Merged Cold Fusion Claims

[Dancing David]

What a hell cold fusion can be of interest for computational physics?

And why a hell a cold fusion researcher would send a cold fusion paper to a computational physics journal?????????



Coming frrom a guy who thinks that a cold fusion researcher would send a paper to a computational physics journal, I doubt if somebody can take seriously the things you say.

 

[McFate]

Originally Posted by pedrone
Why the nucleos of Earth is so active after billion years of existence ?

Then I suppose the radiactivity was already measured by those researchers who penetrate into the mouth of the volcanos in activity.

The Earth's crust is a decent insulator. Heat does not have to be generated very rapidly in order for the interior of the Earth to remain very hot.

A quick back-of-the-envelope calculation:

• The heat escaping the Earth's crust is about 4 x 10^13 W
• The heat generated by radioactive decay in granite is about 5 x 10^-6 W/m^3
• The volume of the Earth is about 10^21 m^3

If the entire Earth had a composition like a typical granite, it would generate about 5 x 10^15 W (the product of the second and third numbers above) which is 100 times more than required to explain its current temperature and heat output.

Obviously, the Earth doesn't have that composition, and the calculation doesn't really tell us anything... other than the fact that you don't need hazardous levels of radiation, inside a reasonably well-insulated 10^21 m^3 planet, to melt rock. The radiation that we observe in rocks exposed at the surface is much more than enough to cover it.

For your proposed example we're talking about 5 microwatts per cubic meter, as opposed to 15 megawatts per cubic meter (assuming a 1-liter reactor as reported generating 15kW) for cold fusion. But what's 12.5 orders of magnitude among friends?

 

[pedrone]

So unless you are claiming there are no important Computational Physics journals (I'd beg to differ), you should be asking yourself that question, not me.

They can be important for computational physics.

They are not important for the advance of Theoretical Physics neither for the devopment of technology (the technology not regarding to computational physics).

Sorry if you dont understand what is important for the advancement of Theoretical Physics.

 

[dafydd]

They can be important for computational physics.

They are not important for the advance of Theoretical Physics neither for the devopment of technology (the technology not regarding to computational physics).

Sorry if you dont understand what is important for the advancement of Theoretical Physics.

What is important?

 

[Tubbythin]

They can be important for computational physics.

Agree.

They are not important for the advance of Theoretical Physics neither for the devopment of technology

Disagree.

(the technology not regarding to computational physics).

Pardon?

Sorry if you dont understand what is important for the advancement of Theoretical Physics.

What are you talking about? You made the claim:

Besides, as cold fusion can revolutionize not only the Theoretical Physics, but also the supply of energy to humankind, only a stupid referee would be unable to understand that such paper is of the interest of any important journal of Physics.

I showed that that statement was nonsense and now you are trying to make out that it is me who has no idea what they are talking about. You are fooling nobody.

 

[pedrone]

Tubbythin,
OK, everybody did understand you.

It's an old strategy to deviate the subject of the discussion by playing game with the words.

Go to apply such strategy of yours in discussions with childrens.
I dont have time to play game with words

 

[Tubbythin]

Tubbythin,
OK, everybody did understand you.

It's an old strategy to deviate the subject of the discussion by playing game with the words.

Go to apply such strategy of yours in discussions with childrens.
I dont have time to play game with words

I wasn't playing games. What I was saying can be summarised very succinctly: "you were wrong".

 

[Dancing David]

They can be important for computational physics.

They are not important for the advance of Theoretical Physics neither for the devopment of technology (the technology not regarding to computational physics).

Sorry if you dont understand what is important for the advancement of Theoretical Physics.

So what was Gell_Mann doing when he proposed the eight fold path? Lots of computation! Without a computer.

 

[Dancing David]

Tubbythin,
OK, everybody did understand you.

It's an old strategy to deviate the subject of the discussion by playing game with the words.

Go to apply such strategy of yours in discussions with childrens.
I dont have time to play game with words

You have yet to demonstrate that you understand the words.

 

[pedrone]

So, instead of discussing cold fusion, now they are playing games with words
Good goal

 

[Horatius]

So, instead of discussing cold fusion, now they are playing games with words
Good goal

Hey, I tried to discuss cold fusion, but like most other woosters, you'd rather ignore that to play with the people who let you quibble about words.

 

[Andy_Ross]

An old tactic, ignore the substantive stuff and argue with the fluff.

What's needed is something like BAUTs Rule 13

 

[John Jones]

An old tactic, ignore the substantive stuff and argue with the fluff.

What's needed is something like BAUTs Rule 13

Quote or link? I'm a BAUT expatriate and couldn't find it in a couple of google searches.

If it's what I think it is, I agree completely.

 

[Emet]

Quote or link? I'm a BAUT expatriate and couldn't find it in a couple of google searches.

If it's what I think it is, I agree completely.

13. Alternative Concepts and Conspiracy Theories

If you have some idea which goes against commonly-held astronomical theory, or think UFOs are among us, then you are welcome to argue it here. Before you do, though READ THIS THREAD FIRST. This is very important. Then, if you still want to post your idea, you will do so politely, you will not call people names, and you will defend your arguments. Direct questions must be answered in a timely manner.

People will vigorously challenge your arguments; that's what science and scientists do. If you cannot handle a frank and critical examination of your theory, then maybe you need to rethink your theory, too. Remember: you came here. It's our job to question new theories. Those that are strong will survive, and may become part of mainstream science. All such discussions must be kept polite and respectful, by all parties.

Additionally, keep promotion of your theories and ideas to only those Against the Mainstream or Conspiracy Theory threads which discuss them. Hijacking other discussions to draw attention to your ideas will not be allowed. ATM threads are limited to a maximum of 30 days.

If it appears that you are using circular reasoning, depending on long-debunked arguments, or breaking any of these other rules, you will receive one warning, and if that warning goes unheeded, you will be banned.

As with the other sections of the forum, we ask you to keep your topics about space and astronomy. We will close down any thread which doesn't have anything to do with space and astronomy immediately.

http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php/32864-**-Rules-For-Posting-To-This-Board-**

 

[Horatius]

An old tactic, ignore the substantive stuff and argue with the fluff.

What's needed is something like BAUTs Rule 13

Yeah, I've seen it before many times. I just really enjoy pointing it out

 

[Dancing David]

An old tactic, ignore the substantive stuff and argue with the fluff.

What's needed is something like BAUTs Rule 13

But then these thread would not teach me so much. Without a certain troll I would not learn so much about modern evolutionary theory , or another and modern plasma physics... etc...

 

[ScarA]

Rossi latest release is on his journal now. I was wondering could somebody explain how this relates to known theory? Interested in following this but i don't understand the science not my field.

Sorry but I can't post the link.

 

[Emet]

Rossi latest release is on his journal now. I was wondering could somebody explain how this relates to known theory? Interested in following this but i don't understand the science not my field.

Sorry but I can't post the link.

Tip: Post the link without the http:// and substitute xxx for www if needed.

 

[ScarA]

Xxx.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=473#comments

Link.

 

[ben m]

Xxx.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=473#comments

Link.

Oy. This sounds like it was written by someone whose only knowledge of nickel isotopes comes from Simple English Wikipedia.

If the proposed model is correct ... well, you have to be transmuting mostly the 58Ni (there's not enough of the other isotopes to add up to 30%). 58Ni absorbing a proton would become 59Cu (a really violently high-energy beta emitter---which they're not detecting) and decay to radioactive 59Ni, which will emit copious x-rays while turning to 59Co over 70,000 years. A 50 gram lump of 59Ni would be something like ten curies.

None of this is actually happening.

The idea of these neutron "chains"---"first you capture to 59Ni, then to 60Ni, then to 61Ni ..." is complete nonsense. (But I've seen it from cold-fusionites before, most notably the guy---I forget who---who proposed the fusion process 4He + p --> 5He, followed by 5He + p --> 6He, and never bothered to look up whether 5He actually exists. (It doesn't; a 3rd neutron cannot stick to 4He at all.)

You have to imagine that (if cold fusion were possible) that there'd be some cross section for 58Ni + p --> 59Cu, and some other cross section for 59Ni + p --> 60Cu, and some other cross section for 61Ni + p --> 63Cu, etc. (And don't forget 63Cu + p --> 64Zn.) Try to invent a list of these cross sections such that Rossi's "chain"---30% of the Ni disappears and turns into Cu---is a possible outcome. You can do it, but it practically requires a conspiracy theory.