Cold Fusion Reborn

[Solar]

It's back.

Cold fusion Rebirth?

"Navy Chemist May Have Rediscovered 'Cold Fusion"

[GaryN]

The results are still not consistent or reliable, but 'cold fusion' is being re-examined. I wonder if they have tried to incorporate the local GIC strengths, or even the prevailing neutrino flux?

60 Minutes show:

http://www.energeticstechnologies.com/? ... agodTgaVFA

[Tone]

.
Cold Fusion More than Junk Science
( on the 60minutes tv-program - 2009-04-19 )

Part 1 of 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qb-9keOk-CQ

Part 2 of 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9f18W2SejEM

.
. .

[GaryN]

Cold Fusion Mechanism in Nanoscale Catalysis?

Electron-electron correlations and core-polarization interactions are crucial for the existence and stability of most negative ions. These physical effects are embedded in our calculations. Indeed, atomic negative ions play an essential role in cold nuclear fusion and in catalysis, a chemical reaction. Au, Pt, Pd and Y atoms can be used in various combinations.

This discovery ushers in new frontiers of efficient design and synthesis of novel functional compounds and catalysts for various chemical reactions, impacting many industries. The controversial Fleischmann–Pons "cold fusion" experiment can now be understood. It used Pt-Pd electrodes and has generated attention in recent APS NEWS articles.

http://www.europhysicsnews.org/index.ph ... C+en_GB.UT

[Goldminer]

We cannot have information like this floating around the internet. People may investigate, build their own power systems and deprive the Seven Sisters and their bankers of the toll position, which they rightfully hold. Big run on those palladium alloy welding rods.

[GaryN]

JANUARY 15th FOCARDI AND ROSSI PRESS CONFERENCE
Energy Catalyzer first test videos – January 14th 2011 – Bologna-Italy
http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com
Hydrogen/Nickel cold fusion probable mechanism
http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.c ... 8#more-338

I WANT to believe!

[tayga]

It's very encouraging to see the Rutherford-Borghi-Santilli neutron continuing to earn acceptance.

IMO the simplest evidence of the proton-electron structure of the neutron is presented by Carl Johnson's analysis of NIST atomic mass data. He finds not only that the supposed reason behind positing the Strong Nuclear force is wrong but also that it is unnecessary to to invoke the Weak Nuclear Force to account for decay.

http://mb-soft.com/public2/nuclei6.html

[fosborn]

In any case, given the compelling evidence that there are NO actual neutrons within atomic nuclei, then the case for claiming that neutrinos must also exist to conserve angular momentum when those nuclear neutrons decay, seems essentially beyond credibility. The implication seems to be that the entire reasoning for postulating neutrinos in the first place does not actually exist, and that there may not be any need for that postulization at allThere may not actually be any neutrinos. . http://mb-soft.com/public2/nuclei6.html

Wow! thanks for this link, tayga .

What are they really detecting, with all those neutrino detectors then?

This could put a serious damper on the stuff "I want to believe".

Your starting to look like a Prophet "seb".

[tayga]

Hey fosborn

You're welcome. Regarding things we want to believe, I find it's a good idea to go look up 'confirmation bias' every now and then - it's probably what got Physics into this whole mess in the first place.

Carl Johnson work epitomises the outsider. In fact, he started his study to look for demonstrable evidence of the Strong Nuclear Force. As it turns out he found exactly the opposite and credit to him for following the data.

In fact, Szpak and Mosier-Boss are also outsiders. Despite working in a defence lab, they did not have the support of their bosses and were told they could only do their work on their own time. That's another one up for the maverick and honest enquiry.

My own brain is way too low-powered to join the dots here but I've followed these people because my research background includes palladium-hydrogen nanoparticle systems, NMR and muons. What I see is the collapse of the assumptions underlying theoretical hot fusion mechanisms (and therefore objections to other fusion mechanisms), prediction of nuclear spin and understanding of particle decay. Fortunately for me, despite these misunderstandings, NMR, MRI and muSR still work!

But, talking of things we'd like to believe, if Carl's work does away with the Strong and Weak Nuclear Forces and Wal Thornhill is right about a dipole basis for gravity/inertial mass then we are left with only the Electrostatic Force and the search for a GUT is the wildest of goose chases.

[seasmith]

Fosborn wrote:

What are they really detecting, with all those neutrino detectors then?

Translating between the few prime 'quanta' of our naturally quantifiable realm of existence ~ and our harmonic awarenesses thereof, ie: electrons, protons, nuclei, spin/orbital resonant entities and etc.,
occur a myriad of transitional energetic phases; the the finest thus far detectable being named "neutrinos" .

All being manifestations of that ineluctable essence known to EU proponents as "charge" .

It may be helpful to view those transitory phase-conjugations as modes of propagation,
if not inception or regression.
Or it may not...

s

[GaryN]

This is looking more like the 'real thing'.
Rossi Cold Fusion Validated by Swedish Skeptic's Society.
http://pesn.com/2011/04/07/9501805_Ross ... s_Society/

[GaryN]

While not really cold, this group may reach a break-even or excess power
stage long before the billion dollar budget experts. The author still
believes in the conventional solar fusion model, but that isn't important
really, so long as his results are successful.

Farnsworth's approach to fusion has been dubbed "Inertial Electrostatic Confinement" or "IEC" for short. (VERY) simply put, the process uses forces within the atomic particles themselves to bring them close enough to fuse. The more common approach uses tremendous external forces to achieve the same effect. These enormous machines employ powerful magnetic fields and the method is called "magnetic confinement" Literally billions of dollars have been spent in the last thirty years with little to show in the way of meaningful results. After thirty years, the "experts" still say that a practical fusion power plant is still - would you believe? - at least another thirty years away.

http://www.fusor.net/

[mjv1121]

Gary,

Regarding hot fusion, since you mention. Tokamaks are a fool's errand, the emc2 Bussard Polywell still has a big task to maintain confinement which will be still vastly more difficult as they near net energy. The best chance is Focus Fusion since they have no confinement - they are using using a plasma pinch to create a plasmoid, so it is self confined. If you're interested in electricity generation, check out LFTR (pronounced LiFTeR - Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor). LFTR is fission done right: simple, safe, proven, scalable and affordable; everything ITER tokamaks have no chance of being. Summary: Focus Fusion would be ideal, LFTR is a superb alternative. Unless of course, Cold Fusion is real.

Michael

PS make no mistake, both these guys are heroes:

http://www.energyfromthorium.com Kirk Sorensen

www.lawrencevilleplasmaphysics.com Eric Lerner

[dodeca]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7sZHOQ6P-Rw