Cold Fusion Back In The Limelight - Guest Speaker Dr. Brian Josephson

  1. What do you guys make of this??

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/mar/17/nuclear-future-beyond-japan/

    It says, and i quote:

    Which makes me feel at least partly safe posting this on PF.

    Any thoughts?
     
  2. jcsd
  3. MacLaddy

    MacLaddy 226
    Gold Member

    Re: Cold Fusion Back In The Limelight


    I was just asking the same question, and then you beat me to it.

    [Edit by Ivan: Link deleted]

    This subject has been locked in two other threads, but I think it may bear some scrutiny. Is this website I listed a legit source? [No :biggrin:]
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 25, 2011
  4. Ivan Seeking

    Ivan Seeking 12,521
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Re: Cold Fusion Back In The Limelight

    Note that this topic qualifies for S&D only because there is evidence for a mystery as per the results of a 2004 conference. Evidence for cold fusion may be another matter entirely.
    https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=425462&postcount=19

    Very frustrating, only the aps link is working on that page. The rest are dead but the dates are referenced.
     
    Last edited: Mar 26, 2011
  5. MacLaddy

    MacLaddy 226
    Gold Member

    Re: Cold Fusion Back In The Limelight

    Thank you, Ivan, for letting this one shine in the light for a bit. Hopefully someone much more educated than I can give some feedback.
     
  6. Ivan Seeking

    Ivan Seeking 12,521
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Re: Cold Fusion Back In The Limelight

    Note that legitimate scientific publications appropriate here are listed at the following link
    http://scientific.thomson.com/index.html

    If you have problems with the search feature, you can view the entire list here.
    http://www.thomsonscientific.com/cgi-bin/jrnlst/jlresults.cgi?PC=MASTER

    The claims of the Italian Scientists are only worthy of consideration if their work is published in an appropriate journal. MacLaddy, what you had linked was a blog, not a journal.

    Do we have anything beyond an unsubstantiated, wild claim?
     
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2011
  7. MacLaddy

    MacLaddy 226
    Gold Member

    Re: Cold Fusion Back In The Limelight

    This is a great link, and no, I could not locate any information about this topic within the search feature.

    This link isn't working.
    (edit: Now it is)

    Apparently I am a sucker for a scientific name, my apologies.

    I'm still a bit green when it comes to appropriate researching, but it appears that we'll just have to wait until the big event in Greece to see if there is anything legit to this.
     
  8. Ivan Seeking

    Ivan Seeking 12,521
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Re: Cold Fusion Back In The Limelight

    The link has been fixed. No problem; that's why we're here. :smile:
     
  9. Re: Cold Fusion Back In The Limelight

    It sounds like they claim to have already built one, but so far journals are refusing to publish.

    Question: Wouldn't it be very easy to validate their claims seeing as they supposedly already have the device? And what happens when peers in the community do validate the findings but the journals continue to refuse to publish? Can that even happen?

    The reason i ask is because it sounded like it has already been peer-review, at least superficially, by Giuseppe Levi.

    If he has investigated it thoroughly and is prepared to submit a paper attesting to the fact, aren't the journals duty bound to publish? See i'm not a scientist and not sure how it works (the peer-review process, not cold fusion :tongue:)
     
  10. Ivan Seeking

    Ivan Seeking 12,521
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Re: Cold Fusion Back In The Limelight

    There is a process to science and it works. If there is anything to this claim, it will be published - you can bet on it. It would be earth-shaking news. There is no sense in guessing when we have journals to sort this out.

    "Prepared to submit" is not the same as "submitted and published". When a claim can't be tested directly, or at least not easily so, things get a little more dicey. But when a claim, like this one, can be tested directly, there is no need for speculation. There is no way the scientific community would let something like this slip through the cracks were it legit. It would be front-page news, beyond question, almost immediately.

    Based on what I've seen, this is almost certainly a con job.

    Yeah, right. Trust me. If they can do this, there is no need to worry about informing the world, It will happen overnight. There would be no doubt.
     
  11. Re: Cold Fusion Back In The Limelight

    I understand. And yeah it sounds pretty spectacular.

    I also just found this which answered my question in part:

    https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=238709&page=2
     
  12. Ivan Seeking

    Ivan Seeking 12,521
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Re: Cold Fusion Back In The Limelight

    There is some irony in this in that Pons and Fleishman - the fathers of cold fusion - jumped to improper conclusions and then managed to get PBS News to put their story up front without publication. No one was lying, but it sure did embarrass a lot of people. I've been a PBS fan since almost the very start. I consider that rush to broadcast their single biggest mistake in the history of the network. I will never forget watching that report and thinking, my God... can this be true?!?!?! For a moment it seemed the world had been changed forever.

    I was actually there when Ponds and Fleishman first presented their data to the American Electrochemical Society. It was really a very embarrassing evening for everyone. A number of speakers completely destroyed P&F's paper.
     
    Last edited: Mar 28, 2011
  13. Pengwuino

    Pengwuino 7,118
    Gold Member

    Re: Cold Fusion Back In The Limelight

    Journals will have what are called 'referees' look at the papers and look for flaws. Journals are under no requirement to publish anything. There are limited resources and journals have a standard to maintain. However, if this is legit, they would want to. Trust me, for a journal to be the ones who refused to publish something this earth-shattering if it were completely legit would be unbelievably counter-productive. They would lose a lot of standing and standing is something makes any journal great (and what sells subscriptions!).

    There is tremendous financial incentive for people to just make up something this revolutionary. Ignoring all the psychological incentives such as fame and admiration and delusions of grandeur, there would be lots of money to be made for anyone corrupt enough to try to push a fake idea like this.

    Of course, they may just have something wrong that they haven't found out yet. It happens. If they DO have something that spectacular, however, you have a world changing event.
     
  14. Re: Cold Fusion Back In The Limelight

    Wow, i bet that was quite a night. I'm beginning to understand the gravity of these claims.

    I've only seen a couple of things from PBS as i'm in the UK. Wasn't The Elegant Universe (string theory thing) done by PBS? I have to say, the Elegant Universe TV programme was very differnt to the book. I saw Brian Greene present it and thought he was so cheesy and probably didn't even understand the thing he was presenting, not realizing he was actually the author. :redface: How wrong I was. I've learnt to love Mr.Greene's passionate delivery now.

    Like selling the story to The Washington Times for a start!

    And thanks for the answers :smile:
     
  15. russ_watters

    Staff: Mentor

    Re: Cold Fusion Back In The Limelight

    The opinions of an op-ed editor of a local newspaper, who'se scientific credentials are unknown don't carry a lot of weight. To the quote specifically:

    1. He implies that CF didn't get a fair hearing the first time. He's wrong - it did.
    2. He implies that by not publishing the results of the Italian experiment, it isn't getting a fair hearing now. He's wrong again.
     
  16. Re: Cold Fusion Back In The Limelight

    I don't get it. Why aren't stars doing "cold fusion", if it exists as a "possibility". It's like talking about "square-circles". Nonsense.
     
  17. Ivan Seeking

    Ivan Seeking 12,521
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Re: Cold Fusion Back In The Limelight

    Because they are doing hot fusion?
     
  18. Re: Cold Fusion Back In The Limelight

    Maybe I was vague. Why can't we see evidence in nature backing the concept of having "cold fusion"... as an energy source worth seeking?
     
  19. Ivan Seeking

    Ivan Seeking 12,521
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Re: Cold Fusion Back In The Limelight

    There was a scientific model being used to explain the results.

    The key is that the claim was first based on experimental evidence. If one can prove something is happening, existence doesn't depend on our ability to explain it. And people still claim to be getting anomalous results.

    Can you name any examples of naturally occuring fission? We know fission works.
     
  20. Vanadium 50

    Vanadium 50 17,526
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor

    Re: Cold Fusion Back In The Limelight

    Oklo.
     
  21. Ivan Seeking

    Ivan Seeking 12,521
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Re: Cold Fusion Back In The Limelight

    Heh, I thought about that after making the post. But it was only discovered after we produced fission artificially. There were no examples in nature that drove the original research.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share a link to this question via email, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?
Similar discussions for: Cold Fusion Back In The Limelight - Guest Speaker Dr. Brian Josephson
Loading...