Merged Cold Fusion Claims

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm going to move from theoretical to practical:

If any of these cold fusion schemes worked as claimed, it shouldn't be that hard to put the thing inside a pressure vessel, boil some water, and produce energy, at least on a demonstration level. If you can do this, and especially if you can get it independently verified that it works with no fakery (hidden batteries or whatever), the investors will beat a path to your door while the physicists try to figure out why it works. How come nobody has done this?

ETA: Anybody who cites conspiracies by the government or Big Oil will be taken just as seriously as they deserve, i.e. not at all, unless you can produce evidence of said conspiracy.
 
Last edited:
Horatius said:
Oi!





....uhmmmmmmmmm......wouldn't "an electron proton pair" just be a hydrogen atom? :confused::covereyes
Click to expand...

And I'd be curious as to what kind of masks protons would wear. :)

The claims of "mini-atoms" sound familiar. Sounds like they're trying to pull that "hydrino" crap again.
 
Last edited:
mike3 said:
And I'd be curious as to what kind of masks protons would wear. :)
Click to expand...


Looking at their diagrams, it looks like the protons have little feet drawn on them.....



The claims of "mini-atoms" sound familiar. Sounds like they're trying to pull that "hydrino" crap again.
Click to expand...



I thought that as well. The sad part is, they're actually pretty close to the explanation of how muon-catalysed fusion works, but they don't understand why that won't work with electrons.
 
ScarA said:
Rossi latest release is on his journal now.
Click to expand...

Bear in mind that Rossi does not have a journal, he has a blog. Putting the word "journal" in his website title does not make it so.

I was wondering could somebody explain how this relates to known theory?
Click to expand...

It doesn't. As with all the rest of the nonsense from these guys, it's just pure fantasy.
 
Cuddles said:
Bear in mind that Rossi does not have a journal, he has a blog. Putting the word "journal" in his website title does not make it so.

I understand this but does no harm in remembering the fact that its just blog.


Apparently there's been another test now of a new smaller unit reported about in nyTechnik.

Here's the article.

Xxx.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3144827.ece

And the full report

Xxx.nyteknik.se/incoming/article3144960.ece/BINARY/Download+the+report+by+Kullander+and+Essén+%28pdf%29.

I'll let the guys with the knowledge dissect what's been reported.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Interesting article.

The isotopic analysis through ICP-MS doesn’t show any deviation from the natural isotopic composition of nickel and copper.
Click to expand...

Very "coincidental" that this process would just happen to create exactly the same isotope ratios of copper as observed in nature. What are the odds? :rolleyes:

As I said earlier in this thread, we've definitely eliminated "honest but mistaken researchers" from the list of possibilities.
 
McFate said:
Very "coincidental" that this process would just happen to create exactly the same isotope ratios of copper as observed in nature. What are the odds? :rolleyes:

As I said earlier in this thread, we've definitely eliminated "honest but mistaken researchers" from the list of possibilities.
Click to expand...

Yep. The only way for the "used" catalyst to get a 2:1 mixture of isotopically-natural nickel and copper is if Rossi sat down with a metallurgist and actually mixed the things together. And lied about it. This is different than the heat measurement, where it *is* possible to be merely incompetent.
 
pedrone said:
Cold fusion is impossible, according to the foundations of Quantum Mechanics.

But there is a lot of cold fusion researchers worldwide.

How does explain that so many people try to get something that everybody knows to be impossible, along more than 20 years ?
Click to expand...

The fact that they're wrong.


You're welcome.
 
pedrone said:
Cold fusion is impossible, according to the foundations of Quantum Mechanics.

But there is a lot of cold fusion researchers worldwide.

How does explain that so many people try to get something that everybody knows to be impossible, along more than 20 years ?

What do they want prove ?

Why do they spend their time and money with cold fusion ?

Are they conspirators ?

If yes, however what is the aim of the conspiracy ?
Click to expand...


"Do or do not. There is no try."
 
Horatius said:
Looking at their diagrams, it looks like the protons have little feet drawn on them.....


I thought that as well. The sad part is, they're actually pretty close to the explanation of how muon-catalysed fusion works, but they don't understand why that won't work with electrons.
Click to expand...

Some people have explored electron catalyzed fusion. Mostly in connection with cold fusion.
 
John Jones said:
I'm not a mod, but I requested these threads be merged. They were springing-up like mushrooms, and they have one central theme - cold fusion.

Maybe you could request a separate forum for cold fusion threads. That way you could start a new thread for each article about cold fusion you ever read.
Click to expand...
Sorry, but this makes no sense. Just because 3 threads happen to have something in common does not mean it makes sense to merge them. These are three completely different topics and I'm afraid the threads are now irreparably confused.

I was interested in seeing comments from people who had previously showed insight regarding the claims of mr Rossi, but understandably nobody bothers with this extremely noisy and confused thread.

I know nothing about the other examples merged with this thread, and no interest either. I'm interested in the Rossi case because it has generated some mainstream interest, including an in my opinion rather unsatisfactory investigation by the chairman of the Swedish skeptics' association (he should have brought a master conjurer.. or at least an experimental physicist!).
 
"We believe it is possible to explain the process with known laws of nature,” said Hanno Essén, associate professor of theoretical physics and a lecturer at the Swedish Royal Institute of Technology and chairman of the Swedish Skeptics Society."

Essén and Professor Emeritus at Uppsala University Sven Kullander, also chairman of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences’ Energy Committee, both participated on 29 March as observers at a new trial in Bologna of the so-called ‘energy catalyzer’, which could be based on cold fusion, or LENR, Low Energy Nuclear Reaction.

In a detailed report, they write:

“Any chemical process should be ruled out for producing 25 kWh from whatever is in a 50 cubic centimeter container. The only alternative explanation is that there is some kind of a nuclear process that gives rise to the measured energy production.”

From the "Swedish physicists on the E-cat:
“It’s a nuclear reaction” article on NY Teknik
 
Horatius said:
Oi!





....uhmmmmmmmmm......wouldn't "an electron proton pair" just be a hydrogen atom? :confused::covereyes
Click to expand...
Well, before the discovery of the neutron physics did assume a bound proton/electron pair with similar properties.
 
Cuddles said:
Bear in mind that Rossi does not have a journal, he has a blog. Putting the word "journal" in his website title does not make it so.
Click to expand...
Whose "advisers" still include a chemist who's repudiated any connection with them and a dead psychologist..................:rolleyes:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom