Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Is Cold Fusion for real this time?

  1. May 24, 2008 #1

    SF

    User Avatar

  2. jcsd
  3. May 24, 2008 #2

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Note that this does not qualify as a scientific reference, but it is a claim of unexplained phenomena. It will be most interesting to see if the experiment can be duplicated.

    A recent review of the evidence for cold fusion yielded a majority opinion that there were some anomalies worth investigating, but most likely not anything related to cold fusion.
    https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=425462#post425462
     
  4. May 26, 2008 #3

    Mk

    User Avatar

    Japanese Cold Fusion Demonstration "successful"

    http://physicsworld.com/blog/2008/05/coldfusion_demonstration_a_suc_1.html
    Interesting article, with real information. What do you think?
     
  5. May 26, 2008 #4

    Borek

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I have been in one of those teams that "replicated" Fleischmann-Pons experiment. My boss was even interviewed by local TV. Since then I am pretty reluctant. Then, while I am not a nuclear scientis (closer to nucular, if anything), I have never heard why it CAN'T happen.
     
  6. May 26, 2008 #5

    Gokul43201

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Did you actually measure a neutron flux?

    It is not that it can't happen. It is just that the calculated fusion rate is roughly 60 orders of magnitude lower than what was claimed by F&P.
     
  7. May 27, 2008 #6
    I think the debate of whether this is or isn't cold fusion is a bit of a red herring. I think the real question should be whether or not this could prove to be a viable option for energy production or whether these experiments are just novelties.

    There have been claims of evidence transmutations occurring in these experiments. If this is the case the argument against this being a nuclear effect is null and void.
     
  8. May 27, 2008 #7

    Borek

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    No. That's why I put "replicated" in quotes. Could be I should put quotes around "experiment" as well. In fact we did nothing worth mentioning - apart from electrolysing heavy water on palladium electrode.

    I was working in electrochemistry research lab and we happened to have palladium electrodes at hand, heavy water was brought from the other lab, everything else was just sitting on every bench. Most of the time it was just bubbling slowly. At some moments it was gettingt hot quite fast. No idea what happened. And I am not saying that we have seen cold fusion - I simply don't know what we have seen. Someone from the other lab suggested it was just catalytic oxidation of hydrogen (deuter to be precise). Before we decided to investigate further hype was over. Heavy water down the drain, electrodes to the box, case closed.



     
  9. May 27, 2008 #8
    I have to say that the comments in that article are fairly embarrassing for those who attack cold fusion. Someone explains that D-D fusion wouldn't produce neutrons, (which seems clear to me: 2+2 particles = 4 in the helium nucleus.) But then poster after poster ignores this and keeps demanding neutrons, with no counter explanation as to why they wouldn't all be in the helium!
     
  10. May 27, 2008 #9

    Gokul43201

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Not true. Most deuterium-deuterium fusion events produce either tritium and a proton or He-3 and a neutron. Additionally, deuterium and tritium react to make He-4 and a neutron, while deuterium and He-3 make He-4 and a proton.
     
  11. May 27, 2008 #10
    Ah, they might have mentioned that. Is there a theoretical reason why a given reaction method couldn't largely favor He-4 over the others? I understand that no one wants free neutrons following them home after work - their absence is very ... convenient.
     
  12. May 28, 2008 #11

    Borek

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    As I was just told, He-4 from D fusion is excited and it has to deexcite - in most cases it does so by quickly emiting p+ or n, sometimes by emitting γ (much slower). So that's just the way it is.
     
  13. Jun 25, 2008 #12
    Cold fusion reminds me on why fusion has not been observed within Bose-Eienstein condensate of Rb atoms. The bosons are confined in something like a spherical harmonic oscillator and could almost all of them occupy the groundstate at low temperature. But p+,p+ interaction has to be taken into account as well (Colomb blocking).

    I belive that you could force nucleus towards eachother by maby some special crystal vibration mode. But the momentum is probably to low to overcome the threshold for a fusion reaction.

    In principle its just to calulate some Hartree equation where you treat the nucleus as waves as well. I did onces for a carbon crystal and I found that the nucleus wave was extended around 5% of the crystall lattice distance. The wave function overlap of two nucleus in a confining electron gas, within a nuclear distace volume is probably small as well, if this is a masure of the probablity of having them "at the same place" -> causing nuclear reaction?...
     
  14. Jun 27, 2008 #13

    Chronos

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member
    2015 Award

    Creating 'free' mass might be objectionable to some physicists.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Is Cold Fusion for real this time?
  1. Cold Fusion (Replies: 8)

  2. Cold Fusion lives again? (Replies: 16)

  3. Cold Fusion (Replies: 43)

Loading...