Cold Fusion

[ubicaritas]

I've been curious about fusion recently and watched some youtube videos about plasma reactors that are being tested. They use huge amounts of power to create plasma and so far aren't ready for prime time as they don't produce enough energy to make them viable.

Out of curiosity I looked up Cold Fusion on youtube and I found a cheesy documentary with Jimmy Doohan narrating. But it does have interviews with actual scientists.

I also found this short piece from 60 Minutes:

It seems to me that two chemists in 1989 may have discovered an interesting phenomenon but they stepped on the toes of physicists, so maybe Cold Fusion is the victim of science politics?

 

[JackRT]

I've been curious about fusion recently and watched some youtube videos about plasma reactors that are being tested. They use huge amounts of power to create plasma and so far aren't ready for prime time as they don't produce enough energy to make them viable.

Out of curiosity I looked up Cold Fusion on youtube and I found a cheesy documentary with Jimmy Doohan narrating. But it does have interviews with actual scientists.

I also found this short piece from 60 Minutes:

It seems to me that two chemists in 1989 may have discovered an interesting phenomenon but they stepped on the toes of physicists, so maybe Cold Fusion is the victim of science politics?

No, the problem was that Fleischman and Pons went public before their research was peer reviewed and published. Scientists at the highest levels including AECL (Atomic Energy of Canada) tried to duplicate the results but could not. Eventually it was discovered that their results were in error.

 

[HitchSlap]

but they stepped on the toes of physicists, so maybe Cold Fusion is the victim of science politics?

Yeah, that’s it. Go with that.

 

[ubicaritas]

No, the problem was that Fleischman and Pons went public before their research was peer reviewed and published. Scientists at the highest levels including AECL (Atomic Energy of Canada) tried to duplicate the results but could not. Eventually it was discovered that their results were in error.

Did you watch the 60 Minutes clip? They hired an independent scientist to go with them to Israel to look at a research project and he ended up confirming their research data as valid.

In the 60 Minutes interview, Fleischman admitted that he was pressured by the University of Utah to go public, because they wanted the publicity. In retrospect, he says it was a mistake.

 

[Kevin Snow]

The real future of this technology is the ITER. It is an international effort to build the first fusion reactor in around 2050 I believe. Based on the smaller JET fusion reactor in the UK.

Basically through JET the world believes that they are able to accomplish fusion with 100% certainty so long as it's bigger. Supposedly this is to power the entire world's energy and is believed to take us into the next age of mankind.

But I think we might have a third world war before it gets completed. But maybe not.

 

[JackRT]

Practical fusion power would solve a great many of our world's problems and perhaps even usher in a new "golden age". It could literally take us to the stars.

 

[sfs]

Did you watch the 60 Minutes clip? They hired an independent scientist to go with them to Israel to look at a research project and he ended up confirming their research data as valid.

Looking at a research project cannot tell you whether the experiment was performed as described. Only replicating the experiment accomplishes that. That's where all of the cold fusion claims have failed. Note also that the 60 Minutes piece was 9 years ago. A great new energy source was being demonstrated, and no one has followed it up in that time? That doesn't pass the smell test.

In a word: no.

 

[timewerx]

What I don't like about fusion technology is that it is still expensive. The technology involved is expensive. We may have abundant energy with it but the expense is still going to give the poor a hard time. Same thing with expensive solar energy.

I've got a better idea than fusion.

My concept simply takes ambient heat energy from matter (gas or water or solids). The matter ends up colder than ambient temperature.

It uses principles of quantum mechanics to achieve "negative entropy" and using my unique concept to do it at a large scale.

https://phys.org/news/2016-10-quantum-violate-law-thermodynamics.html

It only takes heat from matter like air and by product is simply chilled air.... It is absolutely non-polluting and has the potential to reverse global warming and cause global cooling instead.... The technology would also enable sustained exploration of planet Venus surface since ironically, it is the only cooling method that is fully sustainable and can be fully self-contained in a furnace-hot environment. With the cooling system itself providing the main source of energy.

Eventually, this technology can be used to actively reduce planet Venus surface temperature to pave the way for permanent manned settlement.

 

[ubicaritas]

Looking at a research project cannot tell you whether the experiment was performed as described. Only replicating the experiment accomplishes that. That's where all of the cold fusion claims have failed. Note also that the 60 Minutes piece was 9 years ago. A great new energy source was being demonstrated, and no one has followed it up in that time? That doesn't pass the smell test.

In a word: no.

According to Wikipedia, as of 2016, the US military apparently still has at least a minimal level of interest in it. The American Chemical Society also doesn't have a ban on discussion of cold fusion at symposiums.

 

[Halbhh]

What I don't like about fusion technology is that it is still expensive. The technology involved is expensive. We may have abundant energy with it but the expense is still going to give the poor a hard time. Same thing with expensive solar energy.

I've got a better idea than fusion.

My concept simply takes ambient heat energy from matter (gas or water or solids). The matter ends up colder than ambient temperature.

It uses principles of quantum mechanics to achieve "negative entropy" and using my unique concept to do it at a large scale.

https://phys.org/news/2016-10-quantum-violate-law-thermodynamics.html

It only takes heat from matter like air and by product is simply chilled air.... It is absolutely non-polluting and has the potential to reverse global warming and cause global cooling instead.... The technology would also enable sustained exploration of planet Venus surface since ironically, it is the only cooling method that is fully sustainable and can be fully self-contained in a furnace-hot environment. With the cooling system itself providing the main source of energy.

Eventually, this technology can be used to actively reduce planet Venus surface temperature to pave the way for permanent manned settlement.

Reading the nice phys.org link you have explains why this can't work as an energy source. But cooling Venus could be done possibly if there is a way to perhaps (chemically or biologically?) convert the greenhouse CO2 into other carbon based material.

 

[ubicaritas]

Given the threat to the environment posed by conventional power sources and the political problems associated with nuclear energy, just about any theory of exotic energy sources is worth at least some minimal level of interest, however improbable it seems.

 

[Halbhh]

According to Wikipedia, as of 2016, the US military apparently still has at least a minimal level of interest in it. The American Chemical Society also doesn't have a ban on discussion of cold fusion at symposiums.

From what I've read and understand, it seems to me really unlikely cold fusion is possible. I think nuclei repel powerfully until mashed together. It takes powerful energy to drive the nucleus past that repulsion like conditions in the interior of a star or powerful Tokamak.

 

[ubicaritas]

From what I've read and understand, it seems to me really unlikely cold fusion is possible. I think nuclei repel powerfully until mashed together. It takes powerful energy to drive the nucleus past that repulsion like conditions in the interior of a star or powerful Tokamak.

There are verified ways to have fusion at low temperatures, for instance muon-catalyzed fusion, which isn't controversial.

I think cold fusion is a possibility of course but it might require changing our current understanding of physics. Given that we do not fully understand all the fundamental forces of nature, I don't see cold fusion as being in the realm of impossibility.

The lack of ability to make a patent for a cold fusion device in the US no doubt does hurt research interest and also respectability. The US Patent Office dogmatically insists it's an impossibility, similar to perpetual motion, therefore it won't recognize any patents dealing with cold fusion.

 

[Halbhh]

There are verified ways to have fusion at low temperatures, for instance muon-catalyzed fusion, which isn't controversial.

I think cold fusion is a possibility of course but it might require changing our current understanding of physics. Given that we do not fully understand all the fundamental forces of nature, I don't see cold fusion as being in the realm of impossibility.

The lack of ability to make a patent for a cold fusion device in the US no doubt does hurt research interest and also respectability. The US Patent Office dogmatically insists it's an impossibility, similar to perpetual motion, therefore it won't recognize any patents dealing with cold fusion.

Sorry, I meant "cold fusion" on large enough scale to use as a power source.

This should help:
Current techniques for creating large numbers of muons require far more energy than would be produced by the resulting catalyzed nuclear fusion reactions.
.... To create useful room-temperature muon-catalyzed fusion, reactors would need a cheaper, more efficient muon source and/or a way for each individual muon to catalyze many more fusion reactions. (More detail here
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muon-catalyzed_fusion

 

[Tanj]

The lack of ability to make a patent for a cold fusion device in the US no doubt does hurt research interest and also respectability. The US Patent Office dogmatically insists it's an impossibility, similar to perpetual motion, therefore it won't recognize any patents dealing with cold fusion.

What??? You got evidence to back that up?

 

[ubicaritas]

Apparently the idea of using a palladium cathode to catalyze a deuterium fusion reaction using heavy water goes back to the early 20th century. Pons and Fleischmen did not come up with the idea, they were probably trying to mess around with earlier research to see if they could get it to work.

 

[ubicaritas]

What??? You got evidence to back that up?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_fusion#Patents

The source was taken from the Washington Post article:
Weinberger, Sharon (21 November 2004), "Warming Up to Cold Fusion", Washington Post

 

[timewerx]

Reading the nice phys.org link you have explains why this can't work as an energy source.

I agree, they said it can't be done in much larger scales we people work with. It will only work at nanoscale, at least...

What the article missed is that a nanoscale device designed for harnessing ambient (room temperature) random kinetic energy of gas molecules can be replicated in trillions with the right technology. At such numbers and closely together, it would certainly start having strong effect at scales we work at.

But my concept does not work with nanotechnology. I figured out a cheap, rugged, and low tech means to achieve the same outcome. So that the technology is easily accessible to everyone, especially to the poor.

But cooling Venus could be done possibly if there is a way to perhaps (chemically or biologically?) convert the greenhouse CO2 into other carbon based material.

Cooling Venus within a practical time frame would require both bio/chemical processes on the atmosphere and active cooling on the surface.

The only practical way to actively cool Venus' surface is by "reverse entropy". The ambient heat converted into energy, and the excess energy beamed off into space or to an orbiting spacecraft in Venus.

 

[Herman Hedning]

But my concept does not work with nanotechnology. I figured out a cheap, rugged, and low tech means to achieve the same outcome. So that the technology is easily accessible to everyone, especially to the poor.

That's awesome, timewerx! Will we see practical applications of this fantastic technology any time soon?

 

[Radagast]

Did you watch the 60 Minutes clip?

60 Minutes are science experts now?

Cold Fusion is fake. It doesn't work, in spite of thousands of people trying to make it work. It never did work.