Cold Fusion - Is it real?

nirgal · 2002-07-22 18:02:41

I know this topic has been beaten to death and laid to rest by most people a decade ago but research is still being done by the US military (read new Navy report supporting cold fusion reasearch), by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (requires registration) and several others so I think there is something into this.
I think the scientific community rushed to judgement when the results of Pons and Fleischman couldn't be reproduced at first try 13 years ago (it is now known that reproducebility is one of the key issues with cold fusion, it's very difficult to achieve because the conditions under which the effect occurs are not well understood). In fact the results have been reproduced numerous times since then; all that is needed now is better funding.

An excellent article in Wired magazine.

Phobos · 2002-07-22 20:16:39

That Wired article was depressing. 50 years until nuclear fusion becomes a viable powersource if ever? I don't know about cold fusion, I'd probably be less skeptical if I knew more about these nuclear fusion processes that can supposedly take place at low temperatures, but in any case, it would definately solve our energy problems if cold fusion could be made to work. I'll cross my fingers and hope.

nirgal · 2002-07-23 07:41:27

That Wired article was depressing. 50 years until nuclear fusion becomes a viable powersource if ever?

Well, I heard that consruction of ITER ("the way"), an experimental reactor, may begin next year though that information might be dated.

Link to ITER homepage

C M Edwards · 2002-07-23 11:55:40

I once heard a professor on a lecture tour, talking about how cold fusion was a load of bunk. She said that this was a case where ?the system worked?, allowing scientists to determine the worth of a new claim. Unfortunately, that claim is garbage, too, IMHO. Later research into the history of the uproar suggests to me that the system aggravated the problem.

Pons & Fleischman weren?t the originators of the idea that ?cold? fusion could occur, nor were they the only ones running experiments at the time.

Louis Alvarez (you may remember him in relation to the equally famous theory that an asteroid impact caused the extinction of the dinosaurs) was the first to suggest that nuclear fusion could occur at room temperature. His idea was that muon-catalyzed fusion (another Alvarez theory) could occur through interactions with cosmic radiation in the atmosphere. Such reactions would be an infinitesimal trickle of random freak events, barely noticeable even with the best equipment. However, this would occur as a natural phenomenon here on Earth. Though conceivable in light of accepted theory, it was never observed, but this was just fine with Alvarez because the expected reaction rate was so low you could barely expect to find anything anyway.

Another scientist, named Jones, investigated the idea that the fusion reactions Alvarez had predicted (but never observed) might be sped up by loading the atoms inside a hydride, like graphite or palladium. This loading is the same principle used in nickel/metal-hydride batteries. Then he added all kinds of bells and whistles, IMHO, because his hypothesis was that the natural trickle of fusion that Alvarez had predicted was more common inside the solid material of the earth rather than up in the atmosphere. He loaded his reaction chambers with salts, tried various types of rock, ran it at various pressures, and generally tried to mimic conditions found in the Earth?s interior.

He found something. Not a power source or nuclear furnace, but confirmation of a new natural phenomenon. So, he wrote a paper and submitted it for review. The journal he submitted his paper to followed the APS guideline that papers on a topic should be reviewed by two other scientists working in the same field.

The two scientists initially selected to review the paper were Pons & Fleischman, who were known to be investigating Alvarez?s muon-catalyzed fusion hypothesis as well. Realizing they were going to be preempted, they went to the press less than four days later with tales of results so many orders of magnitude beyond what anybody expected that it set off warning lights across the scientific community. Naturally, their unsubstantiated story sold like hotcakes. The journal, Physical Review Letters, assigned Jones?s review to someone more ethical, and it was quietly published amid the ensuing hoopla.

Pons & Fleischman were the first in print. However, if you?re looking for the first paper claiming positive results that actually got a peer review, it?s Jones?s.

Jones?s work was effectively suppressed along with the rest when the American Physical Society stopped considering research into cold fusion. The National Science Foundation and other funding agencies that depend on the APS for review quickly followed suit, and the research funding was halted because of its political associations. It remains the official position of the APS that cold fusion is a fiction, which does not exist in any form.

Scratch one natural phenomenon, courtesy of the APS.

CME

nirgal · 2002-07-23 12:57:56

Interesting! You seem to know quite a lot about cold fusion research so I wondered if you could point me to any good books on the subject?

C M Edwards · 2002-07-31 06:57:57

There are several historical accounts of the incident available. Check your local public libraries.

I was poking about on the internet to see if there were any sites of interest. Imagine my surprise to discover that Mr. Steve Edward Jones is not only still doing research on this subject, but posting his results to the internet!

http://blackroses.textfiles.com/fun/fusion

I thought he'd abandoned the field for greener pastures. Still has a lot of bells and whistles, though.

CME

Mars_B4_Moon · 2023-04-13 11:59:40

Bumping an old thread

It was once a very scifi fringe topic but now it seems real-ish

maybe not true Cold Fusion

China’s ‘artificial sun’ breaks record, marking latest milestone in quest for efficient thermonuclear fusion reactors
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science … ear-fusion

In 1989, two electrochemists, Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons, reported that their apparatus had produced anomalous heat ("excess heat") of a magnitude they asserted would defy explanation except in terms of nuclear processes. They further reported measuring small amounts of nuclear reaction byproducts, including neutrons and tritium. The small tabletop experiment involved electrolysis of heavy water on the surface of a palladium (Pd) electrode. The reported results received wide media attention and raised hopes of a cheap and abundant source of energy

https://web.archive.org/web/20120212001 … 2167.shtml

,
On 30 June 1991, the National Cold Fusion Institute closed after it ran out of funds; it found no excess heat, and its reports of tritium production were met with indifference
https://archive.today/20120717185323/ht … ISOPTR=160

Between 1992 and 1997, Japan's Ministry of International Trade and Industry sponsored a "New Hydrogen Energy (NHE)" program of US$20 million to research cold fusion.

Since the Fleischmann and Pons announcement, the Italian national agency for new technologies, energy and sustainable economic development (ENEA) has funded Franco Scaramuzzi's research into whether excess heat can be measured from metals loaded with deuterium gas.

Conventional deuteron fusion is a two-step process,[text 6] in which an unstable high-energy intermediary is formed:

D + D → 4He * + 24 MeV

Experiments have observed only three decay pathways for this excited-state nucleus, with the branching ratio showing the probability that any given intermediate follows a particular pathway.[text 6] The products formed via these decay pathways are:

4He* → n + 3He + 3.3 MeV (ratio=50%)
4He* → p + 3H + 4.0 MeV (ratio=50%)
4He* → 4He + γ + 24 MeV (ratio=10−6)

Only about one in one million of the intermediaries decay along the third pathway, making its products comparatively rare when compared to the other paths.

,
United States Navy researchers at the Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center (SPAWAR) in San Diego have been studying cold fusion since 1989. In 2002 they released a two-volume report, "Thermal and nuclear aspects of the Pd/D2O system", with a plea for funding. This and other published papers prompted a 2004 Department of Energy (DOE) review
https://web.archive.org/web/20130216190 … 2-vol1.pdf
,
At least one patent related to cold fusion has been granted by the European Patent Office.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg … again.html

Other discussion on newmars

Nuclear power is safe
https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=9169

Nuclear Power is Dangerous - Use with Care
https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=10203

Nuclear vs. Solar vs. Others
https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=7926

Last edited by Mars_B4_Moon (2023-04-13 12:20:22)

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2002-07-22 18:02:41

Re: Cold Fusion - Is it real?

#2 2002-07-22 20:16:39

Re: Cold Fusion - Is it real?

#3 2002-07-23 07:41:27

Re: Cold Fusion - Is it real?

#4 2002-07-23 11:55:40

Re: Cold Fusion - Is it real?

#5 2002-07-23 12:57:56

Re: Cold Fusion - Is it real?

#6 2002-07-31 06:57:57

Re: Cold Fusion - Is it real?

#7 2023-04-13 11:59:40

Re: Cold Fusion - Is it real?

Board footer