Cold fusion - times up
Chris
Cold Fusion
The theory of cold fusion is that when hydrogen is adsorbed into palladium
metal the hydrogen atoms get mixed with the electron "gas" in the metal so
that the protons are able to pack close together so that meson tunnelling
occurred. This makes a proton-proton atom (it is at a lower energy level
than two separated protons) which then emits a positron to form deuterium
which sits at a lower energy level level than the two hydrogen nuclei it
came from.
The deuterons fuse in a similar way to form helium at a lower energy again.
The positrons emitted combine with electrons emitting two gamma photons at
the annihilation frequency the recoil of the nuclei formed make the reaction
hot and some gamma photons escape.
If you put hydrogen in a tube with palladium filament suspended inside after
a few days the filament glows red hot and after a while goes white hot and
makes a very good lamp.
If I recall, I did this experiment at a government lab, somewhere in England
in about 1969. I was severely punished for my invention and put on routine
test work.
They said my invention was "strategic" and I should say nothing for thirty
years.
Times up!
Chris.
Al.R...@gmail.com
Can you be more concrete about time and location. I remember a similar
experiment being done, according legend, in pre-war Copenhagen or
perhaps in Sweden but near copenhagen.
Cary Jamison
> Cold Fusion
> The theory of cold fusion is that when hydrogen is adsorbed into
There is no single theory of cold fusion, since the various parties that
claim to be able to reproduce it all do so with different setups and
results.
[snip rest of Chris's usual delusions]
Howard B. Evans, Jr.
I assume that as more hydrogen is absorbed in the palladium wire over a
period of time (days? weeks? months? years?) the "cold fusion" reaction rate
increases to the point that the wire eventually vaporizes, or at the very
least sublimes onto the wall of the containing glass tube, eventually
extinguishing the lamp. Thus we have a guaranteed market for replacement
lamps.
Edison ran into a similar "problem" with carbon sublimation in his original
lamps causing them to darken. He accidentally discovered the "Edison Effect"
while trying to eliminate this "problem,." not realizing it was a necessary
feature for the economic production of lamps. Edison mistakenly thought he
was in the business of producing and selling electricity, that lamps and
motors and heaters were just a means to that end. He did not realize that
Tesla and Westinghouse had a better plan.
Fast-forward now almost a hundred years: imagine vast arrays of
palladium-wire "cold fusion" lamps, surrounded by cylinders of Ovshinsky
flexible photovoltaic cells, whose outputs feed into a massive high-voltage
superconducting DC network covering the planet. Just like Edison intended,
except he didn't know squat about the technology required. An entire army of
workers would be employed world-wide to change out "darkened" lamps on a
continuous basis to maintain high power output. Factories would hum day and
night producing the lamps! There would be a chicken in every pot and an
electric car in every garage!
Or, alternatively, individuals could purchase these lamps for home use,
uncovering them at night for illumination, and then slipping on the
Ovshinsky photovoltaic wrapper during the day to produce power. If an
individual purchased enough lamps, the excess power could be fed to an
inverter and thence into the existing AC grid, replacing scores of windmills
and roof-mounted photovoltaic collectors.
Too bad about your luck, Chris. I really enjoy visiting your web site:
Please visit mine: http://www.hebe.net
Howard
"Chris" <no...@noserver.com> wrote in message
news:P4CEi.69767$xp6....@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
WLAD
of the nuclear phenomena. However we dont have it.
In the Introduction of my book QUANTUM RING THEORY, it is written in the
page 4:
...................................................
“Perhaps one would like to say that the foundations for cold fusion are
the same of that proposed in Quantum Mechanics. Indeed, in Jan-2004 the
cold fusion researcher Dr. Dimitriy Afonichev sent me an e-mail where he
said the following:
‘I think that occurrence of cold fusion can be explained on the basis of
the existing theories’.
Truthfully his words transmit not merely a personal opinion, because
actually several theorists those try to explain the cold fusion occurrence
share his viewpoint. However such opinion is very intriguing, since the own
academic community is agreeing that the existing theories in the branch of
Nuclear Physics are unable to explain even the ordinary nuclear
properties, as confessed by Eisberg and Resnick in their book Quantum
Physics, where they say in the first page of the Chapter 15:
‘Though we dispose nowadays of a sufficient complete assembly of
information about the nuclear forces, we realize that they are too much
complexes, not having been possible up to now to use this acknowledge for
building an extensive theory of the nuclei. In other words, we cannot
explain the whole properties of nuclei in function of the properties of
the nuclear forces that actuate on their protons and neutrons’.
So, as the existing theories are unable to explain the nuclear properties
responsible for the hot fusion occurrence (which occurs according to the
principles of Quantum Mechanics), it's hard to believe that such existing
theories could explain nuclear properties that would be responsible for
the occurrence of some so much complex as it is the cold fusion (which
occurs by infringing the principles of QM). “
...................................................
For a layman to understand easily that said in the Introduction of my
book, take for instance the interaction between two neutrons.
Two neutrons have no repulsion. But in a short distance, they are
attracted by the strong force. So, after interacting within a nucleus,
two neutrons would have to form the 0n2, and would never separate
anymore.
But 0n2 does not exist in nature. Heisenberg tried to explain it with the
introduciton of the concept of Isospin. Unfortunatelly the isospin is an
abstract mathematical concept.
Two neutrons tied strongly by the strong force cannot be separated by an
abstract concept, because an abstract concept cannot produce a FORCE
capable to win the force of attraction by the strong force.
Only a FORCE of repulsion can win the force of attraction.
A NEW NUCLEAR MODEL (that shows what is the force of repulsion between two
neutrons in short distances) is proposed in my book Quantum Ring theory.
In 2002 the Infinite Energy magazine has published my paper “What is
Missing in Les Case’s Catalytc Fusion” , in which I have proposed some
improvements to be addopted, in order to avoid the missing of
replicability.
In 2003 in the ICCF-10 Lets and Cravens exhibited their experiment, in
which they have adopted the suggestions of mine in my paper published in
2002 by IE.
In my book I propose an explanation for Lets-Cravens experiment, showed in
paper entitled “Lets-Cravens Experiment and the Accordion-Effect”
The Accordion-Effect is a nuclear property unknown by nuclear theorists,
and it is responsible for the resonance that takes place between a nucleus
(for instance Pd) and the oscillation of deuterons due to zero-point
energy.
After reading some of my papers, the late Dr. Eugene Mallove said in 2004:
"Guglinski has interesting and intriguing ideas".
That's why he suggested to put my papers on a book form, and to publish
it.
However, Dr. Mallove did not read my papers concerning the new nuclear
model.
Joe Strout
<5ac7b3fb301bd609...@localhost.talkaboutscience.com>,
"WLAD" <wla...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Before to understand cold fusion, we neeed to have a complete understanding
> of the nuclear phenomena.
Or, perhaps, of the social and psychological phenomena.
--
"Polywell" fusion -- an approach to nuclear fusion that might actually work.
Learn more and discuss via: <http://www.strout.net/info/science/polywell/>
sb...@aol.com
> information about the nuclear forces, we realize that they are too much
> complexes, not having been possible up to now to use this acknowledge for
> building an extensive theory of the nuclei. In other words, we cannot
> explain the whole properties of nuclei in function of the properties of
> the nuclear forces that actuate on their protons and neutrons'.
I come out of retirement to say that no one whose native language is
English would have written these two sentences. I certainly didn't. It
must be that they are a very poor translation back into English of two
sentences in one of the translated versions of my book Quantum
Physics. They should not have been put in quotes.
This is what I wrote (in 1973):
'Although a fairly complete knowledge of nuclear forces has recently
become
available, they turn out to be complicated enough that it has not yet
been possible
to use this knowledge to construct a comprehensive theory of nuclei.
That is, we
cannot explain all the properties of nuclei in terms of the properties
of the nuclear
forces acting between their protons and neutrons.'
Robert Eisberg
WLAD
Nobel Laureate in Physics
Dear Prof.
The nuclear chemist Dr. Mitch Andre Garcia, administrator of a chemistry
forum in the internet, tried to prove that cold fusion is theoretically
impossible.
I showed him that cold fusion is possible when we adopt a new model of
neutron composed by a proton and electron, in which the electron loses its
zitterbewegung when it is captured by the proton.
The discussion is here:
http://www.chemicalforums.com/index.php?topic=17140.0
Dr. Mitch did not reply.
So, we have to conclude that he changed his opinion about what he said
earlier:
"In conclusion, giving coverage to this fringe science only helps
perpetuate the false belief that there exists any viability in cold
fusion. "
Regards
WLADIMIR GUGLINSKI
stefa...@yahoo.com
A nice passage; my favorite part is: ">so that meson tunnelling
occurred."
Bill Snyder
>The nuclear chemist Dr. Mitch Andre Garcia, administrator of a chemistry
>forum in the internet, tried to prove that cold fusion is theoretically
>impossible.
>
>I showed him that cold fusion is possible when we adopt a new model of
>neutron composed by a proton and electron, in which the electron loses its
>zitterbewegung when it is captured by the proton.
>
>The discussion is here:
>http://www.chemicalforums.com/index.php?topic=17140.0
>
>
>Dr. Mitch did not reply.
>So, we have to conclude that he changed his opinion about what he said
>earlier:
>"In conclusion, giving coverage to this fringe science only helps
>perpetuate the false belief that there exists any viability in cold
>fusion. "
Oh, well, in theory we *could* conclude that he just got tired of
arguing with a nutcase. But obviously that would be much more
far-fetched than a nonsensical explanation of an imaginary phenomenon.
--
Bill Snyder [This space unintentionally left blank.]