More Than Junk Science
April 22, 2009 8:03 AM
When first presented in 1989 cold fusion was quickly dismissed as junk science. But, as Scott Pelley reports, there's renewed buzz among scientists that cold fusion could lead to monumental breakthroughs in energy production.
Recent Segments
Scroll Left Scroll Right
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- next
See all 97 CommentsWe also managed to ignore a totally valid theory of light propagation along helical paths not straight lines and this could yet be the missing-link to a successful repeatable cold fusion.
I also propose that prime numbers maybe used in cold fusion technology.
Six months ago I found in chapter THE KEY of the Quran the following prime numbers 7 verses, 29 words, and 139 letters and the sum of their digits (7=7, 2+9=11, 1+3+9=13) also primes and even the sum of the sums 7+11+13=31 is prime too just to confirm their special status.
I then arranged these three numbers (7, 29, 139) from left-to-right (729139) and right-to-left (139297) and also found the new numbers to be primes and digit sums already shown above to be 31, a prime.
So I decided to develop a new numerology system based on prime numbers not log numbers and called it "Primalogy" and calculated the sum of the primalogy values of all the139 letters of THE KEY chapter and ended up with 8317 which is also prime with a digit sum of 19 yet another prime.
WHAT OTHER PROOF DOES MAN NEED TO WAKE UP FROM HIBERNATION?
God willing, 2012 will mark a new start for spiritual awakening and this is also found in the Quran sealed with prime numbers for in chapter THE MERCIFUL there are 31 exact repetitions of a warning from God "What other bounties from your Sustainer do you still not believe?", not only the number of repetitions is prime but the sum of the verse numbers of these repetitions
13+16+18+21+23+25+28+30+32+34+
36+38+40+42+45+47+49+51+53+55+
57+59+61+63+65+67+69+71+73+75+
77 = 1433 a prime too, but not any prime!!! Few days later I realize that we are in the Islamic year 1430 AH (Hijri Calendar), and we are only 3 years away from a a great if not the greatest bounty God will shower upon us in the year 1433AH or 2012AD.
Now ignore that at your peril.
Ali Adams
<prime numbers are God's signature>
'nuff said.
Ken Shoulders, perhaps the greatest experimentalist of our time, equivalent to Rutherford in his day, has discovered and extensively proven the properties of what was first called charge clusters, highly energetic circulating toroids of electrons, moving like smoke rings, but with densities and force enough to disintegrate any matter and cause nuclear fusion when carrying protons. Now called Exotic Vacuum Objects (EVOs), they can exist as fully material or as insubstantial trans-dimensionals, with their centers acting as quantum mechanical black holes / white holes, bringing energy/matter into and out of our reality. They are likely the mechanism of irregularly repeatable cold fusion. They themselves, however, are fairly easily repeatable phenomena by any who choose to try.
But you won't try. Why?
Because you respond to any idea that threatens your brainwashing the same way as the Spanish Inquisitors, you operate on prejudice and condemnation, masquerading as reason.
You listen to political hacks and magicians acting as pseudo-scientists, like Michael Squirmer and Jane's Randi.
Mockery and ridicule are the easiest and most lethal weapons of the manipulative and dishonest, of the pathologically skeptical, who sacrifice the most fundamental purpose of science, which is to know, and betray its most fundamental ideal, which is to abandon preconceived bias in favor of honest observation and testing of phenomena.
To attack, to jeer, so similar to Jerry Falwell's approach to truths such as climate change and evolution, is beneath you, is a waste of your talents and intellect, of your one best chance to make a difference with your robotic life.
A dimension is the most powerful and overwhelming aspect of reality; the difference between Flatland and our 3D universe is just one dimension. There are eight extra dimensions in string theory, and they represent far more than abstractions on paper. But for you and your ilk, there's really nothing special there, just repetitive extensions of endless Wal-Marts. Like addled monkeys in a row, see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil. What dark matter? What dark energy?
As you well know and will not dare to deny, the cores of two of the most successful theories in the history of science, the wave function of QM and the time dilation of special relativity, could not exist without the fundamental use of the imaginary number, i, the square root of negative one, a logical impossibility. Yet it revealed to us that what is impossible is more real than all other mathematics, judging by its overwhelming success in describing reality.
You will argue the pat answer, that i is just a symbology and no more real than three or pi. Yet to say that mathematics has no relation to reality makes string theory utter foolishness, which it is not.
And to say that the square root of negative one is not impossible by the same rules that describe all "ordinary" nature and technology so powerfully is pure hypocrisy, and simply false.
There is more than you know. Lord Kelvin said we knew it all in 1900. Why won't you look? That you know nothing of Shoulders' work does not inspire confidence that you have any clue what you're talking about.
"For decades, physicists have assumed that changing (transmuting) elements always requires high energies."
This is simply false. Spontaneous radioactive decay causes transmutation, and happens all the time at room temperature. And fission of large nuclei is induced by neutrons at very low energies. That's why reactors need moderators.
This doesn't affect your point that _fusion_ at an appreciable rate does require high temperatures, but making a blatant error in the preamble to your explanation does not inspire confidence that you have any idea what you're talking about.
The physical properties of metals have been studied for centuries, and the rigidity of ordinary table spoons is familiar to all. The mechanism of metallic bonding, a kind of collective covalent bond, is well-characterized and consistent in essentially all of the thousands of experimental situations explored.
However, when Uri Geller looks at a spoon in a certain way, the bonds transform into a kind of rubber bonding (Mother nature sometimes pulls weird tricks) and the spoon will bend under the stress of gravity alone. This is sometimes called Geller bonding, and the transformed domains have been named exotic crystalline objects (ECOs). They are real!
Accurate, imaginative, and compelling!
It's true that not everyone has been able to reproduce the effect, but that is probably because of some details that are not the same. For example, recently it's been determined that the eyes must be squinted to at least 90% closed, and in most of the attempts, the experimenters only squinted to 80%.
It's also true that these Geller bonds have not been observed in any other type of experiment, and the theory is not able to make quantitative predictions of any behavior at all. However, there is incontrovertible evidence that something is happening. And if Geller's rubber theory turns out to be right, he is a shoo-in for a Nobel prize.
Accurate, imaginative and compelling.
Shoulder's EVO discoveries are real.
The amended video is at
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4967330n
A Primer for Non-Physicists
Atoms comprise of negatively charged electrons whirling around a relatively small nucleus of neutrons and positively charged protons. Protons have a mass 1836 times the mass of electrons. A neutron is a combination of an electron and a proton with zero net electrostatic charge. An atom?s number of protons and its equal number of electrons determine its type of element. Only when a positive ion (such as a proton or nucleus of a helium atom) penetrates an atom?s nucleus does the atomic nucleus become another element (or another isotope of the same element) or becomes unstable and splits (fissions) into two or more elements.
For decades, physicists have assumed that changing (transmuting) elements always requires high energies. Elaborately expensive machinery was required to accelerate a positively charged particle of less than atomic size to a high enough energy to overcome the electrostatic repulsion of an atom?s nucleus and penetrate its interior.
Cold fusion is only one of several types of physical phenomena which indicate the existence of a mechanism by which elements could be changed to other elements without seemingly requiring very high energies. However, the secret of cold fusion?s excess heat had remained a mystery until September 13, 1996 when Kenneth Shoulders explained how the fracturing of palladium loaded with hydrogen (deuterons) could produce high-density charge clusters and cause nuclear reactions. Based on this evidence and on the pioneering work of Rod Neal and Stan Gleeson, a trio of physicists, Hal Fox, Robert W. Bass, and Shang-Xian Jin, finally deduced a more complete theory of the nature of the mechanism which extends beyond the discovery of cold fusion. The magnitude of their fundamental scientific discovery can best be appreciated by considering that Hal Fox?s Fusion Information Center, Inc., has collected over 3,000 papers on cold fusion since its discovery in 1989 without anyone being able to offer a complete understanding of just how cold fusion works.
What follows is a simplified explanation of their remarkable concept using an analogy of electrons as ping pong balls and protons as bowling balls. Visualize a room with one wall as the positive plate connected to the positive terminal of a battery, and the opposite wall as the negative plate connected to the battery?s negative terminal. Each ping pong ball is negatively charged and when released at the negative wall, electrostatic repulsion/attraction will cause the ping pong ball to fly across the room to the positive wall. Each bowling ball is positively charged and when released at the positive wall, it will roll slowly in the opposite direction across the room to the negative wall.
Both the ping pong ball and the bowling ball have an equal but opposite electrostatic charge. So therefore they both draw the same amount of electrical energy from the battery as they fly or roll from one wall to the opposite wall. But because the ping pong ball is so much lighter than the bowling ball, the ping pong ball will strike the opposite wall at a much greater speed than the bowling ball.
Now assume that 1,000,000 ping pong balls are released as a cluster at the negative wall. (At a high enough density, electrons will forget their mutual electrostatic repulsion and cluster in the same manner as ball lightning. Mother Nature sometimes pulls weird tricks.) Embedded in the ping pong ball cluster are 10 bowling balls. Because there are so many more negatively charged ping pong balls, the positively charged bowling balls are going to stick with the ping pong balls and ignore the attraction of the negative wall and the repulsion of the positive wall. So therefore the bowling balls hitch a free ride along with the ping pong balls. When the bowling balls hit the positive wall along with the ping pong balls at the same speed as the ping pong balls, the bowling balls will hit the positive wall with enormously greater energies than if they had hit the negative wall, rolling slowly alone, in the opposite direction.
In the same manner, protons (and other types of positive ions) in ?low-energy? nuclear reactions are hurled into the nuclei of atoms by their ?piggy-back? ride on high-density electron charge clusters with sufficient energy to split or transmute atoms. This mechanism apparently is the secret of cold fusion?s excess heat, eliminating radioactivity, transmutation of common elements into scarce elements, and powerful new atom smashers small enough for college physics laboratories. If the new theory holds up to scrutiny by other physicists, it might win a Nobel prize in physics!
After 20 years, there is no onus on detractors to explain anomalous CF effects. If the effect is real, the onus is on the adherents to show us the money. Build a self-sustaining device that produces energy from Pd/D, and the world will beat a path to your door.
In any case, before detractors would feel compelled to explain the apparent fact you refer to, they have to be convinced that it is true. That's difficult because the excess heat with D2O has been hard to reproduce. If skeptics are skeptical about the excess heat, then they necessarily have little confidence in the experimenters, and may suspect that they subconsciously compromise the control experiment.
In medicine, where bias is very difficult to eliminate, double-blind tests are de rigueur. Has anyone tried blind tests in CF, similar to the sort of thing that finally closed the book on N-rays? Skeptics could set up 10 or 20 calorimeters, some with D2O, and some with H2O, and then let the believers loose on them, and see if excess heat only comes from D2O. Would they agree to such a thing, or would that be too insulting? Or is it too easy to identify D2O? Just an idea.
Perhaps you can name some examples then, because the 2 examples cited bear very little resemblance to the cold fusion situation.
In Volta's publication on the voltaic pile (Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Vol. 90 (1800), pp. 403-431), he actually describes the electrolyte (brine) and the metals he used (Zn and Ag, among others), so that anyone who followed his description would get the same result, and lo and behold, they did. Every time. It was a highly reproducible experiment. There was an interesting controversy (Trends Neurosci 20 (1997) 443) about the origin of the electricity, first noticed by the twitching of frogs legs about a decade earlier, but unlike your imagined scenario, the controversy had nothing to do with repeatability or reproducibility. The invention followed the sort of path that many discoveries do, and is nothing at all like the CF debacle. There was no one ridiculing the experiments. With the efforts of one or two people over a few years, a useful, energy producing device was developed. And even though Volta did not know that the energy came from chemical reactions between the metals and the electrolyte, the energy production could be easily demonstrated to a school-child, because the device was self-contained, and connected to tungsten wire, it produced heat.
Medical experiments are a little more difficult to control, but Fleming's petri dish observation was also reproducible. The clinical trials, as is their nature, had some problems with consistency, but in spite of that, penicillin went from the petri dish to large scale deployment in the war in a little more than a decade, through the efforts of maybe half a dozen researchers. That doesn't sound like CF, which is still in the petri dish stage after 20 years, and after thousands of people have worked on it (more than 100 of which are believers and still working on it).
New Energy Times has the story:
http://newenergytimes.com/v2/blog/
Steven B. Krivit
Editor, New Energy Times
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4967330n
Steven B. Krivit
Editor, New Energy Times
Please restore this wonderful report-many people deserve to see it and share in the news.
Thank you
Where's the video? I sure hope that your corporate owners didn't take down the video because it was too controversial for your oil and gas sponsors.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- next
See all 97 Comments