1995.07.13 / MARSHALL DUDLEY /  Hypothesis to explain cold fusion in metals
     
Originally-From: mdudley@brbbs.brbbs.com (MARSHALL DUDLEY)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Hypothesis to explain cold fusion in metals
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 1995 14:14 -0500 (EST)

OK, the message I received from Tom Droege clarified the concept of
loading in Pd sufficiently for me to see that it does not appear to
contradict a hypothesis I have been working on.

Here is my hypothesis.  I would appreciate any response that addresses
the technical aspects of this hypothesis.  I can do without the flames,
if I have made a stupid blunder, let me know, but if we don't post
ideas, we won't make any progress.

When Palladium absorbs hydrogen, it is not going into the interstices
of the crystal.  Instead it is combining with the Palladium chemically,
sort of.

Normally Pd forms covalent bonds sharing electrons.  However with hydrogen
and deuterium it forms a ionic bond, with the hydrogen or deuterium losing
an electron to the outer shell of the palladium. (from now on when I say
hydrogen, I mean both hydrogen and deuterium). This leaves the palladium
atom with a -1 charge.

Normally an ionic bond creates two atoms attracted to each other
electrostaticly.  However when hydrogen loses an electron, it no
longer has a shell, all we have is a proton (or proton and neutron with
deuterium).

Thus we cannot have two atoms attracted electrostatically.  Instead the
proton is electrostatically attracted INTO the outer shell of the
palladium.  At this point it sees part of the charge of the palladium
nucleus and is repelled back outside of the outer shell.  When outside
the shell it sees a -1 charge, but when inside the outer shell it sees
a +11 charge (the outer shell of Pd had 10 electrons, plus the extra
from the hydrogen).

This action I will call porpoising, since it is similar to how a
porpoise swims at the surface of the water.  I would expect that the
proton would be inside of the outer shell only about 9% of the time due
to the differences in the charges it sees when inside vs outside the
shell.

Since the hydrogen nucleas spends most of it's time outside of the
shell, the effect would be that adjacent atoms with a porpoising
proton, would tend to have the proton on each move into an area
where it is facing an atom without a proton, or which has the proton
facing the other direction.  If all the atoms surrounding the palladium
have protons, then there would be a diffusion force from the coulomb
repulsion that would tend to spread out the protons such that each would
not have to face another proton.

Now, from what I have determined diffusion can avoid head on protons up
to a loading of 83.33%.  Once beyond 83.33% there will be sites which
have protons facing each other on adjacent palladium atoms.  I would
expect two effects of this.  First I would expect that loading above
84.4% to suddenly be more difficult to achieve.  Secondly, if my
hypothesis is correct I would expect that cold fusion would start
occuring only once this level of loading is approached or exceeded.

An interesting observation of this hypothesis is that when the proton
is inside the shell, the shell shields its charge from being seen from
outside the shell.  Thus the proton can suddenly appear outside the
shell, without any warning.  If two seperate but adjacent atoms have
porposing protons, then the protons will both occasionally appear
outside their shells simultaneously, and at a point in which tunneling
would ensure fusion.  Thus we avoid the problem of coulomb repulsion
through the shielding effects of the outer shell of palladium.

Other effects I would expect if this hypothesis is correct are:

Any disturbance that would disrupt the even distribution of protons
would enhance the fusion rate.  Thus loading shocks, thermal shocks,
mechanical shocks, even magnetic and electrostatic shocks could all
enhance the fusion rate until the protons become evenly distributed
again.

Application of electromagnetic waves which would cause random movement
of the protons around or between the atoms would enhance the effect.
These waves may be in the radio fequency or microwave region, or even
in the X-ray region.  Even ultrasonic vibration could have an effect. I
would expect that there would be resonant wavelengths which would have
much greater effects than other wavelengths in the same range.

The start of fusion in a area could generate a shock wave of heat,
protons, stress, and possibly EM waves which would spread, eventually
causing a significant portion of the palladium to "turn on".  Some
people refer to this as ignition.

------

Now I will address what would be expected if loading exceeds 100%.  In
this case not only will virtually all palladium atoms have a proton,
but some will have 2 of them.  Those which have two protons will most
likely end up with the protons staying on opposite sides of the atom
due to coulomb repulsion.  However, if one of the protons is disturbed
sufficiently, either by a near miss from the proton of an adjacent
atom, or by an external force, such as a resonant or high level EM wave,
it could be hurled around the atom so that it ends up on the same side as
the other proton.  In some cases one could be inside the shell and the
other outside the shell, both penetrating the shell at virtually the same
spot at the same time.  Once again we could expect fusion to occur from
tunneling.  Thus I would expect that loadings greater than 100% could
show a marked rise in the fusion rate, especially if there is some type
of disrupting force, such as an EM wave employed.

One thing that this hypothesis does not explain is the lack of high
energy particles or gammas when a fusion occurs.  The only thing I can
think of is the observation that fusion would occur virtually at the
outer shell of the palladium.  This position could somehow lead to rapid
cooling of the nucleus by the electrons (11 to 22 of them) in the shell(s).
If this happens the energy would be dissapated by a stream of electrons
being thrown off the atom, similar to betas, but with too low an energy to
be detected easily.  As each gets thrown off, the net positive charge would
attract electrons from adjacent atoms to fill the outer shell, and then
they in turn would get thrown off until sufficient energy is lost from
the nucleus for it to capture a couple of electrons for it's own shell.
For this to work effectively the palladium must be electrically conductive,
which of course it is.

Although the metal mentioned is palladium, the same hypothesis should apply to
other metals which are conductive and absorb hydrogen in a similar manner.

Intellegent responses encouraged.

                                                                Marshall
cudkeys:
cuddy13 cudenmdudley cudfnMARSHALL cudlnDUDLEY cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszL cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.07.13 / Bob Pendleton /  Re: The Golden Anniversary of Trinity (Atomic Age)
     
Originally-From: bobp@bga.com (Bob Pendleton)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: The Golden Anniversary of Trinity (Atomic Age)
Date: 13 Jul 1995 19:07:13 GMT
Organization: Real/Time Communications - Bob Gustwick and Associates

jedrothwell@delphi.com wrote:
: Wayne Price <SUCOR@I-link.net> writes:
:  
:      "Celebrating the 50th anniversary of the Atomic Age. . . . J. Robert
:      Oppenheimer is standing before the bellowing mushroom cloud at 008
:      seconds after detonation.  Oppenheimer after observing the results of
:      his creation quoted an ancient Hindu text, "Now I am become death, the
:      destroyer of worlds". . . . Check out this Fractal Design color art work
:      at: .alt.binaries.pictures.misc . . .Comments welcomed!
:  
: You want comments? Okay, you asked for it. As a Japanese - American, I find
: this posting sick, disgusting, and outrageous. Look, no reasonable person
: disputes that in war it is sometimes necessary to use inhuman methods. War is
: hell. Many (but by no means all) Japanese people acknowledge that it is a good
: thing the bomb brought the war to a quick end. But good grief! It is nothing
: to "celebrate"!!!

The topic was "Trinity" not the use of nuclear weapons to end World
War II.  Trinity is probably the single most important event of the
twentieth century and as such deserves to be remembered, and yes,
celebrated.


				Bob P.
cudkeys:
cuddy13 cudenbobp cudfnBob cudlnPendleton cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.07.13 / John Sidles /  A crackpot case history: the Ilizarov technique
     
Originally-From: sidles@u.washington.edu (John Sidles)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: A crackpot case history: the Ilizarov technique
Subject:      Gavril Abramaovich Ilizarov
Date: 13 Jul 1995 19:52:57 GMT
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle


Dear sci.physics.fusion

Whether cold fusion is pathological science is a topic of
heated debate on sci.physics.fusion.  Without presuming to
offer any judgement, here is a case history of a person
who bore most of the hallmarks of a crackpot, but whose 
theories were nonetheless accepted, and who won global
fame and financial properity thereby.

Subject:      Gavril Abramaovich Ilizarov
Born:         1921
Invention:    The Ilizarov limb lengthening technique.
Risk factors: (1) minimal credentials
              (2) third world background
              (3) poor social and scientific skills
              (4) claimed to have solved an important medical 
                  problem that had baffled experts
              (5) successful results obtained only by
                  strict adherance to a "magic" protocol
              (6) no underlying theory to explain results
              (7) poor epidemiological evidence to support
                  extravagant claims

G. S. Alizarov was a 30 year-old M.D. in general practice (not a
specialist) in the Siberian province of Kurgan.  At that time,
circa 1950, healed limb fractures were often accompanied by
significant limb shortening.

Using only tools available locally (machine screws, bicycle
spokes, and a wooden frame), and guided mainly by intuition,
Ilizarov devised a protocol for refracturing too-short limbs,
transfixing the separate pieces by bicycle spokes, and then by
gradual extension inducing the healing fracture to lengthen.

Partly due to Ilizarov's reluctance to operate within the
conventional canons of medical research, his ideas took decades
to be accepted within the Soviet Union, then more decades to be
accepted by the rest of the world.  Yet by 1985 or so, Ilizarov 
was universally acclaimed as one of the greatest orthopaedic
researchers of our century.

To quote Dr. Stuart A. Green: "I was a skeptic. I thought this
guy and his claims were from outer space.  Then I went (to
Ilizarov's Siberian Clinic) to see for myself.  It was a mind
boggling experience.  Now I'm convinced."

Or to quote Dr. Victor Frankel: "I found it to be a fascinating
experience to be in a small Siberian city of several hundred
thousand with a 600-bed orthopaedic institute doing work that a
short while earlier would have seemed almost beyond my
comprehension."

I myself have heard Ilizarov speak.  It was remarkable!  He is
no scientist... really more of tribal doctor, but by trial and
error he has found a technique that works.  His talk consisted
entirely of before-and-after pictures, accompanied by an
anecdotal narrative, but the pictures themselves were so
impressive that he received a standing ovation from the
orthopaedic surgeons in the audience.

So how did Ilizarov succeed, even though he ignored all canons
of medical science?  (1) Ilizarov had a technique which worked,
which (2) he shared freely with anyone who visited his clinic,
and (3) when the visitors returned home, Ilizarov's techniques
worked for them too.

Ilizarov's case shows that seeming crackpots *can* win, provided
their ideas are sound!

Of course, most crackpots have ideas that are grossly unsound.

If you want to know more about Ilizarov, here is a review
article that provides an entre to a vast literature.

Best wishes... John Sidles

Document 1
Accession No.: 95245409.
Author:        Herbert-A-J.  Herzenberg-J-E.  Paley-D.
Title:         A review for pediatricians on limb lengthening and the
               Ilizarov method.
Source:        Curr-Opin-Pediatr.  1995 Feb.  7(1).  P 98-105.
Journal Title: CURRENT OPINION IN PEDIATRICS.
Abstract:      As recently as 1986, limb lengthening in children was
               considered by most North American orthopedic surgeons to be
               both dangerous and impractical. Previous attempts were plagued
               by unacceptably high rates of serious complications such as
               nerve palsy, deep infection, malunion, broken hardware, and
               stiff joints. With the recent introduction of the Russian
               Ilizarov method and apparatus for limb lengthening, a
               tremendous groundswell of interest has risen. Despite a steep
               learning curve, many Western centers have now reproduced
               Ilizarov's clinical results. The important advances over prior
               methods are partly biologic and partly hardware related.
               Ilizarov's principles require a minimally invasive, low-energy
               osteotomy, stable external fixation, a latency period before
               commencing distraction, and gradual lengthening of 1 mm/d in
               divided doses (0.25 mm four times per day). The article reviews
               the background of this new technique and provides an update on
               results reported over the past year. There is disagreement
               regarding precise indications for limb salvage (lengthening) of
               congenital limb deficiencies versus amputation. The role of
               extended lengthening in dwarfism also remains controversial.


cudkeys:
cuddy13 cudensidles cudfnJohn cudlnSidles cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszL cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.07.13 / Richard Schultz /  Re: Implications of Miles results
     
Originally-From: schultz@garnet.berkeley.edu (Richard Schultz)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Implications of Miles results
Date: 13 Jul 1995 10:49:25 GMT
Organization: Philosophers of the Dangerous Maybe

In article <DBMz5x.40M@world.std.com>,
mitchell swartz <mica@world.std.com> wrote:

>just cause you say it, doesn't make it so

Wise advice -- would that you would take it.

>if we agree [lattice-nuclear] couplings exist, let us leave it at that.

Why not just say "fusion is what powers the sun, so therefore fusion
exists," and leave it at that?  

>The existence of the couplings] is reason to consider them.  Now that you dont
>ignore them, some progress is made.

Sigh.

(1) In an earlier post, you said that the CF product distribution is
affected by a number of factors including sample purity and "coherence
length [sic]."  Could you please provide a reference to a published
report that describes how these correlations were measured, by whom,
and when?

(2) In a response to your claim that there may be some relation between
the Moessbauer effect and CF, I presented a calculation that seems to
indicate that there is a difference of fifteen orders of magnitude in
energy between those observed in Moessbauer spectroscopy and those 
involved in D+D fusion.  Could you please either show the error in my
calculation, explain the process of induction that allows you to 
extrapolate over fifteen orders of magnitude, or admit that your 
hypothesis cannot explain cold fusion?

(3) Is there any measurable property of a CF system *independent* of
measured excess heat that correlates with the amount of measured excess
heat that a given experiment will yield?  If so, what is it, and how
do the two variables correlate?

> Since TB-skeptics dont even know the physical lattice structure
> (hexagonal, indeed)  dont even waste our time, if you are not going to
   ^^^^^^^^^
>take the time to read the literature.

I didn't realize that Marshall Dudley was a "TB-Skeptic."
In any case, "CF" is the only example I have ever seen of a "science"
when someone asks a question, the response is "it's in the literature,
don't expect us to do your homework for you."  In every other case
with which I am familiar, a science question will generally lead to
a citation so that the person can actually find out the answer to his
question.  Even when the question is elementary, and the answer is on the
order of "look in your p-chem textbook."  I find it odd that CF True
Believers are the only ones who refuse to provide literature references.
What do they have to hide?

>In the meantime but please do share what you have
>received, if you can, about the "issues" regarding such prohibition.

For someone who gets so incensed by the public posting of something 
he mentioned in private email, you are rather cavalier about asking
other people to post their own email.
--
					Richard Schultz

"What is this whacko attitude you people out here in Fusion Digest have?
What is the matter with you?  This place is a Goddamn Pirahna pool! Let's
have some patience, and some manners."
			--Jed Rothwell, sci.physics.fusion, 14 Jan 1993
cudkeys:
cuddy13 cudenschultz cudfnRichard cudlnSchultz cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.07.13 / Ben Weiner /  Re: Has anyone convinced a crackpot?
     
Originally-From: bweiner@electron.rutgers.edu (Ben Weiner)
Newsgroups: alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci.physics,sci.physics.fusion,
lt.usenet.kooks,alt.religion.kibology
Subject: Re: Has anyone convinced a crackpot?
Date: 13 Jul 1995 10:31:51 -0400
Organization: Rutgers University

[alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci.physics,sci.physics.fusion,alt.usenet.kooks]

wwe <dominaj@blockhead.laney.cc.ca.us> writes:

>hello,
>      my name is alex and this is my very time on this internet.  anyway 
>I just wanted to comment on the fact that unabomber is not looking for 
>sympathy.  I think  he may be looking for people to open their eyes and 
>see what 

 [it abruptly ends there]

Uh-oh, I think the Unabomber has claimed another victim.

I thought he only nailed computer _experts_, though.  Which this guy
isn't.  Unless he means this is his very [first] time on THIS internet
but he's been spending a lot of time on OTHER internets.

Maybe S*rf*tti's been using his quantum beable many-worlds drive to
create AN INFINITUDE OF PARALLEL INTERNETS !!!  Be afraid - be very
afraid.


P.S.  Usenet Don'ts, #32: Don't post from a computer named "blockhead"

P.P.S.  I didn't delete the context from this article, because there
wasn't any.  Not even in the previous articles in the thread.
cudkeys:
cuddy13 cudenbweiner cudfnBen cudlnWeiner cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.07.13 / Bryan Wallace /  CALL FOR PAPERS
     
Originally-From: wallaceb@news.gate.net (Bryan G. Wallace)
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.paranet.ufo,alt.philosophy.objectivis
,alt.sci.physics.new-theories,misc.books.technical,sci.astro,sci.energy,
ci.misc,sci.physics,sci.physics.electromag,sci.physics.fusion,sci.physic
.particle,sci.research,sci.skeptic
Subject: CALL FOR PAPERS
Date: 13 Jul 1995 10:30:13 -0400


                                CALL FOR PAPERS

by St. Petersburg Technologies, Ltd for the IV INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE:
"PROBLEMS OF SPACE, TIME, GRAVITATION" to be held in St. Petersburg, Russia
August or September 1996 Celebrating the JUBILEES of the 400th anniversary of
Descartes and the 350th anniversary of Leibnitz.

                           Organized by:
                    Russian Academy of Sciences;
   International Slavic Academy of Sciences, Education and Arts (ISA);
St. Petersburg Branch of the Institute of History of Science and Technology.
                                 
PROGRAM:  The program is being planned as an international Congress of
participating sciences.  It will include three or four simultaneous sessions
on: Astronomy; Cosmology; Physics and Natural Philosophy; Mathematics and
Mechanics and will feature 4 plenary sessions summarizing recent research in
those areas.  Other individual papers of highest quality research and concepts
will be accepted for presentation at symposia and sessions throughout the
week-long conference.  Additional papers will be accepted for presentation in
poster sessions.

PAPER SUBMITTAL:  Send suggested concepts for sessions, or title and abstract
of your suggested paper to: Neil E. Munch, 9400 Five Logs Way, Gaithersburg,
MD 20879, USA; or e-mail at 70047.2123@compuserve.com.  If multiple authors,
indicate which will present the paper.  These will assembled and processed by
an International Scientific Organizing Committee (SOC).  Details of specific
dates and conference costs (in US dollars) will be supplied to applicants when
available.

THE NATURE OF CONFERENCE: is expected to be an enlarged version of the III
International Conference on "Problems of Space, Time, Gravitation" , which was
attended by about 200 scientists from 20 countries in Europe, Asia and the
Americas. A wider scope and simultaneous sessions will permit participation by
more scientists and their discussion of emerging concepts from around the
world.  Simultaneous language translation in English and Russia is expected. 
Lodging and all meals were provided within a single international hotel in St.
Petersburg.  Space for side discussions and impromptu meetings, especially at
meal times, was provided in the same hotel, facilitating interchange and
discussions between scientists from many nations.

WAYS AND MEANS:  Costs for registration, lodging (double occupancy) and meals
are expected to be about $600 per person.  You will make your own travel
arrangements after approval for attendance is received from the conference
management.  Conference fees include transportation to and from the
St.Petersburg airport.  Visas are required. That's a simple formality although
several weeks should be allowed for its processing.  Security and ample
protection will be provided for all attendees and their guests, including
scheduled sight-seeing tours and shopping.

OTHER ATTRACTIONS IN ST. PETERSBURG:  A varied cultural program and
sightseeing tours will be available (some at extra cost) to participants and
their guests to some of the many outstanding museums, palaces, and attractions
in St. Petersburg area.


cudkeys:
cuddy13 cudenwallaceb cudfnBryan cudlnWallace cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.07.13 /   /  Info Ysmar Heat Generator
     
Originally-From: "alex" <alex@frolov.spb.su>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Info Ysmar Heat Generator
Date: 13 Jul 1995 22:08:48 +0400
Organization: Alexander V. Frolov, Private Account


        Dear Dr. Little,

Thank you for attention to my article
        I have some contacts with Mr. Hal Fox, Utah, his New Energy
News is very interesting newsletter. He sometimes publish my articles.
Do you know about this Fusion Information Centre, Utah, USA? Phone is
1-801-5836232 and fax is 1-801-5832963. You can order all my free
energy and gravity articles of 1994 -1995  from New Energy Newsletter.
Ref.to your question about Moldavian system Yusmar I can answer the
next: I have the technical specification ( warranty paper ) of it. I
sent copy of it for Mr. Fox at last month. He publish some information
in his NEN about it. If you need additional information I can shortly
translate this paper now here...
So, "YSMAR", Generator of heat, ecology clean, for transformation of
energy of moving water in heat for heating of buildings...Pump, electro
motor and automatics system...
Versions Ysmar1 for 60 sq.m. Ysmar2 for 200 sq.m. Ysmar3 for 300 sq.m.
Ysmar4 for 900 sq.m. of bulding.
Mass of systems Y1 -8kg Y2-12kg Y3-20kg Y4-60kg
Ch.5 Design of heat-generator and system
Emition of heat take place in result of complete (difficult) processes of
water circulation in body 3 and tube 5. Water inject in cone 2 by means of
pump under pressure 4...5 atm. (0.4 -0.5 MPa). Heated water is moving
then in radiators.
So, diameter of "tube" 5 after cone 2 is: Y1-53mm Y2-75mm Y3-95mm Y4-160mm
As I understand from Figure here, the greatest side of cone is connected
with pupm, diameters here is for Y1-110mm Y2-110mm Y3-110mm Y4-160mm. So,
cone is trasformation connector between pump and "tube" 5. The cone and tube
are connected directly but angle is 90 degrees. That's all about
principles.
Automatic control operation is in 50 - 70 degrees limits.
At last, address: Firm "VISOR", Republic Moldova, 277012, Kishinev,
Pushkin str.,24 - 16. Phone +232701, +232718, fax+237736.
Unfortunately, I can not make for you more than it? The information
about  300% over/unity I had also from Prof. Anatoly P. Smirnov,
St.-Petersburg. How it work I can only suppose, since water is very
interesting thing. In my opinion the cavitation take place in YSMAR.
        // Water is slowly burning inside of water.//
If it is right, the o/u here is result of water fuel close cycle.

It will interesting if this system will show the "three-side effect".
I speak about effect that must have place when o/u power lead to gravity
and time rate changes in local area. These three effects are close connected
and must take place when power is created by means of syntropy process.
As entropy is direct time factor as syntropy is negative time factor.
Negative time is negative curvature of space, in other words. For small
power of process the sum of normal time rate and reverse time rate is
display as deceleration of rate of time. But for powerful process it is
possible to "bend" the surface of space in opposite direction and time
will flow in opposite direction also.
So, real o/u power system must be time machine and gravity machine also.

I hope, that my ideas are interested for you. Please, keep a contact
with me by e-mail to discuss about all news in free energy/gravity/time
What you think about commercial aspects in this field?


Best Regards,
Alexander V. Frolov
alex@frolov.spb.su

cudkeys:
cuddy13 cudenalex cudln cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.07.13 / Richard Blue /  Reifenschweiler replication?
     
Originally-From: blue@pilot.msu.edu (Richard A Blue)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Reifenschweiler replication?
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 1995 03:00:28 GMT
Organization: Sci.physics.fusion/Mail Gateway

Bob Cormack suggests that my assertions concerning the non-existance
of significant perturbations on nuclear decay rates has been called
into question by the Reifenschweiler experiment.

He says, "If this work can be replicated, then any argument (based on
theory) that the absorption by a crystal lattice can't effect nuclear
events is moot."

Need I point out the fact that the Reifenschweiler experiment has
NOT been replicated!  I have good reason to believe it never will be
replicated in a significant way.  Basically it is a very poorly designed
experiment that does not demonstrate a change in the tritium decay rate
largely because it does not even measure the tritium activity in any
real sense.

Bob also falls into the trap of believing that the point at issue is the
outcome of a null experiment - does or does not the lattice surrounding
a nucleus influence the nuclear decay?  Then one demonstrated effect blows
the entire argument against cold fusion  out of the water.  I doubt that
it is so simple.  There are already in hand the results of hundreds
of experiments that adress this question.  I see no valid reason for
giving the unreplicated, unpublished, and long forgotten results of one
pooly designed experiment any greater weight than those other experiments.

When there is a significant replication we can, perhaps, reopen this question.
Until then I would not proceed as if the replication had already occured.

Dick Blue

cudkeys:
cuddy13 cudenblue cudfnRichard cudlnBlue cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.07.13 / Barry Merriman /  Re: Someone please show me cold fusion!
     
Originally-From: barry@starfire.ucsd.edu (Barry Merriman)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Someone please show me cold fusion!
Date: 13 Jul 1995 02:43:02 GMT
Organization: UCSD SOE

In article <DBIx52.31@nntpa.cb.att.com> gfp <gfp@docunet.mv.att.com> writes:
> Is there a clear, concise set of instruction that will allow me (or any one  
else)
> to 
> 1) Build a cold fusion device

> 
> Perhaps, maybe there is just a conspiricy to suppress thia information (like  
the 
> 300mpg carburator). jp.

Yes, I would say the status of cold fusion is about that of the
300 mpg carburator.



--
Barry Merriman
UCSD Fusion Energy Research Center
UCLA Dept. of Math
bmerriman@fusion.ucsd.edu (Internet; NeXTMail is welcome)


cudkeys:
cuddy13 cudenbarry cudfnBarry cudlnMerriman cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.07.13 / mitchell swartz /  Re: Implications of Miles results
     
Originally-From: mica@world.std.com (mitchell swartz)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Implications of Miles results
Subject: Re: Implications of Miles results
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 1995 04:01:09 GMT
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA


  In Message-ID: <9507130229.AA43003@pilot01.cl.msu.edu>
Subject: Re: Implications of Miles results
blue@pilot.msu.edu (Richard A Blue) writes

-First topic - loading and interstitials.  From your reply, Mitchell,
-I gather that you consider all the hydrogen in PdH to be "interstitial"?

  you gather wrong.  again the literature might give an
idea of the spectrum of these sites.

       =========================================

-I thought the usual sense of that word is that it refers to atoms that
-are not in normal lattice sites, and as applied to PdH interstitial hydrogen
-would be only some fraction of the total "load" and thus could not be
-determined by simple conservation of hydrogen atoms as you suggest.

 no.  Frenkel, Shottkey defects exists, plus interstitials in
a number of sites, plus in grain boundaries, etc.

no.  you are also wrong about conservation of atoms.  
there is conservation, except of course to any putative
fusion reactions.

       =========================================

-Second topic - acoustic and optical branches of the phonon spectrum.
-As for my reference, I was starting from the presentation one might
-find in any solid state physics text.  Indeed there are these two
-branches in the phonon spectrum for a simple lattice.

 yup, but not simple lattice.  it is a binary lattice.

       =========================================

-  I was asking
-for help from you as to why the PdH lattice is special in this regard.
-Clearly you have nothing to offer.  Sorry I ask.

 sorry you didn't look into the literature again.  it is quite
deep and very interesting.
  do all metals absorb that much hydrogen?
 do they all act with anharmonicity?
 how about inverse isotope effect?
If you feel this is simple, why don't you just summarize your
readings from the literature for us.  It would be greatly
appreciated.  thanks, Dick.     ;-)X

       =========================================

-Third topic - lattice-nucleus coupling.  ...
-Then as their logic would have it, any demonstration of the existance of
-this coupling in even one case is sufficient to "prove" that cold fusion
-is really occuring wherever we want it to occur.  No further test of the
-cold fusion hypothesis is required!

just cause you say it, doesn't make it so

       =========================================

- I acknowledge that there are many circumstances in
-which such couplings are clearly demonstrated.  In fact a great deal of
-nuclear physics and solid state physics investigations have made use of
-this couplings as probes to investigate some very intricate details of
-nuclear and/or atomic structures.  As a prime example one need only mention
-Nuclear Magnetic Resonance - MRI to some of you perhaps.  I also would
--not leave out Mitchell's favorite, Mossbauer Effect.

if we agree couplings exist, let us leave it at that.
[BTW MRI involves looking at the magnetic shielding effects around
the moments as they precess due to an ordering H field.  that is 
NOT the same as couple between K-shell electrons and nuclei
which is a coulomb coupling.  If this is incorrect, please enlighten
me, and thanks in advance.]

       =========================================

-What I would suggest is that we need to move beyond the mere existance of
-a nuclear-lattice coupling to a discussion of the quantitative aspects of
-such couplings.  If one assigns an energy scale to the various known
-couplings there is a pattern that is worth noting.  The energies involved
-in nuclear-lattice couplings are not very big.  They don't have very
-large effects on the nuclear states involved.  Now is such experimental
-data something we can simply ignore? 

The existence is reason to consider them.  Now that you dont
ignore them, some progress is made.

       =========================================

- I claim that all the experimental
-data that addresses this question has to be considered and given weight
-appropriately along with the CF calorimetry data.  To my mind it defies
-logic to assert that this body of experimental data should be ignored
-in this discussion.  The evidence clearly indicates that nuclear-lattice
-couplings are, at most, small perturbations on nuclear states.  Is there
-anyone who would challenge that statement as a good summary for the vast
-body of data available?

Evidence is that CF exists, and TBskeptics will do ANYTHING they
can do to continue HEAVYWATERGATE

       =========================================

-Fourth Subject - PdD vs. NiH.  Mitchell suggests that TBskeptics(?) have
-failed to note that there is a clear difference between these two systems
-with regard to the host metal lattice.  I see that they are different, but
-I have been totally mystified as to what significance we are to see in this
-difference.  It seems to me that the fusion reaction that has never been
-satisfactorially explained for PdD can have nothing in common with the
-NiH case.  Instead of one mystery we have two.  Is that supposed to be
-progress?

 Since TB-skeptics dont even know the physical lattice structure
 (hexagonal, indeed)  dont even waste our time, if you are not going to
take the time to read the literature.
Science is systematized knowledge, and yes, that is progress.

       =========================================

-Fifth Subject - Chubb and Chubb theory.  [zip]
-We also see the tired assertion that I have simply not done my homework
-and read the proper papers.  I have a long series of private E-mail
-exchanges with Scott Chubb in which these issues were discussed.  From
-those exchanges I assume I have been given a reasonable sampling of the
Chubb analysis.  In other words, I do not make my assertions concerning
--the selection rules without having made some effort to understand the
--"literature."  However, if there is some specific point that I have
-overlooked I would welcome hearing about it.  I do not intend, however,
-to undertake any general reading of all CF literature.  Sorry, about that.

   e-mail is not reading the literature, is it?   take a chance and go
to the library, dick.
In the meantime but please do share what you have
received, if you can, about the "issues" regarding such prohibition.
it is always good to see another perspective,  and Scott has probably
thought quite a bit about this.

   Best wishes.
            Mitchell Swartz



cudkeys:
cuddy13 cudenmica cudfnmitchell cudlnswartz cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszL cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.07.13 / M Fullerton /  Miles and Calorimetry
     
Originally-From: mefuller@acs4.acs.ucalgary.ca (Michael Ernest Fullerton)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Miles and Calorimetry
Date: 13 Jul 1995 04:26:40 GMT
Organization: The University of Calgary

 Miles MH, Bush BF, Stilwell DE;  J. Phys. Chem. 98 (1994) 1948.
 "Calorimetric principles and problems in measurements of excess power
 during Pd-D2O electrolysis".
[Cut]
 The first type of setup measures the temperature directly within 
 the cell, and this, as the electrolyte changes during electrolysis, 
 produces a changing cell constant; when the temperature is measured 
 outside the cell, this effect goes and better results are obtained. 
____________________________________

Please bear with me on this perhaps silly question.

Could the measuring of temperature outside the cell have
introduced a larger error than if the temerature was measured
inside the cell?  Could the outside measurement make the results
less reliable?  

--
Michael Fullerton |  Seeds, like ideas, don't germinate in concrete
Home Page:           http://www.ucalgary.ca/~mefuller/
cudkeys:
cuddy13 cudenmefuller cudfnMichael cudlnFullerton cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.07.13 /  wwe /  Re: Has anyone convinced a crackpot?
     
Originally-From: wwe <dominaj@blockhead.laney.cc.ca.us>
Newsgroups: alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci.physics,sci.physics.fusion,alt.usenet.kooks
Subject: Re: Has anyone convinced a crackpot?
Date: 13 Jul 1995 03:30:14 GMT
Organization: Laney College, Oakland, CA

hello,
      my name is alex and this is my very time on this internet.  anyway 
I just wanted to comment on the fact that unabomber is not looking for 
sympathy.  I think  he may be looking for people to open their eyes and 
see what 


cudkeys:
cuddy13 cudendominaj cudlnwwe cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.07.13 / Paul Koloc /  Re: New Gravitational force
     
Originally-From: pmk@prometheus.UUCP (Paul M. Koloc)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: New Gravitational force
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 1995 06:46:02 GMT
Organization: Prometheus II, Ltd.

In article <3tunsr$dcu@martha.utk.edu> mbk@caffeine.engr.utk.edu (Matthew Kennel) writes:
>(Charles Cagle) (singtech@teleport.com) wrote:
>: Define gravity.  Define gravitational dipole.  Define gravitational dipole
>: moment.

>In analogy with electromagnetics I don't see any reasonable definition
>of a gravitational dipole as there isn't negative "gravitational charge".

Your right Matt, there is not use in defining grav hanky panky until
we define charge.   

So what is charge, and why does it have the special characteristics it
seems to have?  I've never seen a definition, not even in Jackson.  

special ?  1. the absolute value of the plus minus the absolute
value of the minus certainly looks like a number crowding zero.  
           2. It's time tied, since a positron and electron seem
to be time displaced by a tad.  (a tad is just half a time frame, if
time is quantized).   Positron is advanced and the electron is retarded.  

                      If it's not in a text book, 
                              nobody knows.  
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Paul M. Koloc, Bx 1037 Prometheus II Ltd, College Park MD 20741-1037    |
| mimsy!promethe!pmk; pmk%prometheus@mimsy.umd.edu   FAX (301) 434-6737   |
| VOICE (301) 445-1075   *****  Commercial FUSION in the Nineties *****   |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+

cudkeys:
cuddy13 cudenpmk cudfnPaul cudlnKoloc cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.07.13 / Scott Little /  Re: Institute for Free Energy, Russia
     
Originally-From: little@eden.com (Scott Little)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Institute for Free Energy, Russia
Date: 13 Jul 1995 05:56:36 GMT
Organization: EarthTech Int'l

In article <AMwNY0mKb3@frolov.spb.su>, "alex" <alex@frolov.spb.su> says:

>        Now you have it. Please, sent for me your proposals for real
>        work to develop experiments,  introduce results,  patent new
>        ideas.

In your general area (actually in Kishniev, Moldova) there is a guy named
Potapov who has a company named VIZOR that sells a water heating device 
that is said to be 300% efficient in converting electrical energy into 
heat. However, it appears that this amazing performance has not been 
replicated by an independant party.  Perhaps you could investigate this
device and report your findings to this newsgroup (sci.physics.fusion).
cudkeys:
cuddy13 cudenlittle cudfnScott cudlnLittle cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
processed by cud.pl ver. 0.5 Fri Jul 14 04:37:06 EDT 1995
------------------------------
