Cold Fusion: US Navy makes breakthrough?


by gravenewworld
Tags: breakthrough, cold, fusion, makes, navy
gravenewworld
gravenewworld is offline
#1
Mar24-09, 07:31 PM
P: 1,389
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090324...eenergynuclear


WASHINGTON (AFP) – Researchers at a US Navy laboratory have unveiled what they say is "significant" evidence of cold fusion, a potential energy source that has many skeptics in the scientific community.

The scientists on Monday described what they called the first clear visual evidence that low-energy nuclear reaction (LENR), or cold fusion devices can produce neutrons, subatomic particles that scientists say are indicative of nuclear reactions.



I guess we'll have to wait and see....

Looks like it is being presented at the spring ACS meeting right now.
Phys.Org News Partner Chemistry news on Phys.org
First view of nature-inspired catalyst after ripping hydrogen apart provides insights for better, cheaper fuel cells
Following a protein's travel inside cells is key to improving patient monitoring, drug development
Team helps cancer treatment drugs get past their sticking point
Dr.D
Dr.D is offline
#2
Mar24-09, 09:56 PM
P: 619
Don't hold your breath. USN science is mostly smoke and mirrors. I retired from a Navy lab.
russ_watters
russ_watters is online now
#3
Mar24-09, 11:18 PM
Mentor
P: 22,008
I can't believe the Navy is wasting their money on this!

signerror
signerror is offline
#4
Mar24-09, 11:45 PM
P: 223

Cold Fusion: US Navy makes breakthrough?


The study's results were presented at the annual meeting of the American Chemical Society in Salt Lake City, Utah.
Is this a bad joke?
Ivan Seeking
Ivan Seeking is offline
#5
Mar25-09, 01:19 AM
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
Ivan Seeking's Avatar
P: 12,493
I don't understand why anyone here would even have an opinion about this until we see what they have to offer. A number of groups have been claiming evidence for anomalous results for years. The Navy has been involved in this since the very beginning.
http://meetings.aps.org/Meeting/MAR0...nEventID=28515
berkeman
berkeman is offline
#6
Mar25-09, 01:40 AM
Mentor
berkeman's Avatar
P: 39,708
Quote Quote by Yahoo News
The study's results were presented at the annual meeting of the American Chemical Society in Salt Lake City, Utah.
Past tense? Is there a link to this paper?

Quote Quote by Yahoo News
The city is also the site of an infamous presentation on cold fusion 20 years ago by Martin Fleishmann and Stanley Pons that sent shockwaves across the world.

Despite their claim to cold fusion discovery, the Fleishmann-Pons study soon fell into discredit after other researchers were unable to reproduce the results.

Quote Quote by Yahoo News
Scientists have been working for years to produce cold fusion reactions, a potentially cheap, limitless and environmentally-clean source of energy.
Well, except for all the energetic neutrons...
Borek
Borek is offline
#7
Mar25-09, 03:34 AM
Admin
Borek's Avatar
P: 22,708
Quote Quote by berkeman View Post
Past tense?
I think the conference takes place right now, it ends on March 26th.

Edit - found this link:

http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/1289320

Edit - and this (not that it adds much):

http://www.scientificblogging.com/ne..._if_you_say_so
gravenewworld
gravenewworld is offline
#8
Mar25-09, 08:07 AM
P: 1,389
Quote Quote by signerror View Post
Is this a bad joke?
No joke. These are all the abstracts of the projects being presented at the ACS meeting right now by the scientist mentioned.

Characterization of neutrons emitted during Pd/D co-deposition P. A. Mosier-Boss, pam.boss@navy.mil1, Stanislaw Szpak1, Frank E. Gordon2, and Lawrence Forsley3. (1) Code 71730, SPAWAR System Center Pacific, 53560 Hull St., San Diego, CA 92152, (2) Code 71000, SPAWAR System Center Pacific, 53560 Hull St., San Diego, CA 92152, (3) JWK International Corporation, 7617 Little River Turnpike, Suite 1000, Annandale, VA 22003
Experiments using CR-39 detectors have shown that energetic particles and neutrons are emitted during Pd/D co-deposition. Using 6 micron Mylar between the CR-39 and the cathode, it has been shown that the majority of the tracks formed have energies on the order of 1 MeV. This conclusion was supported by computer analysis of the pits using the ‘Track_Test' program developed by Nikezic and Yu. In this communication, additional analysis of the chips will be discussed. In particular, it will be shown that the size distribution of the neutron-generated tracks on the back side of the CR-39 detectors indicate that DD and DT fusion reactions are occurring. This is supported by the presence of triple tracks and double tracks on the front surface of the CR-39 as well as the energies of the charged particles as determined in the Mylar experiments. Uses of neutrons for energy production and other applications will be discussed as well.

ENVR 5
Twenty year history of LENR research using Pd/D codeposition Frank E. Gordon1, Stanislaw Szpak2, P. A. Mosier-Boss, pam.boss@navy.mil2, Melvin H. Miles, melmiles1@juno.com3, and Lawrence Forsley4. (1) Code 71000, SPAWAR System Center Pacific, 53560 Hull St., San Diego, CA 92152, (2) Code 71730, SPAWAR System Center Pacific, 53560 Hull St., San Diego, CA 92152, (3) Dixie College Foundation, Dixie State College, 301 North 200 East, Suite 3A, St. George, UT 84770, (4) JWK International Corporation, 7617 Little River Turnpike, Suite 1000, Annandale, VA 22003
In the Pd/D co-deposition process, working and counter electrodes are immersed in a solution of palladium chloride and lithium chloride in deuterated water. Palladium is then electrochemically reduced onto the surface of the working electrode in the presence of evolving deuterium gas. Electrodes prepared by Pd/D co-deposition exhibit highly expanded surfaces consisting of small spherical nodules. Because of this high surface area and electroplating in the presence of deuterium gas, the incubation time to achieve high D/Pd loadings necessary to initiate LENR is orders of magnitude less than required for bulk electrodes. Besides heat, the following nuclear emanations have been detected using Pd/D co-deposition: X-ray emission, tritium production, transmutation, and particle emission. Experimental details and results obtained over a twenty year period of research will be discussed.


New Energy Technology
8:30 AM-11:25 AM, Sunday, March 22, 2009 Hilton -- Alpine Ballroom West, Oral
ENVR 19
Nanonuclear reactions in condensed matter Lawrence Forsley, JWK International Corporation, 7617 Little River Turnpike, Suite 1000, Annandale, VA 22003, Frank E. Gordon, Code 71000, SPAWAR System Center Pacific, 53560 Hull St., San Diego, CA 92152, and Pamela A. Mosier-Boss, bossp@spawar.navy.mil, Code D363, SPAWAR Systems Center San Diego, 53560 Hull Street, D363, San Diego, CA 92152-5001.
Since the March, 1989 announcement by Fleischmann and Pons of anomalous heat observed during heavy water electrolysis, there has been considerable controversy as to whether or not the observed nuclear reaction products are commensurate with the thermal measurements. Although heat is one of the reaction products, it is an unsatisfactory probe due to the thermal diffusion time delay between the reaction and its detection. Similarly, many reactions may be exothermic, but excess enthalpy doesn't identify the mechanism. Consequently, we have concentrated upon observing, and when possible, temporally, spatially and spectrally resolving, nuclear reaction products occurring with the Pd:D co-deposition system loaded to near unit stoichiometry. We have monitored cathodes incorporating various witness materials that respond to these nuclear emanations, including neutron-induced reactions. SEM microphotographs have shown a range of structures, from larger than 10 microns to smaller than 1 micron. The structure's size relates to the nuclear channels activated.


New Energy Technology
1:30 PM-5:15 PM, Sunday, March 22, 2009 Hilton -- Alpine Ballroom West, Oral
Dr.D
Dr.D is offline
#9
Mar25-09, 09:17 AM
P: 619
Why not? It is just as good a way for the Navy to waste their money as any of the other ways the Navy wastes money. (All the Navy ever does with research money is to waste it.)
gravenewworld
gravenewworld is offline
#10
Mar25-09, 10:58 AM
P: 1,389
Quote Quote by Dr.D View Post
Why not? It is just as good a way for the Navy to waste their money as any of the other ways the Navy wastes money. (All the Navy ever does with research money is to waste it.)
Your tax dollars at work.
Ivan Seeking
Ivan Seeking is offline
#11
Mar25-09, 12:00 PM
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
Ivan Seeking's Avatar
P: 12,493
How much money has been spent on fusion research? The last time I checked we are at least 10 - 50 years from having anything useful.

How much has been spent on cold fusion research?

I am quite disappointed in the canned opinions. This is how science works. Get over it!
Q_Goest
Q_Goest is offline
#12
Mar25-09, 01:57 PM
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
PF Gold
Q_Goest's Avatar
P: 2,878
Quote Quote by Ivan Seeking View Post
How much money has been spent on fusion research? The last time I checked we are at least 10 - 50 years from having anything useful.

How much has been spent on cold fusion research?

I am quite disappointed in the canned opinions. This is how science works. Get over it!
I agree. When I was a kid 30 years ago, I kept hearing how fusion was just 10 or 15 years away. Seems there's been no change in that projection over the years.

Regardless of the odds that some research may pan out, benefits should be weighed against costs. If the benefit is equal to trillions of dollars annually, then even if it's a million to one long shot, the payback is worth some minor research funding. (I'm sure there's some formal explanation of this, but I'm not the accountant... )
mheslep
mheslep is online now
#13
Mar25-09, 02:04 PM
PF Gold
P: 3,021
From a 'new free energy' perspective this would be disappointing. From a purely investigative scientific perspective these LENR reactions are interesting. There's been quite a bit of work showing what LENR is not, but there is still quite a bit of unexplained phenomenon here that also has been shown, I believe, to not simply be attributable to background emissions or trace counts. So from that perspective Pd/D whatever-it-is warrants continued investigation and small grants, which AFAIK is all it obtains. Throwing ITER size money at it is another matter.
mheslep
mheslep is online now
#14
Mar25-09, 02:07 PM
PF Gold
P: 3,021
Quote Quote by berkeman View Post
...
Well, except for all the energetic neutrons...
There are none with these Pd/D experiments.
Wellesley
Wellesley is offline
#15
Mar25-09, 02:51 PM
P: 267
Quote Quote by Ivan Seeking View Post
How much money has been spent on fusion research? The last time I checked we are at least 10 - 50 years from having anything useful.

How much has been spent on cold fusion research?

I am quite disappointed in the canned opinions. This is how science works. Get over it!
Take a look at this:
http://www.popsci.com/scitech/articl...ght-save-world

These guys say they can have net gain by 2012, if they have the funding....relatively soon compared to the 30+ years for ITER, and for much less.

This can be done, but no one deems this as a priority. Fusion is a lot closer than most people think it is.
russ_watters
russ_watters is online now
#16
Mar25-09, 05:56 PM
Mentor
P: 22,008
Quote Quote by Ivan Seeking View Post
I don't understand why anyone here would even have an opinion about this until we see what they have to offer.
Healthy skepticism based on experience. Anything less on this subject is gullibility.
How much money has been spent on fusion research? The last time I checked we are at least 10 - 50 years from having anything useful.
Useful? That's a pretty big step above the current goal of cold fusion, which so far has not proven to even exist. We know hot fusion exists.
I am quite disappointed in the canned opinions. This is how science works. Get over it!
No, this is how crackpottery, with the occasional Pascal's wager works. Real scientists tend to pick their research based on the merrits of the research topic.
russ_watters
russ_watters is online now
#17
Mar25-09, 06:01 PM
Mentor
P: 22,008
Quote Quote by Q_Goest View Post
Regardless of the odds that some research may pan out, benefits should be weighed against costs. If the benefit is equal to trillions of dollars annually, then even if it's a million to one long shot, the payback is worth some minor research funding. (I'm sure there's some formal explanation of this, but I'm not the accountant... )
It's a variant of "Pascal's Wager" and it is the logic based on which a lot of people lose a lot of money in lotteries. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_wager
Rade2
Rade2 is offline
#18
Mar30-09, 04:20 PM
P: 13
Here is the link to the Navy publication where they claim "evidence" of LENR--fusion at low activation energy input.

http://www.newenergytimes.com/Librar...ipleTracks.pdf

Edit: and see here news release of American Chemical Society presentation:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0323110450.htm

====

Now, I would like to begin here a detailed analysis in this forum of the peer reviewed publication by the Navy. I would like to know the following:

(1) Exactly what are the 'possible' hypothesis now on the table that explain how the Coulomb barrier was overcome to allow for any fusion to begin ?

(2) The Navy explanation of the 3-pit patterns they show in Fig.1 is that Carbon-12 was split into three alpha ? Does this not mean Navy then suggests Carbon-12 isotope has preexisting within it three alpha ready to split ? Is this an accepted hypothesis for how nucleons arranged within nuclear shells for carbon-12 ?

(3) What other explanations come to mind to explain the 3-pit pattern shown by Navy in Fig. 1 ? I think it good possibility each pit is a nucleon, either a P or N. So, why would my hypothesis be false ?

===

Please, let us move this thread forward using science--not insult.


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Cold Fusion High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics 10
cold fusion Classical Physics 6
Cold Fusion General Discussion 8
regarding cold fusion Atomic, Solid State, Comp. Physics 6