LQD: Radical Abundance - Cold Fusion Time

by ChrisCook Sat Jan 12th, 2013 at 05:38:36 AM EST

I am posting this Youtube clip of a lecture by one Dr Iwamura with the following comment from someone with a nom de plume of 'Dlight Sky'.

Talk about Radical Abundance! Thanks for finding this, it's the best talk by Iwamura I've seen so far. It's obvious that this is very mature technology. It's cool to see that they are now able to create platinum from tungsten (almost like creating gold from lead). Since tungsten costs about $50 per kilo and platinum about $3000 per kilo there is potential to make money with this technology, if significant quantities could be produced.
Interestingly Mitusubishi Heavy Industries is primarily interested in the technology for transmutation of radioactive waste from conventional nuclear reactors into non-radioactive elements
Because of this focus they haven't done much work on turning this into an energy-producing technology which it clearly has the potential to be. This is a clean fusion reaction which produces very little radiation.
This looks like an ordinary talk, but it's describing a massive paradigm shift showing a technology that has the potential to solve the world's energy problems. It has clearly proven that nuclear fusion can take place inside of a metal lattice at very low energy states. Most of his experiments don't require any input power at all.
Unfortunately his experiments have been associated with "cold fusion" (which it is) and are relatively unknown outside of a small circle. Also if the military grabs on to this, which they probably have, they likely keep any successes to themselves.
However one can see from the talk that this is quite mature technology, and they have used many sophisticated setups with an array of different sensors to verify the results.
Once commercialized, when we buy a new car it will come pre-loaded with a bit of cesium and heavy water and we will be able to run the car for its whole life without ever needing to re-fuel.
This mature technology is already here. No pollution, no mess, no fuss. It should have spawned a gigantic wave of research, but for some reason hasn't yet. There is a apparently a deep obstacle operating here, whether it's conceptual, spiritual or emotional--mankind simply isn't ready to receive this incredible gift yet.

I'd be interested in what our resident physicists and cynics have to say.

LQD: Radical Abundance - Cold Fusion Time | 66 comments (66 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)

Re: LQD: Radical Abundance - Cold Fusion Time (none / 1)

"It has (been) clearly proven that nuclear fusion can take place inside of a metal lattice at very low energy states."

...would seem to be the key question to this layman. Is it proven? Does it occur naturally?

You can't be me, I'm taken

by Sven Triloqvist on Sat Jan 12th, 2013 at 08:29:48 AM EST

Re: LQD: Radical Abundance - Cold Fusion Time (4.00 / 3)

Unfortunately his experiments have been associated with "cold fusion" (which it is) and are relatively unknown outside of a small circle.

I'm instantly sceptical about that, obviously, but it's always worth looking at.

I distribute. You re-distribute. He gives your hard-earned money to lazy scroungers. -- JakeS

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sat Jan 12th, 2013 at 08:45:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Short answer: No. (4.00 / 3)

Longer answer: Quantum mechanics permits only a couple of pathways to fuse hydrogen into helium. They all produce characteristic fast neutrons. No neutrons, no fusion.

If it actually worked, you would Not Want one in your car. Hot neutrons are useful in materials science laboratory beam lines, stars and fast breeder reactors. Everywhere else they are radioactive pollution.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Sat Jan 12th, 2013 at 09:34:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Short answer: No. (4.00 / 7)

Iwamura is not talking about fusing hydrogen into helium, but apparently about catalysing other reactions in which metals are turned into other metals by absorbing a deuteron (followed by beta decay).

This is not cold fusion, and it could be an energy source (it must be exothermic or it wouldn't happen). Whether it can be done safely from the point of view of both chemical and radioactive contamination is less obvious:

I distribute. You re-distribute. He gives your hard-earned money to lazy scroungers. -- JakeS

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sat Jan 12th, 2013 at 10:20:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Short answer: No. (4.00 / 2)

With the caveat that I never did proper nuclear physics, I have a very hard time seeing how the chemical bonds in a palladium matrix can overcome the sort of potentials you would need to overcome to get a hydrogen isotope nucleus close enough to fuse with a tungsten nucleus. The deuterium should be facing an unshielded 10+ elemental charge Coulomb potential long before it gets close enough to have a non-trivial probability of tunneling through it. The sort of energy you need to overcome that potential barrier is sufficient to tear apart the crystal lattice a thousand times over.

For that matter, I have a very hard time seeing how you can do any of that without getting at the very least hard x-rays when the electron structure re-settles.

So even though I haven't solved the quantum mechanic equations to conclusively prove that it's impossible, it is not something I would bet money on.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Sat Jan 12th, 2013 at 11:19:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Short answer: No. (none / 0)

Haven't checked this particular research, but afaik previous attempts with using transsubstitution have been based on sending neutrons to change the target into an isotope that degradres faster.

Not anything anyone should have in a car, no.

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se

by A swedish kind of death on Sat Jan 12th, 2013 at 11:33:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Warning: highly speculative (4.00 / 5)

I suspect this is not a matter of nuclear physics but of solid state physics. The point is that hydrogen has an unusually high affinity for adsorption into a palladium matrix. Maybe that means deuterium can easily propagate within the palladium matrix. Quantum mechanics tells us that a particle can propagate through a pure enough crystal as if it were in empty space, so maybe once the deuterium is adsorbed into the palladium the single electron is stripped into the metal's electron gas and the resulting free deuteron forms a deuterium gas. This might increase the interaction cross-section of the deuterons with the impurity metallic nuclei, increasing the rate of the interaction (for instance)

²⁰Ca + ²D -> ²²Sc* -> ²²Ti + e^- - ν_e

(I cannot write a bar over the nu for an antineutrino so I write 'minus one neutrino' :)

I distribute. You re-distribute. He gives your hard-earned money to lazy scroungers. -- JakeS

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sat Jan 12th, 2013 at 12:30:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Warning: highly speculative (4.00 / 2)

Wikipedia: Chemical structure and properties of palladium hydride

Neutron diffraction studies have shown that hydrogen atoms randomly occupy the octahedral interstices in the metal lattice (in an fcc lattice there is one octahedral hole per metal atom). The limit of absorption at normal pressures is PdH_0.7, indicating that approximately 70% of the octahedral holes are occupied. The absorption of hydrogen is reversible, and hydrogen rapidly diffuses through the metal lattice. Metallic conductivity reduces as hydrogen is absorbed, until at around PdH_0.5 the solid becomes a semiconductor.

The bulk adsorption and rapid diffusion mean that the hydrogen atoms can tunnel from the centre of one octahedral site to the next with a relatively high amplitude. If metal impurities (say, a Calcium atom) also like to occupy the same insterstices that hydrogen propagates in, then the interaction cross-section of the hydrogen with the impurity atoms would be enhanced with respect to the gas phase.

I distribute. You re-distribute. He gives your hard-earned money to lazy scroungers. -- JakeS

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sat Jan 12th, 2013 at 12:47:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Warning: highly speculative (4.00 / 2)

You should still get a gamma signature from the nuclear decay.

There are off-the-shelf detectors that can split a gamma signal into energy channels, so unless that signature is smack, dab in the middle of the potassium decay channel, you should be able to tell it from background easily enough.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Sat Jan 12th, 2013 at 01:05:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Warning: highly speculative (none / 1)

You don't need a gamma ray because the entire energy could be carried away as kinetic energy by the electron and antineutrino. It's beta decay, not gamma decay!

I distribute. You re-distribute. He gives your hard-earned money to lazy scroungers. -- JakeS

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sat Jan 12th, 2013 at 02:33:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Warning: highly speculative (4.00 / 2)

From the beta decay, yes. But after the beta decay the nucleus will be in an excited state because something that used to be a neutron is now a proton.

It would be quite extraordinary for you to find that replacing a neutron with a proton would not move the minimum energy configuration of the nucleus. And the transition to that new minimum energy configuration would most likely be accompanied by a gamma fingerprint, courtesy of the strong nuclear force.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Sat Jan 12th, 2013 at 04:03:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Warning: highly speculative (4.00 / 4)

Gah, I mixed up atomic mass and atomic number in that equation. Anyway...

Looking at the isotopes of Ca, Sc ad Ti, the observed transmutation looks definitely _special_.

Let's see... ⁴⁰Ca is by far the most common Calcium isotope, but its atomic weight is way too low to support the transmutation to Titanium, as

Naturally occurring titanium (Ti) is composed of 5 stable isotopes; ⁴⁶Ti, ⁴⁷Ti, ⁴⁸Ti, ⁴⁹Ti and ⁵⁰Ti with ⁴⁸Ti being the most abundant (73.8% natural abundance).

(wikipedia)

Now, for Calcium

There are five observationally stable isotopes (⁴⁰Ca, ⁴²Ca, ⁴³Ca, ⁴⁴Ca and ⁴⁶Ca), plus one isotope (⁴⁸Ca) with such a long half-life that for all practical purposes it can be considered stable.

Although ⁴⁰Ca is the most abundant isotope by far, only ⁴⁴Ca, ⁴⁶Ca and ⁴⁸Ca can result in stable Titanium isotopes by Deuterium absorption followed by beta decay. ⁴⁴Ca, with a natural abundance of a couple percent, would seem like the only suitable candidate.

The intermediate states would have to be ⁴⁶Sc, ⁴⁸Sc or ⁵⁰Sc respectively, and given that

The isotopes of scandium range in atomic weight from 36 u (36Sc) to 60 u (60Sc). The primary decay mode at masses lower than the only stable isotope, ⁴⁵Sc, is Beta-plus or electron capture, and the primary mode at masses above it is beta-minus. The primary decay products at atomic weights below ⁴⁵Sc are calcium isotopes and the primary products from higher atomic weights are titanium isotopes.

it would seem to fit.

Now let's look at the energy balance. The isotopic masses of the Calcium and Titanium isotopes are (in atomic units):

Calcium    Titanium   Difference
43.9554818 45.9526316 1.9971498 
45.9536926 47.9479463 1.9942537
47.952534  49.9447912 1.9922572

while the mass of Deuterium is 2.01410178. The smallest energy release would be from the
⁴⁴Ca -> ⁴⁶Ti
reaction. The energy difference is 0.01695198u. The electron rest mass is 0.0005486u, so almost the entire energy difference would be released: 0.0164034u or 15MeV. That's a lot of energy...

I distribute. You re-distribute. He gives your hard-earned money to lazy scroungers. -- JakeS

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sat Jan 12th, 2013 at 02:30:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Warning: highly speculative (4.00 / 2)

Watching the youtube, Iwamura talks about

⁴⁴Ca + 2²H -> ⁴⁸Ti

"analogous to alpha absorption". There is no beta decay, therefore just gamma emission from nuclear rearrangement. And the goal is not energy but treatment of nuclear waste. If you can make it so that nuclear waste treatment doesn't cost energy, that's obviously a plus. But this isn't promising a hydrogen car.

I distribute. You re-distribute. He gives your hard-earned money to lazy scroungers. -- JakeS

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sun Jan 13th, 2013 at 05:22:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Warning: highly speculative (none / 0)

m(⁴⁴Ca + 2²H) - m(⁴⁸Ti) is 0.03573906u, an even higher energy release.

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Thu Jan 17th, 2013 at 10:02:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Warning: highly speculative (none / 0)

They are not talking about impurities in the Palladium matrix. They make a palladium "membrane". through which Deuterium flows due to a pressure difference of 1 Atmosphere. On the high pressure side of the membrane they deposit the metals they want to transmute, and they collect them after the experiment.

I distribute. You re-distribute. He gives your hard-earned money to lazy scroungers. -- JakeS

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sun Jan 13th, 2013 at 05:24:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Warning: highly speculative (none / 0)

My suggestion was simply that an unintended LENR of a type other than expected might have occurred in the infamous cold fusion experiments. Were it due to some uncontrolled contamination any products might not have been produced in a manner that their instruments would have detected. Others, or even they themselves, could have tried the intended experiment but have missed the contamination that allowed something to happen.

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."

by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Sun Jan 13th, 2013 at 05:28:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

A great many things are possible in principle (none / 0)

But unless there exists a fairly convincing quantum mechanical argument for why this particular possibility should even be considered, I find it difficult to muster sufficient prior plausibility to challenge the interpretation "Pons and Fleischman were Doing It Wrong."

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Thu Jan 17th, 2013 at 04:01:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A great many things are possible in principle (none / 1)

You are not alone. It seems fashion these day to put established theory above verified observation. Science was set out to work the other way around though. I will not guide you to all the quotes from all the science-greats over the centuries warning for the pitfall you seem to have fallen into. I don't think you will find an established textbook theory that can makes accurate predictions on quantum mechanics in this particular environment, ie multibody, metal lattice. Nevertheless, some explanation have been proposed, but you will not be able to find them, because you don't know where to look for them. So I will give you a hint: Peter L. Hagelstein The Fleischmann-Pons effect stands, it has been reproduced many times. Other experimental setups like the Mitsubishi transmutation, or the Piantelli's gas loading into Ni, or Arata's gas loading into palladium and zirconium oxide have all indicated that indeed something is going on. Open your eyes. and you will find sufficient plausibility for the interpretation "Caltech and all the other debunking labs in 1989 were doing it wrong"

by Gerrit on Fri Jan 18th, 2013 at 05:05:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A great many things are possible in principle (none / 1)

It seems fashion these day to put established theory above verified observation.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. The cold fusion types so far barely even have ordinary evidence.

I don't think you will find an established textbook theory that can makes accurate predictions on quantum mechanics in this particular environment, ie multibody, metal lattice.

So do an ab initio calculation. Numerical solutions of the Schrödinger equation (and its relativistic variants) are perfectly computationally feasible for systems of this size.

Nevertheless, some explanation have been proposed, but you will not be able to find them, because you don't know where to look for them. So I will give you a hint: Peter L. Hagelstein The Fleischmann-Pons effect stands

A proper reference contains:

Name(s) of author(s)
Year of publication*
Clearly marked title*
Journal of publication*
Volume and page numbers*

I have helpfully marked with an asterisk the ones you need to remedy.

Because I am not going on a scavenger hunt for an incomplete reference.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Sat Jan 19th, 2013 at 09:21:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A great many things are possible in principle (4.00 / 4)

A few points:

Gerrit is right in general that a lab that doesn't want to replicate a result can fail to replicate the result by not being careful enough. This doesn't necessarily imply foul play, just the fact that if you don't believe a result can be attained you won't push the envelope on the experimental setup. However, I'm not sure that Fleischman and Pons had to overcome especial difficulties or that they described any subtleties of their experimental setup sufficiently well.

JakeS is right also that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. And he's right that, at the present level of development of quantum theory, one is justified in relying on theory as a guide.

However, the experiments we're talking about probably require quantum field theory to describe them (I'm not talking about high-energy physics, but effective field theory formulations of solid state physics). So this stuff is hard, both in theory and in practice.

Meanwhile, while I'm not a fan of fishing for misquoted references, I had never heard of Peter Hagelstein, so it bears looking at what Google Scholar coughs up without any effort on one's part:

New Physical Effects in Metal Deuterides, in Condensed Matter Nuclear Science: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Cold Fusion, Marseilles, France, 31 October- 5 November 2004
Constraints on energetic particles in the Fleischmann-Pons experiment, Naturwissenschaften, April 2010, Volume 97, Issue 4, pp 345-352
In recent Fleischmann-Pons experiments carried out by different groups, a thermal signal is seen indicative of excess energy production of a magnitude much greater than can be accounted for by chemistry. Correlated with the excess heat appears to be 4He, with the associated energy near 24 MeV per helium atom. In nuclear reactions, the energy produced is expressed through the kinetic energy of the products; hence, it would be natural to assume that some of the reaction energy ends up as kinetic energy of the 4He nucleus. Depending on the energy that the helium nucleus is born with, it will result in radiation (such as neutrons or x-rays) that can be seen outside of the cell. We have computed estimates of the expected neutron and x-ray emission as a function of helium energy and compared the results with upper limits taken from experiments. Experimental results with upper limits of neutron emission between 0.008 and 0.8 n/J are found to correspond to upper limits in alpha energy between 6.2 and 20.2 keV.
Dual Laser Stimulation and Optical Phonons in Palladium Deuteride, Ch.5 of Low-Energy Nuclear Reactions and New Energy Technologies Sourcebook Volume 2, pp 81-93, December 20, 2009 American Chemical Society
Models Relevant to Excess Heat Production in Fleischmann-Pons Experiments, Ch. 11 of Low-Energy Nuclear Reactions Sourcebook, pp 249-267, August 01, 2008 American Chemical Society
Excitation Transfer and Energy Exchange Processes for Modeling The Fleischmann-Pons Excess Heat Effect [PDF]
The absence of energetic particles commensurate with the energy produced is the single most notable feature of the Fleischmann-Pons experiment for theory, assuming that a new nuclear process is involved. We discuss briefly energy exchange between two-level systems and a low energy oscillator, concluding that spin-boson models augmented with loss are able to describe coherent energy exchange involving a large number of oscillator quanta. Since the coupling between deuterons and the lattice is weak, the excitation must be transferred to a different system with stronger coupling, in order to develop a simple model relevant for heat production. The resulting toy model can be used for simulation, and we describe briefly ongoing efforts to develop a computational model.
PROGRESS TOWARD A THEORY FOR EXCESS HEAT IN METAL DEUTERIDES, in CURRENT TRENDS IN INTERNATIONAL FUSION RESEARCH: Proceedings of the 7th Symposium, 5-9 March 2007, American Institute of Physics.
Stimulation of Optical Phonons in Deuterated Palladium, in ICCF-14 International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science, 2008
Progress made since 2007 in the triggering of excess power by terahertz stimulation of deuterated palladium is reported. The stimulation was provided by tuning dual lasers to one of three specific beat frequencies corresponding to the known optical phonon frequencies of deuterated palladium (8, 15, 20 THz).
Results imply that optical phonons may be involved in the Fleischmann-Pons effect, giving preliminary support to Hagelstein's phonon theory. The importance of laser beam polarization is also demonstrated, confirming earlier work reported by Violante et al., and by Letts and Cravens.
A Model for Fast Ion Emission from Metal Deuterides, American Physical Society, Annual March Meeting, March 20-24, 2000
There have been numerous claims during the past ten years of the observation of a variety of anomalies in metal deuterides. One such anomaly involves the emission of fast (MeV) alpha from PdD as reported by G. Chambers and colleagues at NRL in the early 1990s. A related effect is the emission of a variety of low mass fast ions from TiD reported by groups led by G. Chambers and by F. E. Cecil (Colorado School of Mines) et al(F. E. Cecil, H. Liu, D. Beddingfield and C. S. Galovich, in Anomalous Nuclear Effects in Deuterium/Solid Systems, AIP Conf. Proc.) 228, p. 383 (1990).. We have recently examined a theoretical model for this effect. We propose a second order off-resonant reaction in which fusion reactions are coupled to optical phonons, and then the optical phonon excitation is dipole-coupled to nuclear ionization. Such a model gives reaction products and energies which appear to be in agreement with experiment.
MODELS FOR ANOMALIES IN CONDENSED MATTER DEUTERIDES [PDF], from newenergytimes.com

Conclusion: the only refereed publication outside conference proceedings is the _Naturwissenschaften_ article, which makes no extraordinary claims. All highly speculative. Enticing enough, if one has the time and fortitude to take a serious stab at reviewing the theoretical models that are advanced.

I distribute. You re-distribute. He gives your hard-earned money to lazy scroungers. -- JakeS

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sat Jan 19th, 2013 at 10:06:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A great many things are possible in principle (4.00 / 2)

I think we all agree that currently there does not exist a generally accepted (==textbook) theory that can make predictions about what happens in this specific environment.

It is an extraordinary claim to say that the processes which take place in this special environment must be completely identical to the known processes in a vacuum. That claim would require extraordinary evidence. However, the evidence from a huge number of measurements taken from different experimental setups with the actual environment does not support that claim.

The observations are not claims, they stand by themselves. One can only argue that the observations must be due to errors, because one makes assumptions that some existing theory is suitable to make predictions for that environment and those predictions conflict with the evidence.

And what is extraordinary evidence ? The observations of transmutations that started this thread were performed by Mitsubishi numerous times and replicated by Osaka University and Toyota lab independently several times.
One may keep calling for more and more "extraordinary" evidence to the point that the topic has already become textbook science and people will still not buy it.

Search google scholar for "Lossy Spin-Boson Model", it is Hagelstein's latest model, but many other theorists have made their proposals, for instance Yeong E. Kim (http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00601-012-0374-6) or Widom-Larsen (http://dx.doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s2006-02479-8) which uses the weak force to explain everything and doesn't need "new" science.

The university of Missouri has a funded research program and will host the ICCF-18 in July this year together with Purdue University (http://research.missouri.edu/iccf18/)

by Gerrit on Sat Jan 19th, 2013 at 04:42:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A great many things are possible in principle (4.00 / 2)

I think we all agree that currently there does not exist a generally accepted (==textbook) theory that can make predictions about what happens in this specific environment.

You mean we've no idea of the quantum mechanical properties of metal clusters in solution? Of bulk metal?

Most material scientists would dispute the latter, and most inorganic cluster physicists would dispute the former.

It is an extraordinary claim to say that the processes which take place in this special environment must be completely identical to the known processes in a vacuum.

Here you are fallaciously privileging your hypothesis: That bulk and cluster properties are not identical to vacuum properties does not imply that the bulk properties permit the reaction you propose.

The observations are not claims, they stand by themselves.

No. Really they don't.

In the first place, I am having a devil of a time actually finding those observations. The papers you linked directly to are theory papers (which is not in and of itself a problem), and the papers they cite for empirical support are theory papers (lazy and annoying, but unfortunately not uncommon), but the papers they cite for empirical support are proceedings of cold fusion conferences, private communications, patent applications(!) and articles in chemistry journals or in languages I do not understand and which I doubt my university can access online.

In the second place, results do not stand on their own. They stand on the methodological soundness of the experiments which obtained them. You can always get "supportive results." Even arrant nonsense like homeopathy has "supportive results." What's hard is getting supportive results from an experimental setup which is not garbage.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Sat Jan 19th, 2013 at 06:30:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A great many things are possible in principle (4.00 / 3)

It is an extraordinary claim to say that the processes which take place in this special environment must be completely identical to the known processes in a vacuum.

Nobody is making that claim, at the very least not me. I did say

However, the experiments we're talking about probably require quantum field theory to describe them (I'm not talking about high-energy physics, but effective field theory formulations of solid state physics). So this stuff is hard, both in theory and in practice.

Various claims are made about what is and is not possible. JakeS does make some claims about the reasons why he thinks certain things are implausible. However, his claims are very heuristic and not based on any 'model' of what goes on in a metal deuteride.

The observations are not claims, they stand by themselves.

They don't, they need to be replicated reliably. The original Feischmann-Pons experiment failed to be replicated as far as the conventional wisdom goes. One may argue as you have done that the 'debunkers' were at fault. I have explicitly allowed for that possibility. i honestly don't now any better and I'm not about to set up a solid state nuclear physics lab in my kitchen to test it.

The observations of transmutations that started this thread were performed by Mitsubishi numerous times and replicated by Osaka University and Toyota lab independently several times.

I have not questioned those results. But those results are not evidence of cold fusion in the F-P experiment either.

One may keep calling for more and more "extraordinary" evidence to the point that the topic has already become textbook science

Which as far as I know it has not. If you know a textbook about this stuff, please share it with us.

Also, I note a certain disdain for the concept of "textbook science" in your comment. That is misplaced. Textbook science is what can be reliably reproduced and cogently modelled. That should not be sneezed at. I suggest you look at things like The eighteen arbitrary parameters of the standard model in your everyday life or The Confrontation between General Relativity and Experiment for what textbook science looks like. When I say above

the experiments we're talking about probably require quantum field theory to describe them (I'm not talking about high-energy physics, but effective field theory formulations of solid state physics)

I mean that of course it is the most parsimonious hypothesis that the same physical laws as in vacuum apply inside the materials we're discussing here, contra your rather flippant

It is an extraordinary claim to say that the processes which take place in this special environment must be completely identical to the known processes in a vacuum.

After all, you yourself tells us there is a proposed explanation of the metal deuteride stuff

which uses the weak force to explain everything and doesn't need "new" science

So, which one is it?

As I have pointed out, Peter Hagelstein mostly only publishes in conference proceedings. This means the work is highly speculative. I have also conceded that it doesn't mean it's wrong. I didn't want to go into a tangent on the sorry state of peer review in physics, but basically the fact that I know peer review is broken doesn't mean I accord more credibility to non-peer-reviewed research, just less credibility to peer-reviewed publications. Which means more work for me if I want to make my mind up about some physics issue without resorting to arguments by authority. Sadly, I don't have the time or the fortitude to study the statistical field theory of metal deuterides. I have enough on my plate keeping up with my girlfriend's rare earth dopants in optically active matrices so I can offer what advice I can on her dissertation work.

With that out of the way,

theorists have made their proposals, for instance Yeong E. Kim (http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00601-012-0374-6) or Widom-Larsen (http://dx.doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s2006-02479-8) which uses the weak force to explain everything and doesn't need "new" science.

Well, of course it uses the weak force, we're talking about nuclear transmutatinos here.

Search google scholar for "Lossy Spin-Boson Model", it is Hagelstein's latest model

No, sorry, I already spent my complement of google scholar time for this thread on Peter Hagelstein generally.

Not trying to be rude, but this whole comment thread is getting tiresome, and I already explained ages ago that there's no need to assume the Mitsubishi results are fishy as some others have implied, just that this stuff is not "a mature energy technology" - the Mitsubishi transmutations are not an energy technology and even as a waste management technique they're not a mature technology but basic science research in progress.

So if you are in any way interested in me continuing to debate this (and I don't know why you should as you have no idea who I am), do us a favour and write a semi-technical diary about a theory that would explain the Mitsubishi experiments so we actually know what we're talking about. Colman has just enabled TeX notation on the blog, so there's no excuse on that side. Because the pseudotechnical discussion in this thread is just about name dropping and arguments by authority and who trusts whose sources, and that is not very edifying.

I distribute. You re-distribute. He gives your hard-earned money to lazy scroungers. -- JakeS

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sat Jan 19th, 2013 at 06:39:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A great many things are possible in principle (4.00 / 2)

nuclear transmutatinos

And no, that's not a supersymmetric partner of a pion, it's a typo.

I distribute. You re-distribute. He gives your hard-earned money to lazy scroungers. -- JakeS

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sat Jan 19th, 2013 at 06:55:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A great many things are possible in principle (none / 0)

Migeru, I agree with nearly all the points you make. My previous reply (to you) was actually to both you and JakeS, sorry for that. This time I keep the replies apart and I reply to you first.

About the claim:

Nobody is making that claim, at the very least not me. I did say

And I agree to what you said.

About observations:

They [the observations] don't [stand by themselves], they need to be replicated reliably

I agree.
I was trying to make the point that observations are observations, they are not claims. Surely any observation needs to be replicated reliably by independent parties and as JakeS noted with sound methodology, we all agree. However, when those requirements have been fulfilled the observations stands by themselves, they do not need a theory to exist. Only when we want to understand and describe what made the observations happen, then a testable theoretical proposal is needed. That's when the claim is made and it will need extraordinary supporting evidence to prove that claim is correct.

About F-P:

But those results are not evidence of cold fusion in the F-P experiment either.

That's debatable. First, the results are very supportive of the notion that unknown and unexpected things might happen in a deuterided metal. Second, it depends on what is meant with "cold fusion". It is absolutely clear that "hot fusion" does not take place in these experiments. Nobody has ever made that claim. The observed branching ratios don't fit.
So we can probably agree on what these observations mean for F-P, but I am not sure of how the wording should be.

About textbooks:

If you know a textbook about this stuff, please share it with us.

What happens in this environment is not described yet in (generally excepted) textbooks, the nearest thing available doesn't fit the observations.
I do not have a disdain for textbooks. When observations are made that are not described in textbooks, then those observations must be replicated first, followed by a testable theory proposal. Finally, when sufficient evidence shows that the theory is capable of describing the observations, the whole thing will appear in textbooks.

About the hypothesis:

I mean that of course it is the most parsimonious hypothesis that the same physical laws as in vacuum apply inside the materials we're discussing here

Sure, it is the most reasonable thing to assume at first, but it's a hypothesis. When evidence arises that doesn't support the hypothesis, then we have nothing. And when one (not you) has only a hypothesis, but with evidence against it (of which he may not be aware), but still wants to claim that the hypothsis must be true, then I think that is an extraordinary claim to make.

I could list peer reviewed papers presenting evidence against the hypothesis, but it's a lot of work for me and, as you, I have little time. But if anyone has an interest I can point to the papers.

There is not much we can debate on further, Migeru, we agree on most points.

by Gerrit on Sun Jan 20th, 2013 at 06:52:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A great many things are possible in principle (none / 0)

About the hypothesis:
I mean that of course it is the most parsimonious hypothesis that the same physical laws as in vacuum apply inside the materials we're discussing here
Sure, it is the most reasonable thing to assume at first, but it's a hypothesis. When evidence arises that doesn't support the hypothesis, then we have nothing. And when one (not you) has only a hypothesis, but with evidence against it (of which he may not be aware), but still wants to claim that the hypothsis must be true, then I think that is an extraordinary claim to make.

It's much more reasonable to claim that those who claim to have proven that the existing theory rules out the observed effects have made a mistake in their theoretical calculations. Just like it's reasonable to claim that the observed effects are spurious.

The claim that the observed results are sound and that they invalidate established physical theories is an extraordinary claim.

But we're splitting hairs, really.

I distribute. You re-distribute. He gives your hard-earned money to lazy scroungers. -- JakeS

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sun Jan 20th, 2013 at 07:28:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A great many things are possible in principle (none / 0)

Yes we are probably splitting hairs.

Either the observed results are sound or they are not sound.

When they are not sound, it should be easy to explain why they are not sound and then we can forget about them.

When they are sound then the observations are still only observations, whether or not they "invalidate" or "are not totally in line with" established theory or whether they are regarded by some as extraordinary results does not matter, they are sound, they stand. Observations are not claims.

by Gerrit on Sun Jan 20th, 2013 at 04:09:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A great many things are possible in principle (none / 1)

Either the observed results are sound or they are not sound.
When they are not sound, it should be easy to explain why they are not sound and then we can forget about them.

Actually, no.

When they are not sound they cannot be replicated. When they can be replicated the question becomes how to explain what is happening.

Sometimes (as with perpetual motion machines) one can quickly "explain why they are not sound" just by appeal to general principles (such as "if true, this would violate the laws of thermodynamics"). Of course, the builder of the perpetual motion machine will insist on a detailed explanation of why the experiment doesn't work as intended, or that an error is pinpointed in the builder's explanation of how his device works.

I distribute. You re-distribute. He gives your hard-earned money to lazy scroungers. -- JakeS

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sun Jan 20th, 2013 at 04:36:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A great many things are possible in principle (none / 1)

I was trying to make the point that observations are observations, they are not claims.

Where are those observations? Please provide a reference to the paper you find most compellingly describes the experimental setup and results. Reference-jumping from the papers you cited above did not yield anything worth the time it took to do it, so I'm not going on another scavenger hunt through that particular branch of the literature.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Sun Jan 20th, 2013 at 08:09:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A great many things are possible in principle (none / 0)

I will give you 3 different groups.

Miles et al. "Electrochemical calorimetric evidence for cold fusion in the palladium-deuterium system" - Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry and Interfacial Electrochemistry Volume 296, Issue 1, 10 December 1990, Pages 241-254
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0022-0728(90)87246-G

Mosier-Boss et al. "Triple tracks in CR-39 as the result of Pd-D Co-deposition: evidence of energetic neutrons" - Naturwissenschaften January 2009, Volume 96, Issue 1, pp 135-142
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00114-008-0449-x

Huke et al. "Evidence for a host-material dependence of the n/p branching ratio of low-energy d+d reactions within metallic environments" - The European Physical Journal A - Hadrons and Nuclei March 2006, Volume 27, Issue 1 Supplement, pp 187-192
http://dx.doi.org/10.1140/epja/i2006-08-028-3

that last one is not a "cold fusion" setup, they report that the branching ratios of D-D fusion in metallic environments are different than in gas targets.

There are many more peer reviewed papers from different groups reporting similar results of anomalous heat, transmutations, nuclear ash. So let me know if you want more.

by Gerrit on Sun Jan 20th, 2013 at 02:20:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A great many things are possible in principle (none / 1)

The first is a calorimetry experiment that does not even attempt to detect signature reaction products. That's basically what Pons and Fleischman did, and is not in any way, shape or form evidence of nuclear reactions.

The second is from a journal I can't access, so I only get the abstract and introduction.

The third is an accelerator experiment that has nothing to do with your hypothesis.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Sun Jan 20th, 2013 at 03:44:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A great many things are possible in principle (none / 0)

Goodnight, you can go back to sleep now

by Gerrit on Sun Jan 20th, 2013 at 04:11:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A great many things are possible in principle (none / 0)

Second, it depends on what is meant with "cold fusion".

I'll limit "cold fusion" to Deuterium-Deuterium reactions, if you don't mind...

I distribute. You re-distribute. He gives your hard-earned money to lazy scroungers. -- JakeS

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sun Jan 20th, 2013 at 08:31:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Short answer: No. (none / 0)

"The deuterium should be facing an unshielded 10+ elemental charge Coulomb potential"

Sure, but with a +11 chaotic matrix embedding it just might be possible.

(I agree with your general premise, even the metastable isotopes have energies of formation measured in keV.)

by njh on Fri Jan 18th, 2013 at 12:17:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Short answer: No. (none / 0)

Not without getting, as an absolute minimum, hard x-rays.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Sat Jan 19th, 2013 at 09:21:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Short answer: No. (4.00 / 2)

Iwamura is not talking about fusing hydrogen into helium, but apparently about catalysing other reactions in which metals are turned into other metals by absorbing a deuteron (followed by beta decay).

Apparently not: two deuterons are absorbed, without beta decay.

I distribute. You re-distribute. He gives your hard-earned money to lazy scroungers. -- JakeS

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sun Jan 13th, 2013 at 05:25:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: LQD: Radical Abundance - Cold Fusion Time (4.00 / 2)

Mitsubishi Reports Toyota Replication (December 7, 2012)

Researchers from Toyota Central Research and Development Laboratories performed an independent replication of a Mitsubishi low-energy nuclear reaction transmutation experiment, according to a physicist from Mitsubishi Heavy Industries speaking at the American Nuclear Society LENR session on Nov. 14 in San Diego, Calif.
The physicist, Yasuhiro Iwamura, told the ANS audience that the Toyota researchers confirmed that nuclear changes from one element to another took place without the use of high-energy nuclear physics. Most scientists who have not followed this field closely consider such profound claims inconceivable. Toyota used a LENR deuterium-permeation transmutation method that Iwamura invented.
Iwamura has been working with this LENR method for 14 years. He said that one of his LENR transmutations was closely but not identically replicated by Toyota. Osaka University and Iwate University previously reported similar replications.

So Iwamura is doing research for Mitsubishi.

It is hard to find academic papers about this stuff: Iwamura has at least one from 2002, but it was published in a Japanese journal (in English) which I'm not sure is widely read outside Japan.

Though working with Palladium hydrides, Iwamura does not mention 'cold fusion' nor does he cite Fleischmann and Pons.

I distribute. You re-distribute. He gives your hard-earned money to lazy scroungers. -- JakeS

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sat Jan 12th, 2013 at 08:53:10 AM EST

Re: LQD: Radical Abundance - Cold Fusion Time (none / 0)

Though working with Palladium hydrides, Iwamura does not mention 'cold fusion' nor does he cite Fleischmann and Pons.

One can hardly blame him for not wanting to hang a 'kick me' sign around his neck. But, is it possible that what he has done might suggest how Fleischmann and Pons might have actually gotten a positive result on some occasions while others did not? Might there have been an uncontrolled and even unknown variable at work for Fleischmann and Pons?

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."

by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Sat Jan 12th, 2013 at 11:19:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: LQD: Radical Abundance - Cold Fusion Time (4.00 / 6)

Most of his experiments don't require any input power at all.

That sentence worries me.

However - I'm pragmatic about these things. If there's no evidence of fraud and something is happening, then something is happening.

If theory says it can't happen, then theory is wrong and you throw out or modify the theory, not the reality.

Of course you only do this after you've tested the crap out of it and confirmed it independently in multiple locations.

The problem with this area is that these kinds of experiments keep being repeated, and something seems to happen in a good proportion of them.

It may or may not be a useful or unexpected something. It's pretty much impossible to find out from what little has been published.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Sat Jan 12th, 2013 at 11:34:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: LQD: Radical Abundance - Cold Fusion Time (4.00 / 2)

"Most of his experiments don't require any input power at all."

That must have been intended as 'don't require any net input power'. He shows an apparatus in one case that has a multilayer prepared surface that required sputtering and has the material in a chamber with deuterium gas on one side of a barrier and a high vacuum on the other. It does not require high temperature or pressure though and the reaction itself, as Mig noted, must be exothermic.

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."

by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Sat Jan 12th, 2013 at 11:45:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: LQD: Radical Abundance - Cold Fusion Time (none / 1)

is it possible that what he has done might suggest how Fleischmann and Pons might have actually gotten a positive result on some occasions while others did not?

Maybe, but as Jake correctly points out, hydrogen fusion into helium would be accompanied by high-energy neutrons.

I distribute. You re-distribute. He gives your hard-earned money to lazy scroungers. -- JakeS

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sat Jan 12th, 2013 at 12:39:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: LQD: Radical Abundance - Cold Fusion Time (none / 0)

My thought was that contamination may have allowed a transmutation to occur when no one was looking for it.

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."

by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Sun Jan 13th, 2013 at 12:31:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: LQD: Radical Abundance - Cold Fusion Time (4.00 / 2)

paper will be published here:

Transactions of the American Nuclear Society, Vol. 107, San Diego, California, November 11-15, 2012

see http://newenergytimes.com/v2/conferences/2012/ANS2012W/2012Iwamura-ANS-LENR-Paper.pdf

from the paper:

"Replication experiments have been performed in some universities or institutes mainly in Japan. T.Higashiyama et al. of Osaka University observed transmutation of Cs into Pr in 2003[7]. H.Yamada et al. performed similar experiments using Cs and detected increase of mass number 137 by TOF-SIMS. They used a couple of nano-structured Pd multilayer thin film and observed the increase of mass number 141 (corresponding to Pr) only when 133Cs was given on the Pd sample [8]. N. Takhashi et al., the researchers of Toyota Central R&D Labs, presented that they detected Pr from the permeated Pd sample using SOR x-ray at Spring-8 and the detected Pr was confirmed by ICP-MS and TOF-SIMS [8]."

by Gerrit on Tue Jan 15th, 2013 at 11:58:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: LQD: Radical Abundance - Cold Fusion Time (none / 1)

'Dlight Sky'

It's cool to see that they are now able to create platinum from tungsten (almost like creating gold from lead). Since tungsten costs about $50 per kilo and platinum about $3000 per kilo there is potential to make money with this technology, if significant quantities could be produced.

It may be even more cost effective to produce useable platinum catalysts by this method. They may even find highly effective mixtures of transmuted elements that could be deposited onto suitable substrates as they are transmuted. This could be a boon for fuel cell manufacturing.

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."

by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Sat Jan 12th, 2013 at 12:39:07 PM EST

Re: LQD: Radical Abundance - Cold Fusion Time (none / 0)

Instead of 'deposited in place' I should have written 'transmuted' in place'.

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."

by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Sat Jan 12th, 2013 at 12:49:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: LQD: Radical Abundance - Cold Fusion Time (4.00 / 2)

Platinum closed at $52,36 per gram on Friday. That's $52,360 per kilo, not $3,000.

At least it makes the Trillionum coin lighter by a factor of 17,45...

by de Gondi (publiobestia aaaatttthotmaildaughtusual) on Sat Jan 12th, 2013 at 03:30:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: LQD: Radical Abundance - Cold Fusion Time (none / 0)

The price is usually quoted in troy ounces = 31.1 grams, in the precious metal market. It was $1,629/oz at close Friday, while gold was $1662.70/oz. at close. For a long time platinum traded at a small premium to gold, but not recently.

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."

by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Sun Jan 13th, 2013 at 12:28:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: LQD: Radical Abundance - Cold Fusion Time (none / 1)

In the States and London or whatever international market. In Europe we buy it by the gram. The metric system any day.

Platinum has always cost significantly more than gold before the crisis. Since mid-2011 gold has consistently cost more than Pt. There's simply not enough gold to satisfy the demand.

While Pt prices can crash as in the winter of 2008, gold just doesn't.

by de Gondi (publiobestia aaaatttthotmaildaughtusual) on Sun Jan 13th, 2013 at 05:02:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: LQD: Radical Abundance - Cold Fusion Time (none / 1)

Gold is not a good place to sit - it is vulnerable to mining advances (and if people really start working the hot vent copper deposits, that is going to mean a large side stream of gold production), and is counter cyclical - it is an asset to buy when everyone is piling into the next big thing and regard gold as boring, ie: in no way now.
Most importantly, the investor profile is very, very volatile.
People buy gold because they are scared. This means that an external price shock of any kind is highly likely to kick off a stampede out of gold.

by Thomas on Mon Jan 14th, 2013 at 08:13:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: LQD: Radical Abundance - Cold Fusion Time (4.00 / 2)

From what I see on the Kitco charts, gold was wildly speculated in 1979-80 when it hit $840 an ounce and then collapsed to $300-400 for two decades. The present run picked up momentum in 2006 and has since tripled. The January 1980 event was certainly fed by high inflation and international political unrest. It was much different from the slow climb now going on.

I suspect it's China and India that are investing heavily while the IMF hasn't put its gold up for sale for some time now, 2009 if I'm not mistaken.

by de Gondi (publiobestia aaaatttthotmaildaughtusual) on Mon Jan 14th, 2013 at 10:39:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: LQD: Radical Abundance - Cold Fusion Time (4.00 / 2)

And there was a speculative frenzy - think Tulip Bulbs.

MacKay's 1841 book Extraordindary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds should be required reading in secondary school.

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Mon Jan 14th, 2013 at 02:30:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: LQD: Radical Abundance - Cold Fusion Time (none / 1)

Agree.

Gold doesn't have an Internal Rate of Return. Thus, the future price totally determines the ROI with the future price being amid whatever frenzy (or not - see my comment to De Gondi, above) The Market® is undergoing at that instance in time.

As a purely savings vehicle gold does have some redeeming qualities. But not to the extent the gold bugs fantasize.

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Mon Jan 14th, 2013 at 02:36:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: LQD: Radical Abundance - Cold Fusion Time (none / 0)

'Dlight Sky'

This mature technology is already here. No pollution, no mess, no fuss. It should have spawned a gigantic wave of research, but for some reason hasn't yet. There is a apparently a deep obstacle operating here, whether it's conceptual, spiritual or emotional--mankind simply isn't ready to receive this incredible gift yet.

It is far simpler to consider that most researchers, or at least their supervisors, have a good apprehension of the likely effects of publishing on a topic that could obsolete the business model of a group of businesses that are major contributors to universities and politicians and have major interests in various media corporations. They don't even have to confer with anyone to know not to encourage research along these lines.

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."

by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Sat Jan 12th, 2013 at 01:03:04 PM EST

Re: LQD: Radical Abundance - Cold Fusion Time (4.00 / 3)

This research is being funded and carried out by major Japanese countries in Japan. Slightly different dynamic.

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Sat Jan 12th, 2013 at 01:33:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: LQD: Radical Abundance - Cold Fusion Time (4.00 / 2)

Yes, in Japan, where all petroleum is imported. That is where one would expect such research to take place. I would not be at all surprised if the most immediate practical application of this work were to be in improved battery technology for electric and hybrid electric vehicles.

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."

by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Sun Jan 13th, 2013 at 12:15:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: LQD: Radical Abundance - Cold Fusion Time (4.00 / 6)

I like the slip.

by de Gondi (publiobestia aaaatttthotmaildaughtusual) on Sun Jan 13th, 2013 at 05:03:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: LQD: Radical Abundance - Cold Fusion Time (4.00 / 6)

Talk about Radical Abundance! Thanks for finding this, it's the best talk by Iwamura I've seen so far. It's obvious that this is very mature technology. It's cool to see that they are now able to create platinum from tungsten (almost like creating gold from lead).

That's a low bar for "mature technology" if you ask me...

I distribute. You re-distribute. He gives your hard-earned money to lazy scroungers. -- JakeS

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sat Jan 12th, 2013 at 03:08:34 PM EST

Re: LQD: Radical Abundance - Cold Fusion Time (none / 0)

I was getting ready to make a similar comment. It may be a fair statement that it is an established laboratory experiment with potential for practical applications. To call it a 'mature technology' seems laughable.

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."

by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Sun Jan 13th, 2013 at 12:39:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: LQD: Radical Abundance - Cold Fusion Time (4.00 / 3)

It is, in particular, not a mature energy technology.

I distribute. You re-distribute. He gives your hard-earned money to lazy scroungers. -- JakeS

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sun Jan 13th, 2013 at 05:17:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Cold Fusion Lecture at MIT (4.00 / 2)

Cold Fusion 101: Introduction to Excess Power in Fleischmann-Pons Experiments
Jan/22 Tue
11:00AM-01:00PM
MIT, Building 4-153, 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge
Peter Hagelstein, Mitchell Swartz
Excess power production in the Fleischmann-Pons experiment; lack of confirmation in early negative experiments; theoretical problems and Huizenga's three miracles; physical chemistry of PdD; electrochemistry of PdD; loading requirements on excess power production; the nuclear ash problem and He-4 observations; approaches to theory; screening in PdD; PdD as an energetic particle detector; constraints on the alpha energy from experiment; overview of theoretical approaches; coherent energy exchange between mismatched quantum systems; coherent x-rays in the Karabut experiment and interpretation; excess power in the NiH system; Piantelli experiment; prospects for a new small scale clean nuclear energy technology.
Sponsor(s): Electrical Engineering and Computer Science
Contact: Peter Hagelstein, plh@mit.edu

Hagelstein is doing a series of these introductory lectures during the Independent Activities Period at MIT. IAP is the time, January into the first week of February, when anyone at MIT can offer a non-credit course.

MIT as an institution does not endorse "cold fusion" or low energy nuclear reactions (LENR), as is the term these days. In fact, after Fleishmann and Pons announced their experiments, some in the nuclear community at MIT were accused of doing an academic hatchet job on the research.

Solar IS Civil Defense

by gmoke on Mon Jan 14th, 2013 at 06:12:54 PM EST

Re: Cold Fusion Lecture at MIT (4.00 / 2)

next Monday (21 Jan) there will be a colloquium on Cold Fusion at the TU Eindhoven (Netherlands)

see http://www.tue.nl/uploads/media/Cold_fusion_colloq_TUE_2013_invitation.pdf

Speaker is Jean-Paul Biberian from University of Marseille. Interestingly the invitation also mentions Mitsubishi Heavy Industries.

by Gerrit on Tue Jan 15th, 2013 at 11:17:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Welcome to Eurotrib, Gerrit (none / 0)

I've got a funny feeling we've met before (though I may be wrong)!

_{It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue
- Queen Elizabeth II}

by eurogreen on Tue Jan 15th, 2013 at 12:05:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: LQD: Radical Abundance - Cold Fusion Time (4.00 / 2)

Potential disruptive-as-hell energy techs:

Direct Matter-to-Energy conversion via optical trickery:
Hawking radiation should arise at any event horizon, not just gravitational ones - And it is, in theory, possible to create optical event horizons via meta-materials tech.
Which leads to this neat little piece of math
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1209.4993v1.pdf
where it is theorized that if you fire two very precise laser pulses into a diamond optical wave guide, you can set off a hawking radiation based amplification process - which is matter->energy conversion. if this works it means both Laser cannons and power plants that run indeterminately off a diamond ought to be possible.

by Thomas on Tue Jan 15th, 2013 at 01:45:37 PM EST

Cool indeed! (4.00 / 2)

So all those SF novels we read with hand-waving technologies may come true. Wake me up when somebody's built a demonstrator. (perhaps I will need cryonics in order to sleep that long?)

_{It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue
- Queen Elizabeth II}

by eurogreen on Wed Jan 16th, 2013 at 03:39:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: LQD: Radical Abundance - Cold Fusion Time (none / 1)

Over thirty years ago, after reading some of Hawking's work and science reporting around and about it in Science News, it seemed to me that it might be possible to create what I called a 'black hole drive'. This would consist of two microscopic black holes arranged along an axis and modulated such that gravitrons appeared at the outer event horizon of one black hole and anti-gravitrons at the outer event horizon of the other. The gravitrons and anti-gravitrons produced at the inner horizons (that faced each other) would mutually annihilate. It seemed that this might produce an acceleration for the entire system. My thought was that this might serve as the 'science' behind a science fiction novel - that I never wrote. The optical black holes described in the paper cited above seem possibly suitable - at least for a science fiction novel.

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."

by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Sun Jan 20th, 2013 at 12:29:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: LQD: Radical Abundance (4.00 / 2)

For the Bonk story I created LBH technology (Localized Black Holes), with a 2 micron event horizon. The supposed inventor, Dr Hans Dröppeldorf, died in 1968 during early testing - sucked into the event horizon. His famous last words before the accident were "This is going to make me a star."

You can't be me, I'm taken

by Sven Triloqvist on Sun Jan 20th, 2013 at 04:12:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

LQD: Radical Abundance - Cold Fusion Time | 66 comments (66 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)

Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]

LQD: Radical Abundance - Cold Fusion Time

Top Diaries

Ireland 2023 Rugby World Cup Squad selected

Integrating Ukraine Into NATO Family

Leinster's demise and Munster's hope

Southern Irish disinterest in Northern Ireland affairs

The end is Nigh?

Joe Biden. America's Interventionist Hero

Recent Diaries

NATO Stoltenberg Should Resign

NATO Posing the What If Question

Bi-Partisan Effort to Undermine Democracy

June 2023

Ireland 2023 Rugby World Cup Squad selected

Integrating Ukraine Into NATO Family

Southern Irish disinterest in Northern Ireland affairs

Incident Ukrainian War Display Gets Int'l Attention

German Climate Activists Group Outlawed

Leinster's demise and Munster's hope

Joe Biden. America's Interventionist Hero

Targeted Assassinations: a Bankrupt Strategy

The end is Nigh?

Hijacking Peace by Zelensky for War Escalation

UA Drone Attack On Moscow

May 2023

U.S. Provoked Conflict In Europe

U.S. Will Be Ousted From Middle-East

Settler Extremism Blessed by Jerusalem Leaders