What's new
By:

Cold Fusion

The problem is, they haven’t provided any details on how the process works. After their paper was rejected by several peer reviewed scientific journals, it was published in the Journal of Nuclear Physics-- an online journal apparently founded by Rossi and Focardi. Further, they say they can’t account for how the cold fusion is triggered
Click to expand...

Yep... Exactly like the Utah scientists.

They got it to work once with no one watching... Then couldn't get it to work for reals when people were.

I too can come up with scientific breakthroughs with no one watching or caring.

Scientists. Ha!
 
Last year I listened an intresting interview on NPR's "Science Friday" program regarding cold fusion. Here is a transcript. What the guy says (to my limited understanding at least) is this: there is not an accepted theory explaining it but there are number of theories floating around, there is actually underground effort to understand the process away from the public spotlight, it is possible the original experiment's conditions not have been understood and therefore properly replicated in the laboratories around the world that failed to reproduce it

in other words cold fusion might not be dead yet and there is some science to be discovered behind it. Who knows if the italians are have found it - the type of announcment -picked up by the likes of fox news and times of india instead of prestigious science journals makes me doubt it....
 
Marcus said:
As mentioned, this claim is dubious at best but this would be a world changer if true.

https://tinyurl.com/4z4t78a

I'd be interested in hearing Colton's take on this.
Click to expand...

The scientific question is no longer whether "cold" fusion occurs but whether it is just a scientific oddity or something that can be usefully applied.

Mel Miles, the guy with the calorimeter, has reported both the heat and the helium product since within a few months of the first reports. He reports that the difficulties in reproducing the phenomena by various researchers lies with the impurities in various palladium preparations, and cites the presence or absence of boron.

A major issue is the corrosion of the palladium electrode in the strong causic Lithium Hydroxide electrolyte.

There are a number of metals that under an electric field gradient will pack deuterium, and a wide range of cold fusion products have been reported.

Most of these are potential electrodes for the fusion of deuterium nucleii. But deuterium can be injected into the nucleii of many elements resulting in instability of the daughter nucleii. And a wide range of elemental products.

The practical large-scale industrial spplications and/or electrical power generation applications face huge difficulties.
 
Marcus said:
As mentioned, this claim is dubious at best but this would be a world changer if true.

https://tinyurl.com/4z4t78a

I'd be interested in hearing Colton's take on this.
Click to expand...

This is the first I've heard of these particular guys, but after reading these paragraphs, I'm EXTREMELY skeptical:

The problem is, they haven’t provided any details on how the process works. After their paper was rejected by several peer reviewed scientific journals, it was published in the Journal of Nuclear Physics-- an online journal apparently founded by Rossi and Focardi. Further, they say they can’t account for how the cold fusion is triggered, fostering deep skepticism from others in the scientific community.

Based on this lack of even a theoretical basis for the device’s function, a patent application was rejected. Their credibility isn’t helped by the fact that Rossi apparently has something of a rap sheet, which allegedly includes illegally importing gold and tax fraud.
Click to expand...

There is absolutely no way I would invest any of my own money with these guys.

If I recall correctly Pons and Fleischman (the U of U cold fusion scientists) had a working prototype also that generated heat energy. Problem is... there are lots of ways to generate heat, and 99.999% of them don't involve fusion at all.
 
babe said:
The scientific question is no longer whether "cold" fusion occurs but whether it is just a scientific oddity or something that can be usefully applied.
Click to expand...

Why do you say that? The reviewers at the journals that rejected their paper would seem to disagree with you.
 
colton said:
Why do you say that? The reviewers at the journals that rejected their paper would seem to disagree with you.
Click to expand...

That's a nice open question and I bet I could rattle on about it for hours. Why?

maybe a short answer is that I like to take up an underdog point of view and defend it to the death. . . .

an answer that would be more work to either understand or legitimately dismiss includes the observation that a steadily growing number of papers continue to be published from researchers around the world sustaining some point related to the basic phenomenon. I think I see some fraudster hype in the claims the two Italians are fronting though.

"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.
Click to expand...
https://esciencenews.com/articles/2010/03/21/cold.fusion.moves.closer.mainstream.acceptance

Here's a quick link to some good info:

Have papers been published in peer-reviewed publications?
Yes, many. Also a peer-reviewed book by American Chemical Society/Oxford University Press published in August 2008 and another is on the way.
Click to expand...
https://newenergytimes.com/v2/reports/LENR-FAQ.shtml#lenr



here's my brother's website on the subject: https://coldfusion-miles.com/resources.html
 
Last edited:
babe said:
an answer that would be more work to either understand or legitimately dismiss includes the observation that a steadily growing number of papers continue to be published from researchers around the world sustaining some point related to the basic phenomenon. I think I see some fraudster hype in the claims the two Italians are fronting though.
Click to expand...

OK, thanks for clarifying. I thought you were talking specifically about the individuals mentioned by the OP.
 
The work being reported on LENR, the more scientifically-descriptive term, is beginning to shed light on fundamental nuclear structure. The old idea of a compact unstructured nest of protons with a favorable number of neutrons associated, which facilitates some calculations with the approximation of a point charge just needs qualification. The fact that some nucleii are unstable with finite rates of decay, or expulsion of a part of the whole, has always called for an explanation we just have not had the tools to explore. Now we have one more tool to explore it with.
 
Ok here is what I understand about cold fusion, this should put the debate to rest. When a wet warm object, say a tongue, comes in contact with a cold metal object, say a light pole, you experience cold fusion.

tongue_stuck_on_pole.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top