Connect with us

cold fusion

Discussion in 'Home Power and Microgeneration' started by BlueEyes, Mar 20, 2005.

Scroll to continue with content
  1. BlueEyes

    BlueEyes Guest


    Is anyone aware of what has become of cold fusion.
    Even if there was a one percent gain useful machines
    could be built. Just wondering, I haven't heard a thing
    in ten years.
  2. News

    News Guest

    On the fringe? Some serious research is going on all around the world.
  3. Are they asking for donations?


  4. News

    News Guest

    I'm sure they would take your money and say thank you too.
  5. Vaughn

    Vaughn Guest

    If you can't buy it at your local Home Depot, Graybar Electric, or
    alternative energy store, you probably are asking the wrong group.

  6. Exactly! There are people here that understand something about physics and
    are killing themselves laughing.
  7. News

    News Guest

    The BBC Horizon TV programme did a show on him a couple of months back. They
    arranged an independent test, between the US and UK, who found nothing.
    Some of the testers said he may have detected erroneous electrons.

    Rusi Taleyarkhan, did the tests again himself and insists he found evidence.
    Ponds or Fleishman was interviewed. He said they got it wrong, the testing
    method was at fault, but blamed Utah university of publicising the event
    with media circus press conference. They wanted it to appear in a journal
    that has a circulation of 7. P&F was a effort between Utah uni and
    Southampton uni in the UK. They still believe it is possible. One of the
    team is doing research in France on cold fusion.

    The book, The Scientist, the Madman, the Thief and their Lightbulb by Keith
    Tutt goes into how MIT discredited Cold Fusion. They never did proper tests
    and announced it dead to the media. They were receiving obscene amounts of
    hot fusion research money. If Cold Fusion was a reality 40 years of
    research would be instantly dead. It was in their interest it went away. How
  8. People are still throwing money at it, and nothing definite has turned up.
    MIT could not have discredited it if there were neutrons.
  9. Must be time for the quacks to surface again. After all it's been ten years
    since the last cold fusion discovery turned out to be some scientists
    couldn't use a pencil properly.

    Maybe we can create a perpetual motion machine with the new energy source?
  10. Vaughn

    Vaughn Guest

    One of the characteristics of science is that it is reproducible. In the
    case of cold fusion, so far, nobody has. I think the verdict is pretty much in
    on this chestnut. If there is some future progress, that will be a great thing
    (if it does not lead to cheap new WMDs). In the mean time, please save us the
    conspiracy theories.

  11. News

    News Guest

    MIT discredited P&F and never did any real meaningful testing. It was all to
    do with money.

    Research is about process of elimination. Cover all tracks until all are
  12. News

    News Guest

    You don't know until you try. And anyone who only goes by the laws of
    physics, laid down by men when cars were not even common, is narrow mined.
  13. Many diamonds come from "narrow mines"
  14. News

    News Guest

    I have given no conspiracy theory. If P&F did not have a media circus and
    then discredited, no one would laugh at cold fusion research.
  15. Last I read in New Scientist, the US Navy is quietly continuing the

    My 2c; Even if P&F didn't show Cold Fusion, they had one hell of a
    storage capacitor.
  16. I understand your position.
    All I'm saying is, there isn't an efficient conspiracy that has buried this
    thing. Significant money is still being spent. Japan is desperately in need
    of something like that. They couldn't give a damn about MIT, Big Oil, or
    anybody else's conspiracy. Over ten years, and there hasn't been a widely
    reproduced finding.

    Also note: theorists have been unable to come up with a theory that would
    explain cold fusion if it did work. The theory says that the energy barrier
    (distance between nuclei) is far too large, even with enhancements like
    cavitation collapse.

    So we have two significant negatives:

    1. No widely reproduced results.
    2. Theory that says it can't be done.

    I'm disappointed, and I'm not a fan of hot fusion either.
  17. News

    News Guest

    MIT did hold it back for a number of years by discrediting Cold Fusion.
    Probably their initial aim to gain the funding during in the late 1980s.
    The hydrosonic pump was initially thought to be a form of cold fusion which
    uses cavitation. This led people to look at shock and sound waves.
    There are other ways of getting around the energy problem, but some want a
    quantum leap. The auto giants will not abandon the IC engine unless the
    alternative is a quantum leap. Developing a alternative engine to get
    100mpg is not enough for them. Catch22 then.

    There is too much evidence to discount cold fusion. Positive evidence
    can seen from: France, Japan, China, USA and the UK. There are at least
    eight claims of excess heat besides P&F, but no one fully understands the
    processes going on yet - a bit like semiconductor research in the 1950s.
    The current problem is reproducing on demand. Once they have cracked that,
    and have a handle on it, the way forward is clear - and P&F will be
    vindicated. They may be dead when this happens, if it ever does.

    Like you I an no fan of hot fusion either.
  18. Me

    Me Guest

    Nobody is laughing at cold fusion research, they are laughing at the
    guys that say they actually have prduced neutrons in great numbers,
    and have Unverified, and, or non-Peer Reveiwed Data and results.
    Real cold fusion has not been modeled in math yet, and empirical data,
    so far, has not produced reproducable results. The UofU cell did
    produce actual data, it just could never be reproduced by others
    reliably, and the mechanism that released the measured energy, was
    never substantiated or proved by the test data. There is much
    speculation about causation of the enegy release, but they never were,
    or are, able to confirm the mechanism by which the measued energy was
    released. Some researchers have postulated that the energy release is
    from the Hydrogen, actually interacting with the platinum catylist
    and prying the platinum matrix structure apart, and releasing the
    bonding energy of the platinum matrix. The energy released is very
    small, and just barely above the measurable resolution limits.

    Me nice try, but no cigar, cuban or otherwise.........
  19. You're wrong. Automakers would accept an alternative to the IC engine if
    it either was simpler to build/weighed less, had significantly less
    emissions while giving equivalent performance or was cheaper.
Ask a Question
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
Electronics Point Logo
Continue to site
Quote of the day