Open Access Article Originally Published: August 12, 2002
Thinking Out Side the Physic's Box
Orthodox physics has a hard time accepting Cold Fusion, or what the Navy research team of Gordon, Mosier-Boss and Szpak call the Fleishmann-Pons (F-P ) effect in honor of the two original discoverers. A major reason for this is because it doesn't neatly fit into our current theoretical model. Theory holds that nuclear fusion can only occur at extremely high temperature and pressure, which is why controlled fusion in a laboratory setting has been so difficult to achieve.
Now along come Martin Fleishmann and Stan Pons, both highly respected scientists prior to the original Cold Fusion media debacle in 1989, who contended that fusion could, in fact, happen at room temperature in a simple test tube full of heavy water in which is suspended a thin pair of palladium and platinum wires
Dr. Pam Mosier-Boss sees the problem this way. "There are all these wonderful theories, but they are meant to be guides," she stated. "In our minds, the experiment decides what's going on. We use the theories to guide us. She added that she's had arguments with friends who are physicists who point out how "elegant" current theory is. Mosier-Boss pointed out theory says proton decay should happen at a predictable rate, but it in fact doesn't. The rate of decay keeps getting longer and longer the more experiments are conducted. The implication is obvious: elegance doesn't mean the theory is right.
Dr. Frank Gordon added, "I don't think we have all the answers yet."
As if to underline this observation, last week researchers announced they had proved contrary to Einstein's theory of relativity, that the speed of light, thought to be 186,000 miles (300,000 km) per second, is not constant. It can slow down. This discovery, if verified, could have a profound impact on our understanding of matter and the universe.
The Navy team, who work at the SPAWAR research laboratory in San Diego, California, began looking at the F-P effect shortly after the original announcement. Initially, they received some funding from the Office of Naval Research. Once those funds were exhausted, they continued to investigate the phenomenon on their own.
"The experiments aren't all that expensive to conduct, if you don't count your own time," Dr. Gordon stated, obviously concerned about the perception that tax-payer money is being spent on a theoretical dead end. "We basically have been doing experiments on our own."
Cold Fusion Plating
Unlike the classic Fleishmann-Pons experiment that used palladium wire, Dr. Gordon's team uses an approach akin to electroplating metal to speed up the F-P effect and better measure the results. Gordon explained to EV World that instead of using deuterium-rich heavy water, they have substituted a solution of deuterium and palladium chloride. They then use either copper wire or a copper wire mesh as their electrode. When a small electrical current is run through the anode and cathode, the deuterium and palladium quickly begins to coat the negative electrode, resulting in the higher deuterium/palladium concentrations necessary to see the F-P effect.
"We plate the palladium on to wire mesh and in the process of plating it. It's being plated at the same time the deuterium is evolving. So we generate the alpha and beta phase as the thickness of the plating is growing."
GO TO NEXT PAGE >>
|
| Times Article Viewed: 3457 |
|
|
|
Reader Comments
A valid email address and confirmation is required before your comment can be posted. Comments not confirmed within
24 hours are automatically deleted.
5 comments so far...
24-Jan-2005
5971
| |
An ill-informed John Smith commented:
January 19,2004 -- Well, Cold Fusion keeps not showing up. There is a long way from the first time Drs Fleischmann and Pons talked about it (we got an energy output 4 times higher than the input)to what they say now (there is a 2 degree difference between electrode and solution). I think Cold fusion is a mixture between lack of experience in nuclear measurements (thery are chemists, not physicists) and wshful thinking. So there. Peace and tokamaks, John"
John, care to dispute any of the results the revealed in this latest article?
Like the anomolous temperatures picked up by the IR camera?
Or the transmutation of elements?
Please, John, become better informed of this subject before simply reciting what you were blindly taught in high school or by what is put out by the 'hot fusion party'.
Signed _Jim
"
Posted by: _Jim P
|
|
01-Apr-2003
961
| |
what in the hell does this mean?
Posted by: Ben Smith
|
|
07-Sep-2004
4640
| |
Sep 7th 2004
Mr. Spencer Abraham
U.S. Energy Secretary
Congratulations to your decision of performing a review of entire “cold fusion” question by the U.S. Department of Energy.
I am sending you the manuscript of my book “Ring Theory – Foundations for Cold Fusion”, where 23 papers of mine have been met into a book form (four papers have been already published by the Journal of New Energy in 2002-2004, and one paper by the magazine Infinite Energy in 2002).
In the end of this letter I explain why I have decided to send my book to your appreciation.
In Feb-2004 the Infinite Energy Editor-in-Chief Dr. Eugene Mallove encouraged me to put all of my papers into a book form, because from his opinion I “have developed so many interesting , intriguing theories”. Let me explain why Dr. Mallove has taken the decision of encouraging me to put my papers into a book form
In the beginning of 2002 I have submitted seven papers for publication in Infinite Energy. Dr. Mallove has analyzed them during two years, but in his opinion some of the papers are too complex for the Infinite Energy readership. That’s why in the Feb-2004 he has decided to stimulate me in putting the papers into a book form. In an e-mail of February 20, 2004, the Managing Editor Christy Frazier said the following:
“Our editor suggests that since you have developed so many interesting, intriguing theories that you consider the following: publishing a book which melds the many theories together”.
As I was in two minds, she has insisted in Mallove’s suggestion, by sending me more two e-mails where she said:
“Our editor again encourages you to consider putting all of your papers into one book form, with a hearty introduction which generally explains the purpose of the "chapters"/papers.”
“I hope that our encouragement to publish the papers as a whole entity (and tied together coherently and neatly) is something you will consider. As I noted before, we would consider making copies and selling the product for you if you presented us with a clean, hard copy that has a good introduction which makes sense to the reader.”
In the beginning of March, as I finally was agreeing with the Dr. Mallove’s suggestion, Christy Frazier sent me in March 24 another e-mail saying the following:
“We ask that you provide a working title for the whole piece so we can make a cover/title sheet.”
Copies of her e-mails are enclosed.
Now let me explain why my theory can be important for the advancement of cold fusion, as follows:
1. In Nov-2002 the magazine Infinite Energy has published a paper of mine entitled “What is Missing in Les Case’s Catalytic Fusion”, in which some suggestions were proposed for increasing the speed of cold fusion reactions (the paper is exhibited in the page 186 of the book).
2. In the ICCF-10 (the Tenth International Conference on Cold Fusion, which was held in Cambridge, MA and in part at MIT, August 24-29, 2003), my suggestions were dramatically corroborated by the results of Letts-Cravens experiment (in the page 189 of the book it is exhibited my paper “Letts-Cravens Experiment and the Accordion-Effect”, where the results of that experiment are analyzed from the viewpoint of the new nuclear model proposed in my Ring Theory).
3. There is not any theory able to explain cold fusion yet. This is the reason why there is so strong resistance against cold fusion from the academic theorists.
4. My theoretical work is not a theory for cold fusion. However the Ring Theory proposes new foundations that can help the development of a Cold Fusion Theory by other theorists. That’s why it is important to publish the Ring Theory.
Unfortunately Dr. Mallove was killed in May-2004. And so I don’t know if in Infinite Energy they will keep his decision of publishing my book, because I don’t know what a new Editor-in-Chief will think about.
Since Dr. Mallove spent two years in reading my papers, and finally he decided to publish them into a book form, it is hard for me to lost the chance of spreading my ideas after two years of waiting.
So, I would like to know if the U.S. Energy Department could help printing my book. As my ideas can stimulate the development of theories for explaining cold fusion, one can conclude easily that, if published, my book can be very important for the advancement of Science.
If you think that there is chance that U.S. Energy Department should be a sponsor for the publishing of my book, I would be very thank to you.
Thanks to your attention
WLADIMIR GUGLINSKI
R. Santo Antonio, 637 ap 306
CEP 36.015-001 , Juiz de Fora-MG
BRAZIL
Email: wladimirguglinski@hotmail.com
"
Posted by: wladimir guglinski
|
|
13-Aug-2002
584
| |
Fourth para from end of article sentence should read :
'For some, the dream of cold fusion is as elusive as the hunt for practical hot fusion.' !
Very interesting, I continue to side with the
'maverics' who believe that experimental measurements precede & provide a base on which theoretical hypotheses are erected.
Posted by: Derek Smith
|
|
19-Jan-2004
1304
| |
Well, Cold Fusion keeps not showing up. There is a long way from the first time Drs Fleischmann and Pons talked about it (we got an energy output 4 times higher than the input)to what they say now (there is a 2 degree difference between electrode and solution).
I think Cold fusion is a mixture between lack of experience in nuclear measurements (thery are chemists, not physicists) and wshful thinking. So there.
Peace and tokamaks,
John"
Posted by: John Smith
|
|
