1995.07.14 / mitchell swartz / Syclops and the helium fallacy Originally-From: mica@world.std.com (mitchell swartz) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Syclops and the helium fallacy Subject: Syclopse and the helium fallacy Date: Fri, 14 Jul 1995 15:28:35 GMT Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA In Message-ID: <9507141400.AA26252@pilot05.cl.msu.edu> Subject: Syclopse and the helium fallacy blue@pilot.msu.edu (Richard A Blue) writes =dblue " There are too many other ways to account for =dblue the presence of helium at the =dblue trace levels being considered. " The He4 has been shown to be linked to the production of excess heat by palladium and heavy water (12sigma above background) when metal flasks were used to prevent diffusion in from the ambient. 12 sigma is not trace. Mitchell Swartz (mica@world.std.com) cudkeys: cuddy14 cudenmica cudfnmitchell cudlnswartz cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 ------------------------------ 1995.07.14 / jedrothwell@de / Re: Cold Fusion Originally-From: jedrothwell@delphi.com Originally-From: Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: Cold Fusion Date: Fri, 14 Jul 95 12:49:09 -0500 Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice) Syclopse writes: >I have a very general knowledge on at the most basic level what cold >fusion, or even fusion is. Can anyone suggest some literature on the >internet or at the bookstore which I could acquire and use to expand my >basic knowledge? Originally-From: Cold Fusion Research Advocates 2060 Peachtree Industrial Court, Suite 313 Chamblee, Georgia 30341 Phone: 404-451-9890 Fax: 404-458-2404 July 10, 1995 Recommended Publications Here are some recommended publications relating to cold fusion. Contact us if you want one of these items and you cannot get a copy. Items marked [E-Mail] are available from the Cold Fusion Research Advocates (CFRA) in e-mail or diskette. Items marked [SCIENCE Lib 2] can be downloaded from the CompuServe SCIENCE forum physics library 2. To contact us by e-mail, address messages to Jed Rothwell, Compuserve: 72240,1256. Internet: JEDROTHWELL@DELPHI.COM. General Fire from Ice: Searching for the Truth Behind the Cold Fusion Furor, (John Wiley & Sons, May, 1991), by Dr. Eugene F. Mallove $26 (including postage). The definitive book on the subject. E. Storms, "Cold Fusion Heats Up," Technology Review, May-June 1994 issue (MIT), 20-29 The May 5, 1993 hearings covering both hot and cold fusion: "FUSION ENERGY, Hearing before the Subcommittee on Energy of the Committee on Science, Space and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives," ISBN 0-16-041505-5. Infinite Energy Magazine, Edited by E. Mallove, P.O. Box 2816, Concord, NH 03302-2816, Tel: 603-228-4516, Fax: 603-224-5975 E-mail: 76570.2270@compuserve.com Good information on cold fusion can be found on the John Logajan's World Wide Web home page: URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan Technical Fusion Technology, a technical journal published by the ANS has published many articles about cold fusion. Contact: Publications Manager, The American Nuclear Society, 555 North Kensington Ave, Lagrange Park, IL 60525. Back issues of Fusion Technology are available from the APS publications office at 708-352-6611. Fusion Facts, a monthly newsletter. Contact subscription office at: P.O. Box 48639, Salt Lake City, UT 84158. Tel: 801-583-6232 Fax: 801-583-6245 The Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Cold Fusion (ICCF4). This conference was sponsored by the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), Advanced Nuclear Systems, and by the U.S. Office of Naval Research. It was held December 6 - 9, 1993, at Hyatt Regency Maui, Lahaina, HI. The proceedings can be purchased from: EPRI Distribution Center * 207 Coggins Drive * P.O. Box 23205 * Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 * Tel: 510-934-4212 Another version of the ICCF4 proceedings was published by the American Nuclear Society: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Cold Fusion, Dec. 6 - 9, 1993, Transactions of Fusion Technology, 1993, Vol. 26, No. 4T, Part 2 (Dec. 1994), ISSN: 0748-1896. This is a peer-reviewed set of some of the formost papers. Unfortunately, some of the best papers from the conference were either not submitted or they did not pass peer review, so they can only be found in the full proceedings from EPRI. Frontiers of Cold Fusion, ed. H. Ikegami. The proceedings of the Third International Conference on Cold Fusion (Nagoya, Japan, October 21 - 25, 1992) in Nagoya, Japan. Available from Universal Academy Press, Inc., PR Hogo 5 Bldg., 6-16-2, Hongo, Bunkyo Tokyo 113, JAPAN. Tel. 011-81-3-3813-7232, Fax: 011-81-3-3813-5932. Price 22,000 yen (U.S. $194.77, Air shipping: $26.65) P. Hagelstein (M.I.T.), "Summary Of Third International Conference On Cold Fusion In Nagoya," 43 pages, $5 [E-Mail] [SCIENCE Lib 2] The Science of Cold Fusion, ed. T. Bressani. The proceedings of the Second Annual Conference On Cold Fusion. (Como, Italy, June 29 - July 4, 1991); contact: SIF, Via L. degli Ondalo 2, 40124 Bologna, ITALY. From the Second Annual Conference proceedings, we recommend: M. McKubre (SRI), "Isothermal Flow Calorimetric Investigations Of The D/Pd System," p. 419 - 443 M. McKubre et al., "Isothermal flow calorimetric investigations of the D/Pd and H/Pd systems," J. Electroanal. Chem. 368 (1994) 55 S. Focardi (Bologna U.), R. Habel (Cagliari U.), F. Piantelli (Siena U.), "Anomalous Heat Production in Ni-H Systems," Il Nuovo Cimento, Vol 107 A, Feb. 1994, p. 163 - 167 M. H. Miles (Naval Air Weapons Center), B. F. Bush (SRI), D. E. Stillwell (CAES), "Calorimetric Principles and Problems in Measurements of Excess Power during Pd-D2O Electrolysis," J. Phys. Chem. 1994, 98, p. 1948-1952 M. Fleischmann (Univ. Southampton), S. Pons (IMRA Europe), "Calorimetry of the Pd-D2O system: from simplicity via complications to simplicity," Physics Letters A, 176 (1993) 118-129 E. Storms (Los Alamos), "Review of Experimental Observations About The Cold Fusion Effect," Fusion Technology, Vol. 20, Dec. 1991 433 - 477. A superb technical introduction to the field. O. Reifenschweiler (Philips), "Reduced radioactivity of tritium in small titanium particles," Physics Letters A, 184 (1994) 149-153 M. H. Miles and R. A. Hollins (Naval Air Weapons Center), B.F. Bush and J.J. Lagowski (Univ. Texas), "Correlation of excess power and helium production during D2O and H2O electrolysis using palladium cathodes," J. of Electroanalytical Chemistry, 346 (1993) 99 - 117. H. Gerischer (Fritz Harber Institute Der Max Plank), "Memorandum On The Present State Of Knowledge On Cold Fusion." [E-Mail] [SCIENCE Lib 2] Information about the Mills light water experiment. [E-Mail] [SCIENCE Lib 2] Media Coverage BBC "Horizon" series science documentary, "Too Close to the Sun." Broadcast March 21, 1994. Scheduled to be shown by the CBC in Canada on April 4, 1994 Popular Science, August 1993 issue, "COLD FUSION Fact or Fantasy," by Jerry Bishop, cover story Sunday Times (U.K), June 27, 1993, "Nuclear confusion," by Neville Hodgkinson, cover story The National Public Radio (NPR) program "Science Friday" on June 25, 1993 was devoted to cold fusion. It was moderated by Ira Flatow. Panelists included Michael McKubre of SRI, John Huizenga of Rochester University, Peter Hagelstein of MIT, Melvin Miles of the Naval Air Warfare Center, and Bruce Lewenstein of Cornell University. For a tape, send $12.50 to: NPR Tapes * Washington, DC 20036 * Visa orders: 202-822-2323. Specify the date (06/25/93) The NPR program "Science Friday" was again devoted to cold fusion on January 20, 1995. The Canadian Broadcasting Company (CBC) broadcast a superb documentary on cold fusion on June 24, 1993, titled "The Secret Life of Cold Fusion." For a copy, contact: Canadian Broadcasting Corporation * Post Broadcast Unit * Room 5-E, 314 J * P.O. Box 500 * Station A * Toronto, Canada M5W 1E6. The cost is $85 Canadian plus appropriate tax. Specify program title and date. New York Times, November 17, 1992, "Cold Fusion, Derided in U.S., Is Hot In Japan," by Andrew Pollack, p. B5 The Observer (UK), December 6, 1992, "Western sceptics hand Japan cheap power on a plate," by Michael White cudkeys: cuddy14 cudenjedrothwell cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszL cudyr1995 ------------------------------ 1995.07.14 / Barry Merriman / Re: Cold Fusion Originally-From: barry@starfire.ucsd.edu (Barry Merriman) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: Cold Fusion Date: 14 Jul 1995 18:34:13 GMT Organization: UCSD SOE In article <3u4vk4$h4h@newsbf02.news.aol.com> jenstroll@aol.com (JensTroll) writes: > > > > I spent the summer of 1990 at University of Utah campus working on my > dissertation project. There I met several Chemical Engineering graduate > students who were employed with the cold fusion resarch group, though not > academically (not for degrees). Those students told me that they saw > repeatable helium (He4) production results in some of the experiments run. > I don't personally know what is or was going on, but I strongly doubt > that a massive conspiricy existed to rip-off the state of Utah, so I > belive that those guys were telling the truth. > > If one accepts the proposition that those students were telling the truth, > which I do as I see no motive for them to lie, Why do you view it in terms of truth or lie? Have you ever considered that a scientist might just, somehow, make a mistake? As I recall, the final word on the He4 measurements done at Utah was at best inconclusive. As for ripping off the state of Utah: if they really did find something there, and then pulled out and moved to France, that would seem like ripping of the state, which supported that work directly at the CF institute and indirectly through Pons' faculty position. -- Barry Merriman UCSD Fusion Energy Research Center UCLA Dept. of Math bmerriman@fusion.ucsd.edu (Internet; NeXTMail is welcome) cudkeys: cuddy14 cudenbarry cudfnBarry cudlnMerriman cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 ------------------------------ 1995.07.14 / Scott Little / Re: Syclops and the helium fallacy Originally-From: little@eden.com (Scott Little) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: Syclops and the helium fallacy Date: 14 Jul 1995 18:37:33 GMT Organization: EarthTech Int'l In article , mica@world.std.com (mitchell swartz) says: > 12 sigma is not trace. Correct...but it can be very, very small. With a very sensitive instrument one can see He in just about everything. cudkeys: cuddy14 cudenlittle cudfnScott cudlnLittle cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszS cudyr1995 ------------------------------ 1995.07.14 / / You can get direct contact with YSMAR's inventors Originally-From: "alex" Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: You can get direct contact with YSMAR's inventors Date: 14 Jul 1995 22:47:30 +0400 Organization: Alexander V. Frolov, Private Account Dear Sirs, Re YSMAR system, please contact with Prof. Anatoly Smirnov. He is professional scientist. First news about YSMAR I had from him. Now he is working with group creating the new version of heat generator similar YSMAR, but for 40 atm. pressure. He said that 10 time o/u is demonstarted and temperature is 600 C. His address: Prof. Anatoly P. Smirnov, P.O.Box 25, St.-Petersburg, 195298, Russia. I'm not interested in "intermediator position", please contact with Prof. Smirnov directly. Also, I don't understand why people whoes are interesting in YSMAR test did not try dot in direct contact with inventor? I can repeat the address: VISOR firm, Republic Moldova, 277012, Kishinev, Pushkin str., 24-16. Phone *23-27-01, 23-33-18, fax *23-77-36 I use paper "The Techical Documentation for Heat Generator YSMAR" printed in August 1994. Re attempt make drawing that Gary Steckly asked. Let's look what I did here: Flange of cone to pump ------------------------------- \ / \ /cone2 \ / \ / tube 5 i--\ /-i ----------------------------i i ------------i i i i i body3 i -----------i i -----------------------------i i i i i-----------i Text "emiting of heat energy take place thank to complete processes of circulation of water in body3 and tube 5. Water is pumping in cone2 by means of pump under 4...5 atm." I must note, that HOW CAVITATION BUBBLES ARE CREATED INSIDE OF TUBE 5 this YSMAR paper of 1994 don't explane. I can only suppose it. In american well-known magazine Science of 1989-1992 published articles re CAVITATION. From it I remember the data: "up to several thousands degrees" for temperature of micro-explosion of single bubble inside of water. I have not question how it can work in general principle. How it is real working is the secret of inventor and who whant ask him, please, find him. That's all from me now. Please, try get in direct contact with inventor. I had information that YSMAR real device cost USD 1000. If you need it to test it, it is more easy to buy it from Potapov or Smirnov than try to reproduce. Best regards Alexander Frolov cudkeys: cuddy14 cudenalex cudln cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 ------------------------------ 1995.07.14 / Scott Little / Re: Syclops and the helium fallacy Originally-From: little@eden.com (Scott Little) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: Syclops and the helium fallacy Date: 14 Jul 1995 19:34:53 GMT Organization: EarthTech Int'l In article <3u6dhd$m0r@boris.eden.com>, little@eden.com (Scott Little) says: > >In article , mica@world.std.com (mitchell swartz) says: > >> 12 sigma is not trace. > >Correct...but it can be very, very small. With a very sensitive instrument >one can see He in just about everything. On second thought, Mitchell, I have to say that you're sorta wrong. 12 sigma simply means that the result was quite significant when compared to the instrument's measurement precision. This has nothing to do with the actual concentration being measured which is where the term "trace" comes in. "Trace" means a small concentration. "Trace" connotes a concentration near the detection limit of a particular instrument but, what is "trace" for one instrument is a big signal for another instrument and an undetectable amount for a third instrument. cudkeys: cuddy14 cudenlittle cudfnScott cudlnLittle cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszS cudyr1995 ------------------------------ 1995.07.14 / Dieter Britz / Biblio update Jul-95 (4 more papers). Originally-From: Dieter Britz Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Biblio update Jul-95 (4 more papers). Date: Fri, 14 Jul 1995 12:33:15 +0200 Organization: DAIMI, Computer Science Dept. at Aarhus University Starry droogs, here are four more papers, including a couple from people who have posted to this group, such as Todd Green, and yours truly. The study of Green and Quickenden is a remarkable quality minus; if all CNF work were done like this, I believe the issue of whether there is such a thing as CNF would have been settled long ago. They did their damndest to do all the things others reckon are the secret of excess heat, and found none. I have the feeling that they really wanted to find it. You may remeber the arguments we had here about current fluctuations etc and how they might affect F&P's power calculations. One of my students and I looked at this and found that this is not an explanation of excess heat. We looked at the power spectrum of both cell voltage and current, and there were no extremely high-frequency components that might do the trick. F&P did make a mistake with their setup, but it did not produce apparent excess heat. I belieive that this subject is now dead, on the basis of this paper. We did not use heavy water but tried to make conditions as much like those of F&P as possible in all other respects. Than there is the older Martynov et al, which has taken me a long time to get (Dr. Filimonov of Belarus kindly sent it to me). There was an ion beam experiment, but they did switch off the beam and measured neutrons after that. Lastly, a Chinese paper that I am not so sure is about COLD fusion, although there is a reference to F&P-89. Crashing Au ions at several MeV into a TiD target does not seem like cold fusion to me, really. If there are Chinese-speakers among the gentle readers of this group, I have a question: With the paper whose authors I render as Yi et al, I wasn't sure which way around these names should go. As an example, the first author is written as Yi Kai; so if one were to apply the usual form of names in references, should that be K. Yi, or Y. Kai? There must be a standard. As you can see, I have guessed at K. Yi but if I was wrong, I'll correct it later. Usually, Chem. Abstr., where I find most papers, knows; but in this case it seemed they were equally at a loss and just reproduced all the names in full. So much for the updates. Then I have a bit of news out of New Scientist, that does not fit into any of the bibliography files. In vol 147 (1995), issue 1984, 1-Jul, page 8, there is an item about the Japanese sending first an orbiting moon probe around the year 2000, to survey the moon for a good later landing site. One of the objects is to try to find 3He and mine it there, for use in hot fusion back here on Terra Firma. I just mention it. Journal Papers: Current count = 994 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ # Green TG, Quickenden TI; J. Electroanal. Chem. 389 (1995) 91. "Calorimetric studies of highly loaded deuterides and hydrides of palladium". ** Calorimetry, high loading, res0 G&Q report here the results of a painstaking study of the calorimetry of the title systems. Many of the published recommendations for producing excess heat were tried (with particular attention to the work of McKubre et al and Hasegawa et al): high loading (up to 0.93), low-high charging current regime, prolonged electrolysis (30 days) and additives (Al and SiO2). An isoperibolic calorimeter was used and the error in the heat balance was 1.5%. The result of 48 separate measurements (including controls) is that no excess heat outside the error limits was found in any run. Oct-94/Jun-95 #..................................................................... Jul-95 Holst-Hansen P, Britz D; J. Electroanal. Chem. 388 (1995) 11. "Can current fluctuations account for the excess heat claims of Fleischmann and Pons?". ** Experimental, instrumentation, res0 This responds to some discussion about the possible role of current fluctuations in the F&P galvanostatic setup in the production of excess heat artifacts. Analysis of the dynamics of F&P's galvanostat shows that it would indeed produce some high frequency current fluctuations and an experiment with an electrolytic cell confirmed this. However, the fluctuations are very small in magnitude and essentially uncorrelated with cell voltage, so that this error in instrumentation did not lead to artifactual excess heat in F&P's calculations. Sep-94/May-95 #..................................................................... Jul-95 Martynov MI, Mel'dianov AI, Chepovskii AM; Vopr. Atom. Nauki i Tekh., Ser. Termoyader Sintez 1991 (2) 77 (in Russian). "Experiments on the detection of nuclear reaction products in deuterated metals". ** Experimental, neutrons, gammas, charged particles, electrolysis, ion beam, ** res+ This team tried two kinds of experiments: an electrolysis, and an ion beam experiment. For electrolysis, LiOD in D2O was the electrolyte, and a Pd foil of 40 mu thickness and about 1 cm^2 area the cathode. One side of the foil was exposed to the electrolyte, the other was isolated from it, and a detector of charged particles (cp's) mounted close to it. At 300 mA/cm^2, and over an observation time of 10-20 h, no cp's above background were observed. There were two ion beam runs, using H, D and Xe ions. With a D-beam, run for 200 h at 1-2 keV onto a TiD target at 400 C, the n count went up to about 3 times the background noise, and remained at this level after the beam was switched off. H and Xe beams did not produce n counts above background. The neutron detector was a triple 3He type, with a discriminator. Gamma results are not mentioned. Jan-91/Feb-91 #..................................................................... Jul-95 Yi K, Jiang D, Qian X, Lin J, Ye Y; Nucl. Techniques (China) 17 (1994) 722 (in Chinese, Engl. abstract). "A study of D-D fusion in TiD target induced by 197Au bombardment". ** Experimental, ion beam, res+ A TiD target was bombarded with beams of Au ions at 1-5.2 MeV energies, and the resulting proton flux measured. The beam induces d-d fusion in the target. The abstract says that the resulting fusion can be explained by a two stage cascade collision model, indicating that the energy transfer is carried out by elastic collisions between deuterons and the Au ions. There are references to F&P-89 as well as to Beuhler et al 89, but it is not clear to this abstracter how this might be considered cold fusion. Jul-93/Dec-94 #..................................................................... Jul-95 How to retrieve the archived biblio files: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 1. By ftp from vm1.nodak.edu; log in as anonymous, giving your email address as password. Then cd to fusion. There are many files here, so do not use dir; if you are after the biblio files only, try dir fusion.cnf-* and then get or mget what you want. 2. Send an email to listserv@vm1.nodak.edu, blank subject and the message get fusion.. To find out what there is, send index fusion This gets you an email with the directory of all files there, with which you can also match Fusion Digest numbers with file names, before getting those files. The index, or files you ask for, will be emailed to you. -- Dieter Britz alias britz@kemi.aau.dk cudkeys: cuddy14 cudenbritz cudfnDieter cudlnBritz cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszL cudyr1995 ------------------------------ 1995.07.14 / EKennel / Re: Reifenschweiler replication? Originally-From: ekennel@aol.com (EKennel) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: Reifenschweiler replication? Date: 14 Jul 1995 09:19:07 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Dear Dick, >>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.<< Well, that is a reasonable position, I suppose. I'm curious as to whether anyone has bothered to attempt a replication. Are you aware of any attempts? I'm interested in this experiment because metal tritides are one of the few cases where there is a documented coupling between nuclear decay and chemical state of the atom, owing to its effect on electron capture (albeit orders of magnitude too small to account for the Reifenschweiler claims). By the way, sorry if this message appears twice. I tried to send it earlier, and I'm not sure if it transmitted successfully. Best regards, Elliot Kennel Yellow Springs OH cudkeys: cuddy14 cudenekennel cudlnEKennel cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 ------------------------------ 1995.07.14 / Richard Blue / Syclopse and the helium fallacy Originally-From: blue@pilot.msu.edu (Richard A Blue) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Syclopse and the helium fallacy Date: Fri, 14 Jul 1995 14:05:31 GMT Organization: Sci.physics.fusion/Mail Gateway Syclopse seems to have awoken from a five-year sleep as far as CF is concerned, but that is OK. Nothing much has changed since those heady days in Utah during the summer of 1990. The guys at the cold fusion institute were detecting helium everywhere and all was well with the world. However, there is a little problem with helium detection as proof that nuclear transmutations have occurred. If one but harks back to the works of Lord Rutherford (Something Mitchell Swartz should do!) one will learn that the detection of helium in a sample does not constitute proof that the helium was produced in the sample. There are too many other ways to account for the presence of helium at the trace levels being considered. Ultimately those experimental results that were routinely showing up helium traces were trashed, just as they should have been. Obviously the more common helium detection becomes the less such detection has special significance. End of story? Dick Blue cudkeys: cuddy14 cudenblue cudfnRichard cudlnBlue cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 ------------------------------ 1995.07.14 / Richard Blue / Re: Implications of Mills result Originally-From: blue@pilot.msu.edu (Richard A Blue) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: Implications of Mills result Date: Fri, 14 Jul 1995 14:35:22 GMT Organization: Sci.physics.fusion/Mail Gateway MItchell Swartz and I have just about run this into the ground. He clearly starts with a belief that the existence of CF is not in question leaving only a few details to be worked out. I don't yet see any very robust evidence to support such a belief. Furthermore I find that the advocates of CF, such as Mitchell, so a remarkable inability to provide solid information to support their position. When the going gets rough Mitchell just resorts to berating me for not having read "the literature", whatever that means. Having read sci.physics.fusion for 5 years clearly has not done much to inform me on the topic! After all that has been said I still have no clue as to what mechanism can possibly result in a very strong perturbation of certain nuclear states that leaves no trace other than "excess heat" and possibly the one reaction product most likely to sneek into the experimental system. It is a cleverly designed scheme devised to cloud men's minds. Any of the more unambiguous signals we might expect to find have been suppressed in a truly remarkable (but totally unexplained) manner. Clearly the CF results require a very strong perturbation of the nuclear states involved, but at the same time CF advocates continue to treat the problem as if the perturbations are small and rather insignificant. >From the perspective of thermodynamics the nuclear degrees of freedom must be closely coupled to the atomic degrees of freedom in order for these systems to exhibited the behavior claimed. Yet this coupling magically restricts the decay modes rather than expands the possibilities. Somehow the density of states goes up and goes down at the same time! Is that not a problem? The nuclear-states question is not a problem for CF advocates because they do not address such questions. Scott Chubb has not addressed that question so there is little point in my searching "the literature" as Mitchell would have me do. Dick Blue cudkeys: cuddy14 cudenblue cudfnRichard cudlnBlue cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 ------------------------------ 1995.07.14 / Richard Blue / Marshall Dudley hyhpothesis Originally-From: blue@pilot.msu.edu (Richard A Blue) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Marshall Dudley hyhpothesis Date: Fri, 14 Jul 1995 14:50:30 GMT Organization: Sci.physics.fusion/Mail Gateway If I understand Marshall Dudley's hypothesis he starts by seeking to use the electronic configuration of PdD to provide shielding for the electrostatic repulsion between D nuclei. That has been considered many times by many people with some limited success. Yes, it is possible that there is some enhancement of the fusion rate, but never enough to be interesting. The way CF has gone actually frustrates this approach to the problem. Experimentally the advocates are forced to assert that the PdD system is particularly well suited for this, i.e. is endowed with some special properties not to be found in other systems. However, the approach Marshall proposes fails to show any special significance in the choice of Pd as the host lattice. Even after the fusion-rate barrier is overcome the experimental data leaves much to be explained concerning the outcome of the fusion that is said to occur. Rapid cooling of the nucleus implies close coupling which implies very significant alterations in the nuclear wave functions. That in turn indicates a general breakdown in the organization of the nucleons as Pd, D, and/or 4He, etc. Should we not expect that a few neutrons might leak out under those conditions? Aren't we requiring some sort of Maxwell's Demon to be operative at the nuclear level? Dick Blue cudkeys: cuddy14 cudenblue cudfnRichard cudlnBlue cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 ------------------------------ 1995.07.14 / mitchell swartz / Re: Implications of Mills results Originally-From: mica@world.std.com (mitchell swartz) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: Implications of Mills results Subject: Re: Implications of Mills result Date: Fri, 14 Jul 1995 15:26:40 GMT Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA In Message-ID: <9507141430.AA61449@pilot05.cl.msu.edu> Subject: Re: Implications of Mills result blue@pilot.msu.edu (Richard A Blue) writes: =dblue " When the going gets rough Mitchell just resorts =dblue to berating me for not having =dblue read "the literature", whatever that means. =dblue Having read sci.physics.fusion =dblue for 5 years clearly has not done much to inform =dblue me on the topic!" Dick Blue last confused e-mail, and now confuses sci.physics.fusion, with "the literature". =dblue "After all that has been said I still have no clue ..." The literature remains a good start. --- BTW when did this change from Miles->Mills? Best wishes, Mitchell Swartz cudkeys: cuddy14 cudenmica cudfnmitchell cudlnswartz cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 ------------------------------ 1995.07.13 / Mahipal Virdy / Re: The Farce of Physics Originally-From: virdy@pogo.den.mmc.com (Mahipal Singh Virdy) Newsgroups: alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci.astro,sci.energy,sci.misc,s i.physics,sci.physics.electromag,sci.physics.fusion,sci.physics.particle sci.research,sci.skeptic Subject: Re: The Farce of Physics Date: Thu, 13 Jul 1995 20:43:44 GMT Organization: Martin Marietta Astronautics In article <3tu0si$42r@sun001.spd.dsccc.com>, Al Fargnoli wrote: >In article <3trl6i$qa3@netnews.upenn.edu>, >Kevin Sterner wrote: >:In article <805190629snz@galacta.demon.co.uk>, >:"Dr. Rich Artym" writes: >: >:> As scientists we should be careful to keep both feet on the firm ground >:> of the scientific method and not try claiming knowledge of some greater >:> truth regarding reality. Leave that to philosophy and religion. >:> Same old sentiment. Let's put scientists in THEIR place. But this is weirder than normal because it starts as "As scientists *we*..." >: >:You are completely wrong. OF COURSE electrons exist, regardless of > >[rest of Kevin's nonsense deleted] > Yeah. Let's replace Kevin's nonsense with THIS NONSENSE... 8-( >What Dr. Artym stated so well is _exactly_ what I was taught >in high school _and_ at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. > >Are you the same Kevin that doesn't understand GR? Maybe you >should consult some of the physics professors at UPenn when you >don't understand what you find on sci.physics.* > >Al Fargnoli Actually, this "Kevin" is the one who has shown he LEAST understands GR with respect to all other known Kevins. ;^) Even if you agree with somebody, Al, you need better defence than your HS and RPI teachings. Science is being misrepresented by a whole lot of factions and it would come as no surprise that some are actually "Science Teachers". Science is a VAST field. It isn't limited to GR, SR, QFT, SEX, etc. If one is not an expert in several of these fields, one is still a scientist. Your NONSENSE about "theoretical constructs" doesn't alter the fact that science is talking about something absolutely REAL. The electrons that bombard your computer screen are REAL and they make this communication link possible. Enjoy what you've got but stop being hypocritical about Science. [Not directed to you persoanlly Al.] Joke: Isn't science MORE that a study of ACRONYM S.O.U.P.? Isn't it? Mahipal, |meforce> cudkeys: cuddy13 cudenvirdy cudfnMahipal cudlnVirdy cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 ------------------------------ 1995.07.14 / Barry Merriman / Re: absorption of hydrogen by palladium Originally-From: barry@starfire.ucsd.edu (Barry Merriman) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: absorption of hydrogen by palladium Date: 14 Jul 1995 03:26:37 GMT Organization: UCSD SOE In article <3u0egj$gb6@agate.berkeley.edu> schultz@garnet.berkeley.edu (Richard Schultz) writes: > > "P&F are getting so much heat that you hardly need any calorimetry at all." > --Jed Rothwell, sci.physics.fusion, 19 Jul 1992 > "The palladium based systems are a useless dead end. Who cares about them?" > --Jed Rothwell, sci.physics.fusion, 10 Dec 1992 An amusing set of quotations, useful to fill the gap since JR himself has been quiet of late. Of course, I assume that JR would rationalize the above by saying that while P&F are getting plenty of heat, their results pale beside those of X,Y & Z. Also, as Jed points out, past experiments can generate evermore excess heat through reanalysis. Perhaps P&F are simply recycling their data, which explains why they don't need calorimetry :-) -- Barry Merriman UCSD Fusion Energy Research Center UCLA Dept. of Math bmerriman@fusion.ucsd.edu (Internet; NeXTMail is welcome) cudkeys: cuddy14 cudenbarry cudfnBarry cudlnMerriman cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 ------------------------------ 1995.07.14 / JensTroll / Re: Cold Fusion Originally-From: jenstroll@aol.com (JensTroll) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: Cold Fusion Date: 14 Jul 1995 01:33:56 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) syclopse@aol.com (Syclopse) writes: ,,, "I am new to the specifics of cold fusions. I have a very general knowledge on at the most basic level what cold fusion, or even fusion is. Can anyone suggest some literature on the internet or at the bookstore which I could acquire and use to expand my basic knowledge? I'd appreciate any suggestions from anyone. thank you. Syclopse on America Online a.k.a Matt Syclopse@aol.com a.k.a. Matt." ====================================================== 1) Fusion is a nuclear process by which two (or more) atoms come together and "fuse" to form a heavier atom. This commonly happens in the interior of the sun and other stars or when a hydrogen bomb is detonated. A common fusion reaction which is said to occur in the sun is where through repeated intermediate collision and fusion reactions four hydrogen atoms fuse into one helium atom plus two positrons. Current "accepted" physics states that for fusion reactions to work, the temperature must be very very high as in millions of degrees. It is well known that such reactions do occur at those temperatures (H-bombs do work). It should also be understood that fusion reactions produce enormous energy for the amount of matter fused. If one could make a fusion reactor which fused Hydrogen or one of its isotopes, you could probably drive around the world several times for the amount of hydrogen (heavy or otherwise) in a typical glass of water. This is what all the excitement is about. Anyone (or group) who could make such a reactor would probably make a fortune that would make Don Trump look positively middle class. 2) Cold Fusion is the concept that fusion reactions may be made to work at very low ( room) temperatures. Most scientists who are familier with and/or work on "hot" fusion reactor designs scoff and/or ridicule the concept of cold fusion when they pay any attention to it at all. Cold fusion came into public notice when two chemists working at the University of Utah claimed to have produced fusion reactions in a glass jar using a Palladium rod, heavy water and electricity. Their experiments and results have been hard to reproduce which has tended to fuel the ridicule that "hot" fusion scientists tend to heap on them. However, several groups have claimed to duplicate some or all of there results. I belive that there is something real going on. I was a graduate student working toward a Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering with a minor in Physical Chemistry at Louisiana State University from 1989 until early 1994. I spent the summer of 1990 at University of Utah campus working on my dissertation project. There I met several Chemical Engineering graduate students who were employed with the cold fusion resarch group, though not academically (not for degrees). Those students told me that they saw repeatable helium (He4) production results in some of the experiments run. I don't personally know what is or was going on, but I strongly doubt that a massive conspiricy existed to rip-off the state of Utah, so I belive that those guys were telling the truth. If one accepts the proposition that those students were telling the truth, which I do as I see no motive for them to lie, and assumes that no fraud was being perpetrated by the professors ON THEIR LAB ASSISTANTS WHO WERE ALL GRADUATE ENGINEERS AND/OR CHEMISTS*, the only remaining alternative is some form of transmutation or fusion. * Having been a graduate laboratory assistant for ~6 years I find the notion of a professor commiting a scientific fraud in his lab without his lab assistants knowing it stupid. Any Physics guys who wish to ridicule, feel free, just remember how Lord Kelvin "proved" the earth was no more than 100 million years old and Darwin a fool. cudkeys: cuddy14 cudenjenstroll cudlnJensTroll cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszL cudyr1995 ------------------------------ 1995.07.14 / Charles Cagle / GE Nuclear - wholly private? whew! Originally-From: Charles Cagle Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: GE Nuclear - wholly private? whew! Date: 14 Jul 1995 07:17:55 GMT Organization: Singularity Technologies, Inc. barry@starfire.ucsd.edu (Barry Merriman) wrote: >In article <21cenlogic-2906950512430001@austin-1-2.i-link.net> >21cenlogic@i-link.net (Mitchell Jones) writes: > >> I suggest you switch >> to the private sector. See how carrying the load feels, and maybe you will >> begin to develop a different attitude toward bloodsuckers who spend their >> lives riding on other people's backs. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >Actually, my wife was an engineer working in the private energy >sector, for General Electric Nuclear Energy. You don't get it do you Barry? General Electric Nuclear Energy has its hands so deep in uncle's pockets that calling it private sec= tor must imply they are actually so deep they are playing with uncle's "private" parts (which, incidently, happens to be taxpayer's = money)! You can't have all those submarine and naval vessel contracts without being the same thing. Regards, Charles Cagle Chief Technical Officer Singularity Technologies, Inc, 1640 Oak Grove Road, N.W. Salem, OR 97304 Ph/Fx 503/362-7781 ----------------------------------- I sought the fount of fire in hollow reed, Hid privily, a measureless resource For man, and mighty teacher of all arts. - Aeschylus ..Prometheus Bound email> singtech@teleport.com cudkeys: cuddy14 cudensingtech cudfnCharles cudlnCagle cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 ------------------------------ 1995.07.14 / Charles Sites / Re: Implications of Miles result Originally-From: cbsite01@starbase.spd.louisville.edu (Charles B Sites) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: Implications of Miles result Date: 14 Jul 1995 03:59:58 GMT Organization: University of Louisville, Louisville KY USA In js_vetrano@pnl.gov (John Vetrano) writes: >Question for either Mitchell Swartz or anyone else in the know. Our >library does not have access to the CF literature (i.e. the conference >proceedings) but I have been curious for some time if anyone has done >Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM) studies of the metal before or >after a CF reaction. This technique gives a direct look at the lattice >and can tell you many things about the processes that have occurred >there. If you have any specific papers or researchers that have done this >I would appreciate any information. Thanks in advance. TEM work is tricky with electrodes used in an conventional electrolytic type experiment simply due to the sample size and the difficulty getting undistured Angstrom thick specimens. It might be a really good technique for thin films loaded in pressurised D gas however. I got a peak at a few cells Tom Droege ran under an SEM with backscatter. In that case there was alot of chemistry involved with some of the electrolyte fusing with the surface metal. Too bad we couldn't disern any isotopic shifts. >Regards, >John Vetrano >js_vetrano@pnl.gov -- Chuck Sites | cbsite01@starbase.spd.louisville.edu | \e- e-/ System Programmer | (502)-852-7070 | \~~~>/ Electrical Engineering |-----------------------------------------| /<~~~\ University of Louisville | http://www.spd.louisville.edu/~cbsite01 | /e- e-\ cudkeys: cuddy14 cudencbsite01 cudfnCharles cudlnSites cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 ------------------------------ 1995.07.14 / Charles Cagle / Re: Has anyone convinced a crackpot? Originally-From: Charles Cagle Newsgroups: alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci.physics,sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: Has anyone convinced a crackpot? Date: 14 Jul 1995 06:56:13 GMT Organization: Singularity Technologies, Inc. eaton1@chinook.halcyon.com (Eaton/Cutler-Hammer Corp.) wrote: > >As long as we remain in denial that modern science is imperfect, we will >not be able to work towards its improvement. > >-- >===================================+================================== >Bill Beaty >Eaton/Cutler-Hammer Corp. Industrial Optoelectronics >720 80th St. SW voice: 1-800-426-9184 >Everett, WA 98203-6299 fax: 1-206-347-0544 You are a wise and insightful man, Bill Beaty. God Bless you, Charles Cagle Chief Technical Officer Singularity Technologies, Inc, 1640 Oak Grove Road, N.W. Salem, OR 97304 Ph/Fx 503/362-7781 ----------------------------------- I sought the fount of fire in hollow reed, Hid privily, a measureless resource For man, and mighty teacher of all arts. - Aeschylus ..Prometheus Bound email> singtech@teleport.com cudkeys: cuddy14 cudensingtech cudfnCharles cudlnCagle cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 ------------------------------ 1995.07.14 / R Jenkins / Wanted: Your views on Internet stuff for physicists Originally-From: R.Jenkins@shef.ac.uk (R.Jenkins) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Wanted: Your views on Internet stuff for physicists Date: 14 Jul 1995 08:02:21 GMT Organization: Information Studies, University of Sheffield , UK APOLOGIES TO THOSE WHO HAVE ALREADY SEEN THIS REQUEST I am a physics graduate who is studying for an MA in Librarianship at the University of Sheffield. My ambition is to be a science librarian in a university or other research establishment. I am especially interested in networked information resources and my dissertation topic is entitled 'Evaluating Internet Resources For Physicists' Therefore, I am very interested in your views about the Internet and how you use it, and would be very grateful for any comments that you could give me (which will remain anonymous). (NB I am not too worried about distinctions between IP and non-IP networks - all of them are relevant to my study) Brief answers to the following questions would be particularly valuable: 1) Do you find anything which is relevant to research (or teaching) via the Internet? 2) Are there any Internet resources that you find particularly valuable? (whether they are newsgroups, mailing lists, ftp/Web/gopher sites or whatever) If so, what is good about them? 3) What appeals to you the most about Internet-based resources in general? What appeals to you least? Thank you in advance for you help, Ruth Jenkins cudkeys: cuddy14 cudenJenkins cudfnR cudlnJenkins cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 ------------------------------ processed by cud.pl ver. 0.5 Sat Jul 15 04:37:05 EDT 1995 ------------------------------