• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Cold Fusion

Cold fusion

AFTER 16 years, it's back. In fact, cold fusion never really went away. Over a 10-year period from 1989, US navy labs ran more than 200 experiments to investigate whether nuclear reactions generating more energy than they consume - supposedly only possible inside stars - can occur at room temperature. Numerous researchers have since pronounced themselves believers.

With controllable cold fusion, many of the world's energy problems would melt away: no wonder the US Department of Energy is interested. In December, after a lengthy review of the evidence, it said it was open to receiving proposals for new cold fusion experiments.

That's quite a turnaround. The DoE's first report on the subject, published 15 years ago, concluded that the original cold fusion results, produced by Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons of the University of Utah and unveiled at a press conference in 1989, were impossible to reproduce, and thus probably false.

The basic claim of cold fusion is that dunking palladium electrodes into heavy water - in which oxygen is combined with the hydrogen isotope deuterium - can release a large amount of energy. Placing a voltage across the electrodes supposedly allows deuterium nuclei to move into palladium's molecular lattice, enabling them to overcome their natural repulsion and fuse together, releasing a blast of energy. The snag is that fusion at room temperature is deemed impossible by every accepted scientific theory.

That doesn't matter, according to David Nagel, an engineer at George Washington University in Washington DC. Superconductors took 40 years to explain, he points out, so there's no reason to dismiss cold fusion. "The experimental case is bulletproof," he says. "You can't make it go away."

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg1 ... tml?page=5
 
fusion is quite deadly.

Many people tried and failled to reproduce the cold fussion results and one of the biggest clues that suggested that fusion was not occuring was the fact that the experimentors where still alive after having done their experiments.If fusion had been taking place at anything like the rate originaly claimed then anyone within a few meters of the equipment would have been killed stone dead by the neutron radiation which is an inevitable result of fusion reactions.
 
'Cold fusion' moves closer to mainstream acceptance
http://www.physorg.com/print188377829.html
March 21st, 2010 in Chemistry / Other

A new "calorimeter," shown immersed in this water bath, provides the first inexpensive means of identifying the hallmark of cold fusion reactions: the production of excess heat. Credit: Melvin Miles

A potential new energy source so controversial that people once regarded it as junk science is moving closer to acceptance by the mainstream scientific community. That's the conclusion of the organizer of one of the largest scientific sessions on the topic -- "cold fusion" -- being held in San Francisco for the next two days in the Moscone Center during the 239th National Meeting of the American Chemical Society (ACS).

"Years ago, many scientists were afraid to speak about 'cold fusion' to a mainstream audience," said Jan Marwan, Ph.D., the internationally known expert who organized the symposium. Marwan heads the research firm, Dr. Marwan Chemie in Berlin, Germany. Entitled "New Energy Technology," the symposium will include nearly 50 presentations describing the latest discoveries on the topic.

The presentations describe invention of an inexpensive new measuring device that could enable more labs to begin cold fusion research; indications that cold fusion may occur naturally in certain bacteria; progress toward a battery based on cold fusion; and a range of other topics. Marwan noted that many of the presentations suggest that cold fusion is real, with a potential to contribute to energy supplies in the 21st Century.

"Now most of the scientists are no longer afraid and most of the cold fusion researchers are attracted to the ACS meeting," Marwan said. "I've also noticed that the field is gaining new researchers from universities that had previously not pursued cold fusion research. More and more people are becoming interested in it. There's still some resistance to this field. But we just have to keep on as we have done so far, exploring cold fusion step by step, and that will make it a successful alternative energy source. With time and patience, I'm really optimistic we can do this!"

The term "cold fusion" originated in 1989 when Martin Fleishmann and Stanley Pons claimed achieving nuclear fusion at room temperature with a simple, inexpensive tabletop device. That claim fomented an international sensation because nuclear fusion holds potential for providing the world with a virtually limitless new source of energy. Fuel for fusion comes from ordinary seawater, and estimates indicate that 1 gallon of seawater packs the energy equivalent of 16 gallons of gasoline at 100 percent efficiency for energy production. The claim also ignited scepticism, because conventional wisdom said that achieving fusion required multi-billion-dollar fusion reactors that operate at tens of millions of degrees Fahrenheit.

When other scientists could not reproduce the Pons-Fleishmann results, research on cold fusion fell into disrepute. Humiliated by the scientific establishment, their reputations ruined, Pons and Fleishmann closed their labs, fled the country, and dropped out of sight. The handful of scientists who continued research avoided the term "cold fusion." Instead, they used the term "low energy nuclear reactions (LENR)." Research papers at the ACS symposium openly refer to "cold fusion" and some describe cold fusion as the "Fleishmann-Pons Effect" in honor of the pioneers, Marwan noted.

"The field is now experiencing a rebirth in research efforts and interest, with evidence suggesting that cold fusion may be a reality." Marwan said. He noted, for instance, that the number of presentations on the topic at ACS National Meetings has quadrupled since 2007.

More information:
Among the reports scheduled for the symposium are:

* Michael McKubre, Ph.D., of SRI International in Menlo Park, Calif., provides an overview of cold fusion research. McKubre will discuss current knowledge in the field and explain why some doubts exist in the broader scientific community. He will also discuss recent experimental work performed at SRI. McKubre will focus on fusion, heat production and nuclear products. [3pm, Monday March 22, Cyril Magnin ]
* George Miley, Ph.D., reports on progress toward a new type of battery that works through a new cold fusion process and has a longer life than conventional batteries. The battery consists of a special type of electrolytic cell that operates at low temperature. The process involves purposely creating defects in the metal electrode of the cell. Miley is a professor at the University of Illinois in Urbana and director of its Fusion Studies Lab. [11am, Sunday March 21, Cyril Magnin I]
* Melvin Miles, Ph.D., describes development of the first inexpensive instrument for reliably identifying the hallmark of cold fusion reactions: Production of excess heat from tabletop fusion devices now in use. Current "calorimeters," devices that measure excess heat, tend to be too complicated and inefficient for reliable use. The new calorimeter could boost the quality of research and open the field to scores of new scientists in university, government, and private labs, Miles suggests. He is with Dixie State College in St. George, Utah. [2.30pm, Sunday March 21, Cyril Magnin I]
* Vladimir Vysotskii, Ph.D., presents surprising experimental evidence that bacteria can undergo a type of cold fusion process and could be used to dispose of nuclear waste. He will describe studies of nuclear transmutation — the transformation of one element into another — of stable and radioactive isotopes in biological systems. Vysotskii is a scientist with Kiev National Shevchenko University in Kiev, Ukraine. [11.20am, Monday March 22, Cyril Magnin I].
* Tadahiko Mizuno, Ph.D., discusses an unconventional cold fusion device that uses phenanthrene, a substance found in coal and oil, as a reactant. He reports on excess heat production and gamma radiation production from the device. "Overall heat production exceeded any conceivable chemical reaction by two orders of magnitude," Mizuno noted. He is with Hokkaido University in Japan, and wrote the book Nuclear Transmutation: The Reality of Cold Fusion. [3pm, Sunday March 21, Cyril Magnin I]
* Peter Hagelstein, Ph.D., describes new theoretical models to help explain excess heat production in cold fusion, one of the most controversial aspects of the field. He notes that in a nuclear reaction, one would expect that the energy produced would appear as kinetic energy in the products, but in the Fleischmann-Pons experiment there do not appear energetic particles in amounts consistent with the energy observed. His simple models help explain the observed energy changes, including the type and quantity of energy produced. Hagelstein is with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. [10.20am, Sunday March 21, Cyril Magnin I].
* Xing Zhong Li, Ph.D., presents research demonstrating that cold fusion can occur without the production of strong nuclear radiation. He is developing a cold fusion reactor that demonstrates this principle. Li is a scientist with Tsinghua University in Beijing, China. [9.10am, Sunday March 21, Cyril Magnin I].


Provided by American Chemical Society
Click to expand...
 
Success for Andrea Rossi's E-Cat cold fusion system, but mysteries remain
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/201 ... si-success
Against all the odds, Andrea Rossi's E-Cat cold fusion power plant passed its biggest test yesterday, producing an average of 470 kilowatts for more than five hours. (A technical glitch prevented it from achieving a megawatt as originally planned). The demonstration was monitored closely by engineers from Rossi's mysterious US customer, which was evidently satisfied and paid up.

The energy was output in the form of heat, measured by the quantity of water boiled off. The results are reported in NyTeknik and Pure Energy Systems News, who both had reporters present for the test. Associated Press also sent a correspondent who should be filing a story in the next few days (one suspects his editors might have some questions).

But this does not mean we can crack open the champagne and celebrate the end of fossil fuels quite yet. Skeptics have plenty of grounds to doubt whether the new test really takes us any further forwards.

For a start, the US customer remains anonymous. In other words, a group of unknown, unverifiable people carried out tests which cannot be checked.

Secondly, observers apart from the customer were only allowed to view the test for a few minutes at a time and during the entire test the E-Cat remained connected to a power supply by a cable. The external power was supposedly turned off; as a demonstration it would have been more impressive for the reactor in its shipping container to be visibly disconnected while operating.

The successful test should pave the way for further work at the University of Bologna, and more contracts with the enigmatic customer. NyTeknik did discover one possible clue to their identity. The customer's controller, one Domenico Fioravanti, apparently reports to a man whose title is "Colonel". This suggests that the mystery customer might be DARPA, the Pentagon's extreme science wing which, as Wired.co.uk has previously noted, has expressed interestin Rossi's work -- but which might not be quite ready to explain to its political masters why it spent millions on a cold fusion device.

Plenty of mysteries remain. But the game just got a lot more interesting.
Click to expand...

I won't believe this guy until he unplugs his device from the electricity supply and it can run on its own.
 
If it is a genuine cold fusion technological breakthrough, it's bad news if the 'customer' is DARPA.
They will just keep it all to themselves, and it will never come into common usage.
 
Mythopoeika said:
If it is a genuine cold fusion technological breakthrough, it's bad news if the 'customer' is DARPA.
They will just keep it all to themselves, and it will never come into common usage.
Click to expand...
Like GPS and the internet? ;)

Anyway, there's no success. The thing was still plugged in to the mains.
 
kamalktk said:
Mythopoeika said:
If it is a genuine cold fusion technological breakthrough, it's bad news if the 'customer' is DARPA.
They will just keep it all to themselves, and it will never come into common usage.
Click to expand...
Like GPS and the internet? ;)

Anyway, there's no success. The thing was still plugged in to the mains.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I take your point there.
However, cold fusion has the potential to be a much bigger game-changer than those other 2 technologies. It could destroy entire economies and industries.
DARPA would keep it under wraps for a long time, until the time was 'right'.
 
kamalktk said:
I wonder why the e-Cat units require lead shielding (paragraph 3) since the technology is supposedly totally clean. http://pesn.com/2011/09/16/9501915_The_Ultimate_Ni-H_Cold_Fusion_E-Cat_Test/
Click to expand...
If you have successful fusion the tech might be totally clean, but you're going to be releasing vast amounts of energy, some of it in the form of alpha particles.

http://www.jet.efda.org/jet/news/2005/10/jet-demonstrates-alpha-particle-heating/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_particles

Thus irradiating and ionising the near vicinity with large high energy particles. That would be the excuse, anyway.
 
Also, add to that the release of the occasional neutron.
Nasty if it hits you.
 
The electrochemistry of cold fusion resembles the alleged transmutations of biological chemistry.
Biological transmutation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_transmutation
Click to expand...
The very mention of the word transmutation sends shudders through mainstream science. Can this be another reason why scientists are so determined to kill off cold fusion? A return to Alchemy and another reminder that Newton was an Alchemist? The death of atomic theory? The return of Louis Kervran and French science? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Kervran
These and other questions will be asked. :D
 
In the news again.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/markgib...device-maybe-the-world-will-change-after-all/

"Published on May 16, the paper titled “Indication of anomalous heat energy production in a reactor device” would appear to deliver what we wanted.

The paper was authored by Giuseppe Levi of Bologna University, Bologna, Italy; Evelyn Foschi, Bologna, Italy; Torbjörn Hartman, Bo Höistad, Roland Pettersson and Lars Tegnér of Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden; and Hanno Essén, of the Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden. While some of these people have previously been public in their support of Rossi and the E-Cat they are all serious academics with reputations to lose and the paper is detailed and thorough.

The actual test reactor, called the E-Cat HT, was described by the testers as:
...
"
 
Re New Scientist: A good article.

It does appear that a lot of people may owe Pons and Fleischman an apology.

INT21
 
INT21 said:
Re New Scientist: A good article.

It does appear that a lot of people may owe Pons and Fleischman an apology.

INT21
Click to expand...
That's yet to be seen. But I don't think they deserved the vilification they received. As far as I can tell, when a scientist makes a claim that goes against accepted science, all usual, legitimate doors are closed in their face. Pons and Fleischman are often accused of having gone public with results that hadn't been published and peer reviewed, but the peer review process, which I generally support, is useless if those peers are primed to dismiss your particular results. Looks at the problems the EmDrive has had.
 
Well I suspect it doesn't work, but at least it's finally being put to the test. And if it does work, we'll have learnt new physics. Probably nothing as groundbreaking as a refutation of Newton's third law, but at least practical solutions to equations of particle physics that hadn't previously been thought of. And that's the point, really. Theoretical physicists are constantly trying to answer big questions about the Universe with new solutions to those equations, but the world of particle physics is complex, and sometimes on a more pedestrian scale we need to just look at what seems to work, and not dismiss it because it seems ridiculous. If I'm a fortean, I'm a fortean for that reason.
 
To conserve momentum, the maximum thrust of an EmDrive or related concept would need to be the same as a photon rocket; that is 300 megawatts to create one lousy newton of thrust. That's why the thrust of these devices is so tiny; it is hardly worth doing at all.

The same appears to apply to cold fusion and related LENR processes; because (if they happen at all) they happen at conditions far below the nuclear fusion threshold, these reactions will occur rarely and produce little energy, making it impractical to get more energy out of a generator than you put in.
 
All this talk of cheap energy has reminded me of Steorn's Orbo device. Didn't they start selling a mobile phone and charger or something a while ago? Shouldn't the people who bought it know whether it works by now? Shouldn't that Irish fella be in prison for fraud or something? I'd have thought we would have heard something by this point.
 
PeteByrdie said:
All this talk of cheap energy has reminded me of Steorn's Orbo device. Didn't they start selling a mobile phone and charger or something a while ago? Shouldn't the people who bought it know whether it works by now? Shouldn't that Irish fella be in prison for fraud or something? I'd have thought we would have heard something by this point.
Click to expand...
Steorn chose a "jury" of scientists to evaluate its claims in 2006. In 2009 this jury unanimously ruled Steorn had not proven any of its claims. Two additional demonstrations were conducted in 2007 and 2009 / 2010. The 2007 one was a total failure. The latter one was called a futile attempt at a perpetual motion machine.

Steorn went defunct in 2016.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steorn
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top