This scheme has that sort of smell to it.

      In this case, I think it's black market Russian radioisotope batteries rather than AA's... they can keep producing a surprising amount of energy for decades.

      Careful measurement to detect the presence of nuclear material is probably warranted for anyone wanting to invest.

  16. Re:So many nay-sayers here by FaxeTheCat · · Score: 2

    Because the struggle against stupidity is a constantly ongoing battle, and pausing it will give all the scam artists more space to scam innocent people.

    Then there is of course the definition of who is the "shithead". Those of us who simply say "prove it", or those who are willing to believe anything that seems only faintly credible by people who have a good long list of false claims?

    BTW: Wanna buy a car that runs on water?

  17. Re:I guess... by Pogue+Mahone · · Score: 3, Funny

    You mean your flying electric car currently has a power cable?

    No wonder the range is limited.

    --
    Every bloody emperor has his hand up history's skirt [Peter Hammill/VdGG]
  18. Re:Rossi is not a scientist by Sockatume · · Score: 3

    I think "has managed to make it work" is the aspect that people have the most objection to. There is no evidence that this is the case.

    --
    No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
  19. Re:So many nay-sayers here by jonbryce · · Score: 2

    Or the naysayers who claim it is impossible to go faster than the speed of light. This http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15471118 is what happens when scientists make an observation that appears to go against our current understanding of the laws of physics. This level of disclosure and scrutiny is not happening with the cold fusion claim.

  20. Re:dear moron by meglon · · Score: 2

    "But generally the vacuum state is considered the lowest-energy state possible."

    I'm pretty sure a couch potato playing Farmville is the lowest energy state possible.

    --
    Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
  21. Re:I guess... by Carewolf · · Score: 3

    Why use a flying car? I would just catch a pig and use it a flying mount.

  22. Re:Slashdot is posting blatant scams now? by nospam007 · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Sometimes it's desirable to put these scams under a spotlight, don't you think?"

    Yes, it worked wonders a couple of weeks ago, for the moron who claimed he had discovered quasi-crystals, when everybody knows no such thing exists.

  23. Re:Slashdot is posting blatant scams now? by Dunbal · · Score: 2

    And don't forget human greed. People with too much easy money thinking "oh, I'll give this guy venture capital for a 90% cut and if it pans out, I'll be a gazillionaire".

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  24. Re:While this one won't work, others do have a cha by ledow · · Score: 2

    If you have exponential growths in available energy, that leads to exponential growths in:

    - Spaceflight potential (hell, it suddenly becomes a cinch to take a entire power station to the Moon or Mars and back - and while you're there look for fuel, etc.).

    - Food, water, heat, light, etc. for humans, which leads to many more productive, educated, "worryless" humans (i.e. we have 7bn productive people learning science instead of most of them trying to scrape a living to earn enough to eat for most of their day).

    - Particle physics (which can only help us throw more energy at more subatomic matter and find more possible fusion fuels - this is ignoring the fact that fusion is a quite efficient way of using a fuel, much more so than the stuff we use at the moment - e=MC^2 provides a lot of energy from a little bit of matter if you do it right).

    - Computing power. You can now just throw billions of simulations and refinery analysis etc. at a supercomputer that consumes whatever it needs and cools itself to whatever temperature you want. Farms of the damn things, limited only by space.

    I don't see that we would have major problems even if we assume that humans are inherently dumb and will just consume whatever they can (and everyone ends up pulling MWh's for themselves all day long).

    We really need an "Energy Age" where we solve that problem first, in order to prove that it won't spoil us. But of course, the next week the paper's will be begging us to cutdown because of shortage of X or environmental impact Y.

  25. Re:Slashdot is posting blatant scams now? by paiute · · Score: 2

    How the hell did he convince anyone to fund a cold fusion reactor anyways?

    Why do people buy Powerball tickets? Similar chance of success: both round to zero.

    --
    If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
  26. Sadly its not real by hAckz0r · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I work at a physics lab, and I can assure you that the cold fusion effect is very real, but nobody can explain yet why it works, ...sometimes. It is difficult to reproduce and with varying degrees of energy production. The biggest problem is that nobody will touch the technology with a ten foot pole as far as funding just because the original researchers did such a poor job of their documentation, and others were completely unable to produce anything. Trying to find out why it works, sometimes, is tantamount to committing career suicide. You will loose your funding, even on your other research projects, and most likely your job as well. You are better off researching this technology in your basement if you want a good respectable career.
    .

    That being said, this one is obviously a scam. Why do I say so? Dig back through the previous stories and you will see a picture of a shipping container full of little black plastic buckets in racks, which is supposed to be a 1MW reactor. Excuse me? You but 1MW of thermal energy in a confined space like that and it will heat up so much that all the liquid would evaporate and the steam would kill anyone attempting to maintain it. The reaction produces heat energy, and plastic buckets aren't going to last very long. These CF reactions have been known to scorch the tables that the apparatus were sitting on. A plastic container is just plain stupid and this photo only demonstrates a man with a limited intelligence at work. Also, where is the generator? The reaction does not create electricity, it produces thermal heat. You need a generator my friend, and preferably a brain containing half a conscience would not hurt either..

    1. Re:Sadly its not real by MyLongNickName · · Score: 2, Informative

      >> I work at a physics lab, and I can assure you that the cold fusion effect is very real, but nobody can explain yet why it works, ...sometimes

      I doubt this. You don't even realize that 1 MW is not a measure of energy.

      --
      See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
    2. Re:Sadly its not real by Baldrson · · Score: 4, Interesting
      hAckz0r writes:

      The biggest problem is that nobody will touch the technology with a ten foot pole as far as funding just because the original researchers did such a poor job of their documentation, and others were completely unable to produce anything.

      A commonly held myth among apologists for the scientific establishment.

      The reality is that CalTech, MIT and Harwell all attempted to replicate P&F's results nearly a year prior to P&F's experimental protocol being published, and P&F were restricted, by University of Utah legal counsel, from making any disclosures beyond their "preliminary notes" issued along with the press conference.

      It is generally recognized, even by the pseudo-skeptic "authorities" such as the DoE's chair of its cold fusion panel, Huizenga, that for all practical purposes, the prestigious institutions' failure to produce "nuclear products" (even though P&F IN THE ORIGINAL PRESS CONFERENCE said that neutrons were a factor of a billion too small to be explained by conventional nuclear fusion) closed out the entire affair WITHIN FIVE WEEKS of the press conference.

      The claim that these ridiculous "experiments" (using speculative protocols), conducted to ridiculous expectations (totally ignoring evidence of excess heat), somehow "falsified" P&F's experiments is triply corrupt:

      1. You can't claim to attempt to replicate an experiment for which you don't even know the protocol.
      2. You can't "falsify" in the P-pperian sense, an experiment with another experiment. P-pperian falsification applies only to theories being falsified by experiment.
      3. Looking for a phenomenon that is a factor of a billion smaller than another, clearly measurable (not to mention practically valuable) phenomenon -- HEAT -- while ignoring that other phenomenon, smacks of precisely the kind of "pathological science" that the pseudo-skeptics accused P&F of promoting.

      There is simply no excuse for the scientific establishment's handling of this affair.

    3. Re:Sadly its not real by CrowdedBrainzzzsand9 · · Score: 2

      Maybe they meant mW.

    4. Re:Sadly its not real by wembley+fraggle · · Score: 4, Informative

      Imagine a hundred-watt light bulb.

      Now imagine ten thousand of them, crammed together. Toss a few more in for good measure, since a 100W bulb produces about 98W of heat (2W of light, which is why we're trying to phase them out).

      Now consider what that would do to the plastic bucket. And stop nitpicking on Joules vs Joules/sec. Shorthanding watts into "energy production" makes sense, because having a measure of total energy produced is kind of meaningless (a 1MJ plant that took a thousand years to produce that MJ wouldn't be that interesting).

      So yeah, seems unlikely.

    5. Re:Sadly its not real by rasmusbr · · Score: 2

      The reactor (or con machine depending on what you think) looks to be inside a hangar, not a shipping container. See picture. Most of the stuff seems to metal.

      There's no way to debunk this just by looking at the machine. Scientists and engineers have been doing just that for months. Looking. It's either a really good scam, a really expensive and foolish mistake, or an actual cold fusion machine.

      If you believe that cold fusion is possible you should not dismiss this machine based just a picture.

      As a layman I personally think that cold fusion can be explained by experiment error. I could very well be wrong. I will say this: I would not invested a penny in this venture I was offered to do so at this moment.

  27. geothermal? by madbavarian · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Is this plant built where one can extract some geothermal energy from the ground? 1 MegaWatt isn't all that much to scam. The only problem would be getting rid of all the sulfur and mercury that comes up with the steam without anyone noticing.

  28. They laughed... by alispguru · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They laughed at Galileo.
    They laughed at Einstein.

    They also laughed at Bozo the Clown.

    --

    To a Lisp hacker, XML is S-expressions in drag.
  29. Tinfoil Conspiracy by q.kontinuum · · Score: 3, Funny

    Any nerd claiming to wear a tinfoil head is either a wannabe or part of the tinfoil conspiracy!
    It is so obvious that tinfoil hats might cover you from alleged hostile brain control waves from sattelites thousands of kilometeres awas, but otoh forms a nearly parabolic antenna to the whole communication wires and infrastructure below pedestrian lanes just a couple of meters away. And coincidentally only relevant people will be affected, since only they are likely to wear - wait a minute, there is someone knocking at my door, I will write more. later.

    --
    Trolling is a art!
  30. Re:suicide by 0111+1110 · · Score: 2

    I had to think about that. Here are my top 5:

    5. Hypothermia from being underdressed near Vostok, Antarctica which holds the record for the coldest temperature on the planet. I'm not sure what it feels like to freeze to death, but I'm betting it is less painful and unpleasant than most methods. Have a friend bury you in a chipped out block of ice. Poor man's cryonic storage. Like those frozen bodies on Mount Everest that have been there for decades.

    4. Fill a room with nitrogen. Supposedly it doesn't have some of the nastier effects that Carbon Monoxide or Carbon Dioxide would have. It's what we normally breathe. You'd still might get headaches from the lack of oxygen before you passed out, but no suicide method is perfect.

    3. I have heard that drowning is one of the more pleasant ways to day. Quite painless. Using excessive diving weights, drown yourself above the Challanger Deep, a part of Mariana Trench near Guam. Hopefully you would die before you reached the bottom 6.78 miles down. You would truly have gone where no man has gone before.

    2. Radiation poisoning while attempting to build your own nuclear fission reactor. Or you could do the tickling the dragon's tail experiment by piling subcritical bricks of U235 on top of each other until you get a nice blue flash of Cerenkov radiation or maybe even a tiny nuclear explosion.

    1. Try to beat the high altitude record for a manned gas balloon of 34.67 km set by Malcolm Ross and Victor Prather in 1961 in a 300 ft diameter balloon. Use hydrogen. You'd get to experience a view of the earth that you would never otherwise get to see. When your bottled oxygen ran out I am guessing you would asphyxiate in the near vacuum nearly 4 times higher than Mount Everest.

    --
    Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
  31. Re:Slashdot is posting blatant scams now? by jonamous++ · · Score: 2

    I think that would be interesting. Car gets a dent and then I get rear ended. :)

  32. Re:Slashdot is posting blatant scams now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    How the hell did he convince anyone to fund a cold fusion reactor anyways? ...(and get some more funding)

    He convinced himself. Its entirely self-funded. He ONLY makes money if his 1MW reactor works. Period. If he needs more funding, its coming out of his own pocket. If he's to make any money off this, he must get the 1MW reactor online. Otherwise, he's out of pocket the entire cost of the project. In fact, it was previously publicized that he's turned down funding from others to the public dismay of those would wanted to invest.

    Your post is extremely uninformed and ignorant. That's not to say I've bought into his effort but I am wishing.

  33. Re:suicide by nedlohs · · Score: 2

    I'm pretty sure drowning would be rather unpleasant.

    Not that I've ever drowned, but I have been under water long enough for my "must have air" drive to override my "must hold my breath" decision and "breath" some water. It was very unpleasant.

  34. Re:dear moron by Sockatume · · Score: 2

    To extract energy from the zero-point vacuum, we must assume that it is a "false vacuum", and a lower-energy vacuum could be created. If you convert a region of false vacuum into a lower-energy vacuum, you can extract the difference in energy. Unfortunately that region must necessarily obey different physical laws than our universe, and because it has a lower energy, that region will expand at the speed of light. By definition anything that is currently observable will be within range of that effect.

    --
    No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
  35. Re:"news for nerds" by Surt · · Score: 3, Funny

    No, they'd clearly be stuff that dematters.

    --
    "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
  36. Baloney by jonc77 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Really, this is going to happen in Bologna... Isn't that a bit ironic?

  37. Re:Sadly its real by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    If you want to know what's really going to happen, it's pretty simple. First tomorrow their will be a lot of heat but not near 1 MW. However, real Scientists will take a look at the device and figure out how it works sometime before Thanks Giving. One these scientists will get a little over ambitious and build large a more efficient device. It will fire up on December 12, 2012. However, the cold fusion will produce a lot more heat and huge magnetic field that will fuse the moisture(Hydrogen) and co2 (carbon) in the air this will spread out in about 2.5 seconds across the globe. The reaction will be so intensive that earth will covert into a star for around 10 minutes. The spiral of the star earths magnetic field which is such that it causes sub-atomic particles to vibrate in the electromagnetic plan (or dimension if you prefer). When this happens atoms exposed to this field will fuse because of a loss of magnetic repulsion causing the atoms to collide and fuse. This BTW is how cold fuse works because when the hydrogen is exposed to the electromagnetic forces it's proton vibrates on in the electromagnetic plan. But what people won't know is that when it fuses it create a never before seen spiral magnetic field that cause other atoms to be vibrate in the same dimensional plane. The Sun will follow suit burning a large amount of it's own fuel in about 16 minutes. The other plants will also follow suit. This will create a HUGE magnetic spiral that might chain react across the universe transforming it. Over trillions of years the subatomic particles no longer repelled by electromagnetism will continue to fuse and grow ever large masses this will lead to the next big bang. Anyway, that's what the Mayans were saying would happen.

  38. Been following very closely all year by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Andrea Rossi is his own worst enemy - his arrogance, paranoia and lazy approach to instrumentation (as well as a total inability to accept advice) has resulted in something like 11 inadequate demos so far, any one of which could have made him a billionaire if he had only spent another few hours setting up to take measurements of demonstable veracity and run the thing for half a day or more rather than a couple of hours. He can't even be bothered to record data during his demos, even when all it would take is the insertion of an SD card into his thermometer! He basically expects the world to take him at his word (in spite of his history of scam-like behaviour), and while supreme belief in one's own correctness is a useful attribute as an inventor, it is hurting him badly now - he has had to sell his house to keep going.

    That said I have spent a lot of time trying to forensically extract answers from the crappy data and other info gathered during his demos, and his latest on 6th October looks pretty convincing - it ran for 3 hours producing 3+ kW output with about 100W of control input, with reasonably good calorimetry. His latest move to a 1MW plant demo is extremely stupid - expensive, dangerous and totally unecessary as any potential investor would be happy with a 5kW demo done with care.

    So even if his engineering and judgement is atrocious (he built a steam pressure vessel as a box shape FFS!!) I am personally convinced that he has something (neither he nor anyone else knows how it works, but it works). But at this point he should be removed from the project and replaced by someone competent for his and the world's sake.

  39. "What would you do if it were real?" by JSBiff · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'd keep getting up in the morning, going to work, and paying my electric and heat bill. Perhaps when I'm an old man, my energy bills will be lower or about the same as they are now (instead of rising with inflation).

  40. Re:Why didn't you just wait 24 hour before publish by osu-neko · · Score: 2

    ...military is working on it too.

    Yes. These are the same people who researched using psychics for intelligence. It means nothing (other than, if you have enough money, you can afford to waste it outrageously).

    --
    "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
  41. Re:dear moron by MightyYar · · Score: 2

    I think you have Sockatume's argument backwards. He's not arguing that it is possible for us to destroy the universe - he's arguing that if you have a theory that says that you can get free energy, but the math works out such that it would destroy the universe... you probably don't have a way to extract that energy. In other words, the free energy "proof" works out to 1=2.

    --
    W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  42. Re:Slashdot is posting blatant scams now? by Jherico · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yeah, 'Cold Fusion' and LENR are largely synonymous, but the former term has been tainted by bad press over the last 20 years. In point of fact my submission used the term LENR in place of Cold Fusion, but apparently the editors felt it wasn't mass market enough. And to be fair, there have been some quotes by Rossi saying it's not actually fusion, but some sort of weak field interaction, but since it supposedly consumes nickel and produces coppoer, not calling it fusion seems more like marketing.

    --

    Jherico

    What can the average user can do to ensure his security? "Nothing, you're screwed"

  43. Re:suicide by Muad'Dave · · Score: 2

    Here's a 12-step plan to flash-freeze strawberries:

    1) Obtain strawberries
    2) Obtain a Styrofoam cooler
    3) Obtain a small amount of dry ice
    4) Put dry ice in cooler
    5) Drive to liquid nitrogen supplier with cooler, dry ice, and strawberries
    6) Arrange for the purchase of several liters of LN2
    7) Place strawberries in cooler
    8) Have LN2 supplier pour LN2 over strawberries.
    9) Wait until they're hard as rocks
    10) Pour out remaining LN2 or allow it to boil off
    11) Close cooler
    12) return home with flash-frozen strawberries on dry ice.

    --
    Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
  44. Re:dear moron by Lumpy · · Score: 3, Funny

    "you would cause a vacuum metastability event, which would destroy the observable universe."

    so do it with your eyes closed. the worst that will happen is that your eyelids will vaporize.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  45. Some of Rossi's Results Reportedly Replicated by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 3, Informative
    --
    A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
  46. Re:dear moron by canajin56 · · Score: 2

    No, they didn't. They considered the possibility of a runaway nitrogen fission chain reaction, ran the numbers, and determined it would not happen. Sort of like the LHC blackhole bullshit. "We considered the possibility, the odds are trillions to one against" "So......they aren't zero? SCIENTISTS CONFIRM LHC MAY DESTROY UNIVERSE".

    --
    ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI
  47. Re:dear moron by Joce640k · · Score: 2

    Skepticism is good, but it should lead to investigation not prejudice.

    After a while you figure out that life's too short to investigate every kook out there.

    "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" is a much better way to do it.

    If his machine works then let him show it in action. A positive result is very easy to measure and as far as I know we don't have easily concealable 1-megawatt batteries yet.

    --
    No sig today...
  48. Re:Institutional Incompetence v "Conspiracy Theori by Culture20 · · Score: 2

    Help help! I'm being repressed! Come and see the incompetence inherent in the institution!

  49. My essay on paradigm shifts in thermodynamics by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 3, Interesting

    https://groups.google.com/group/openmanufacturing/msg/93edc128d5cd0054

    Essentially, whenever a system does not seem to obey the second law of thermodynamics, we just invent new science.

    And here is another essay by me sent to Andrea Rossi on why cold fusion information be made freely available because of a paradigm shift in economics from scarcity towards abundance: http://peswiki.com/index.php/OS:Economic_Transformation

    --
    A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
  50. Re:dear moron by Lumpy · · Score: 2, Informative

    The problem was that government officials and Teller were trying to Cover their asses and that is why that was put into the official document that went to washington.

    Oppenhimer himself said that Teller, "lacked the sense to shut up" about it.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  51. Re:While this one won't work, others do have a cha by w_dragon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Water covers most of the planet. Desalinization is mostly a problem of not enough energy. Food production also gets a lot easier if artificial lighting makes economic sense - you could literally build a skyscraper and grow food on every floor. Similar to what marijuana growers do when they bypass the electric meters.

  52. Re:I guess... by Crudely_Indecent · · Score: 4, Funny

    currently has a power cable

    I have the same problem with my Evangelion.

    --


    "Lame" - Galaxar
  53. How about a 10KW plant for your house? by RogueWarrior65 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If this technology works, why bother with a 1 megawatt plant? Why wouldn't you build the equivalent of Bloom boxes and sell them to homeowners? Get rid of the grid entirely.

  54. Obligatory Dilbert by Shompol · · Score: 2

    Dogbert invented it first, followed by this press conference announcement.