Cold Fusion

[Admiral Valdemar]

Given the recent reemergence of evidence that such experiments on cold fusion cells by the USN during the past few decades have been seemingly successful, what is your take on the future of an often mocked subject in physics?

I'm also interested in whether we should move our efforts to cold fusion instead of hot fusion which seems to be even harder to get working.

[Queeb Salaron]

Given the recent reemergence of evidence that such experiments on cold fusion cells by the USN during the past few decades have been seemingly successful, what is your take on the future of an often mocked subject in physics?

What sources are you referring to? I don't remember reading anything about pre-emptive cold fusion experiments working. But the mocking I remember.

I'm also interested in whether we should move our efforts to cold fusion instead of hot fusion which seems to be even harder to get working.

Hmm... Not familiar with the premise of hot fusion. Care to explain? Or am I just out of the loop?

[Joe]

If I'm not mistaken, hot fusion is just another name for traditional nuclear fusion.

[Queeb Salaron]

If I'm not mistaken, hot fusion is just another name for traditional nuclear fusion.

Hm. Easy solution then: Set off a nuke in antarctica. BOOM! [/pun] Instant cold fusion.

[Joe]

Given the recent reemergence of evidence that such experiments on cold fusion cells by the USN during the past few decades have been seemingly successful, what is your take on the future of an often mocked subject in physics?

I'm also interested in whether we should move our efforts to cold fusion instead of hot fusion which seems to be even harder to get working.

Past few decades? The idea of cold fusion is only about fourteen years old. Can I get a source on these USN experiments?

I'm no physicist and I'm no chemist, but I know that cold fusion as conceived by the original Utah chemists doesn't work. Has some other method been brought into the equation?

[Queeb Salaron]

Past few decades? The idea of cold fusion is only about fourteen years old. Can I get a source on these USN experiments?

I'm no physicist and I'm no chemist, but I know that cold fusion as conceived by the original Utah chemists doesn't work. Has some other method been brought into the equation?

I could be wrong, but didn't Einstein first mention Cold Fusion, and didn't he disprove himself, saying it is impossible to spontaneously create energy where none previously existed without doing some sort of work on it? And wasn't that a lot more than 14 years ago?

[Illuminatus Primus]

Cold fusion is one of most assinine concepts ever.

[Joe]

Past few decades? The idea of cold fusion is only about fourteen years old. Can I get a source on these USN experiments?

I'm no physicist and I'm no chemist, but I know that cold fusion as conceived by the original Utah chemists doesn't work. Has some other method been brought into the equation?

I could be wrong, but didn't Einstein first mention Cold Fusion, and didn't he disprove himself, saying it is impossible to spontaneously create energy where none previously existed without doing some sort of work on it? And wasn't that a lot more than 14 years ago?

Possibly, but the cold fusion as conceived by Pons & Fleischmann - the production of mass amounts of energy through the fusion of deuterium atoms in a fuel cell - is bunk.

[Durandal]

Cold fusion was proven to be bullshit through the wonderful process of peer review.

[Joe]

Cold fusion was proven to be bullshit through the wonderful process of peer review.

Poor Pons and Fleischmann would have saved themselves a lot of trouble had they actually had this done (they didn't, they just went straight to the media with their AMAZING discovery).

[kojikun]

Pure logic can prove cold fusion is impossible.

You need to overcome the electrostatic repulsion within the nucleus of an atom, and this requires a certain minimum energy in any given atom thats fusing. That energy is measurable not only in joules but degrees kelvin and the equivalent energy in dK makes the process very hot.

Thats not to say that you need an constant raging inferno to create fusion like Tokamaks do, but you do need a temporary spike in temperature, like all Inertial Confinement reactors create (whether they're laser induced implosion or electrostatic).

Theres simply no way around that, without breaking the laws of physics. And unless you can transfer all the energy out of surrounding gas and into a few localised particles at 0 energy cost, you can't get fusion without plugging the thing into a wall socket and flipping a switch.

[Admiral Valdemar]

The United States Office of Naval Research seems to disagree with you, in the latest New Scientist there is an article on experiments done in the late eighties and nineties by Melvin Miles (publisher of 97 respected papers on electrochemistry) and Stanislow Spzak. They had nothing to gain from screwing with such experiments or releasing data at a press conference like a certain duop did in '89.

They recorded unexplained increases in heat of the test apparatus water used by as much as 3 degrees C using a palladium-hydrogen interaction, in several experiments Miles found that the apparatus was giving out 20-30% (excess energy was as much as 0.52 Watts) more energy as heat than was going into the experiment.

I don't doubt cold fusion is still the laughing stock, but I haven't seen any firm opposition to such research other than rhetoric about it being unthinkable instead of actually critisizing the data they got or redoing the exact experiments.

I'm curious as to why the Navy has kept such experiments from reoccuring despite supposed proof that there is something at work, I still doubt the total worth of the technology at the moment, but this has still intrigued me.

Anyone have any other sources of research on the subject that doesn't involve Pons and Fleischmann getting eaten alive?

[Zoink]

This place will answer many of your questions

Cold fusion FAQ

[Admiral Valdemar]

This place will answer many of your questions

Cold fusion FAQ

Ah cheers. I remember having a good site a few years back that went into all this but I dismissed it soon after I found out about Pons And Fleishmann etc. This new article though makes me curious.

[Morat]

The United States Office of Naval Research seems to disagree with you, in the latest New Scientist there is an article on experiments done in the late eighties and nineties by Melvin Miles (publisher of 97 respected papers on electrochemistry) and Stanislow Spzak. They had nothing to gain from screwing with such experiments or releasing data at a press conference like a certain duop did in '89.

The same could be said about a lot of "scientists" who have invented or altered their data. That's why having experiments independantly reproduced is one of the most important steps in the scientific process.

They recorded unexplained increases in heat of the test apparatus water used by as much as 3 degrees C using a palladium-hydrogen interaction, in several experiments Miles found that the apparatus was giving out 20-30% (excess energy was as much as 0.52 Watts) more energy as heat than was going into the experiment.

I don't doubt cold fusion is still the laughing stock, but I haven't seen any firm opposition to such research other than rhetoric about it being unthinkable instead of actually critisizing the data they got or redoing the exact experiments.

I'm curious as to why the Navy has kept such experiments from reoccuring despite supposed proof that there is something at work, I still doubt the total worth of the technology at the moment, but this has still intrigued me.

Until or unless their experiments are reproduced, there is nothing to talk about. If the experiment is redone independantly and similar results are obtained, then we can start to consider the mechanism that might be behind this unexplained heating. Naturally, we'd have to consider any possible chemical phenomenon before we start looking to the nucleus.

If, after all that, physicists and chemists believe that cold fusion is the most likely explanation, then it can be said to have been discovered.