1995.08.22 / Robert Eachus /  Re: FYI98 - PCAST Report on DOE Fusion Program
     
Originally-From: eachus@spectre.mitre.org (Robert I. Eachus)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion,sci.energy,sci.physics
Subject: Re: FYI98 - PCAST Report on DOE Fusion Program
Date: 22 Aug 1995 01:05:04 GMT
Organization: The Mitre Corp., Bedford, MA.

In article <412l83$eeu@electron.rutgers.edu> bweiner@electron.rutgers.ed
 (Ben Weiner) writes:

  > Old news.  Ray Davis (PI of the long running Homestake chlorine
  > experiment) claimed a possible correlation with the sunspot cycle
  > a long time ago.  I think it's fair to say that most people don't
  > see it in the data.

   Yeah, but now there is just beginning to be enough data from the
Gallium experiments to "confirm or deny."

  > I think it is misleading to say that the neutrino experiments
  > "have observed anything but constant burning."  The number of
  > neutrinos detected is very small and there is also the potential
  > for large systematic errors since the tank flushing process is
  > such an undertaking.  Constant burning is likely just as
  > consistent with the data as anything else.

   Uh, if constant burning is consistant with several years of no
observed neutrinos, the sun is producing very little energy from
fusion.  If you want to contend that even the total integrated flux
observed with in the Homestake experiment is consistant with constant
burning you have to propose either a radically different solar model
or a mass for the neutrino.  For now I'll apply Occam's Razor and say
the observations are not consistant with constant burning.

   Since the Gallium experiments which both look for much lower energy
neutrinos and are much less vulnerable to systemic error or noise also
don't look very much like a Poisson process, I very much stand my
ground.

--

					Robert I. Eachus

with Standard_Disclaimer;
use  Standard_Disclaimer;
function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is...
cudkeys:
cuddy22 cudeneachus cudfnRobert cudlnEachus cudmo8 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.08.22 /  dview@earthlin /  Nuclear Contamination
     
Originally-From: dview@earthlink.net
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Nuclear Contamination
Date: 22 Aug 1995 01:24:56 GMT
Organization: Earthlink Network, Inc.

I need some practical advice on de-contaminating a *slightly* radioactive antique.
Let me 'splain: 
I collect magnetic compasses as a hobby.  About a year ago I found a very cool, 
WW1 infantrymans marching compass at an antique show.  It was pretty advanced
for the time, fluid filled with a sighting magnifier that allowed
you to read directly without
refocusing your eye. Anyway, the thing was in pretty bad shape so I drained what was left
of the fluid and disassembled it.  Inside, on either side of the
sighting optics, there are 
two glass ampoules with something dark pink sealed inside. They reminded me of the 
Tritium modules found in modern day mil-spec compasses.  After it occured to me that
they didn't have access to tritium back then I figured that I better
be safe and check this
thing for radiation.  So I borrowed a Geiger counter and sure enough, It's pretty active.
If I've read this instrument correctly  it's about 4000 CPM (Curies per min.?) or about
4mR/hr  (whatever that is) at a distance of about 5cm.  Unfortunately,  most of the other
metal parts in this thing register a fair number of "clicks" as well.

I would like to know the answers to the following:

What would the source most likely be made of?
(By the way, it no longer glows)

Is that level of radiation dangerous ? 

I haven't tried to clean it yet. All of the parts are coated with oxide and some paint.
Is the contamination likely to be into the brass or would it just be on the surface?

Can it be de-contaminated?

AND

What is the best way to do this?

I appreciate any advice. (I know that alot of you are going to tell me to toss it.
I don't want to do that if it can be avoided).

Thank you,

signed, "Playing w/Fire"
a.k.a. dview@earthlink.net

cudkeys:
cuddy22 cudendview cudmo8 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.08.22 / Robert Eachus /  Re: Heavy Metal Deuterides
     
Originally-From: eachus@spectre.mitre.org (Robert I. Eachus)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Heavy Metal Deuterides
Date: 22 Aug 1995 01:15:50 GMT
Organization: The Mitre Corp., Bedford, MA.

In article <40j23v$3mi@ds8.scri.fsu.edu> jac@ds8.scri.fsu.edu (Jim Carr) writes:

  > Chernobyl exploded.  The fire followed. 

  > Analysis of the fission products indicated that it was blown apart 
  > by a prompt-critical fission reaction.  True, it was more like using 
  > gunpowder rather than plastic explosive because of the lack of a 
  > tamper, but it did blow up. 

    By atomic bomb standards it may have been a fissle, but it was
certainly well tamped and acted like a shaped charge aimed up.  Just
like the Idaho disaster the trigger involved rapid removal of the main
control rod, and so the explosion started at the bottom and propagate
upward.  Does anyone yet have an estimate of the equivalent power of
the explosion in kilotons?  Last I heard it was difficult to compute
from the radioactive products, as the core continued to burn (both
chemically and in the nuclear sense) for days after the initial
explosion.
--

					Robert I. Eachus

with Standard_Disclaimer;
use  Standard_Disclaimer;
function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is...
cudkeys:
cuddy22 cudeneachus cudfnRobert cudlnEachus cudmo8 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.08.17 / Martin Sevior /  Re: Off the deep end
     
Originally-From: Martin Sevior <msevior@physics.unimelb.edu.au>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Off the deep end
Date: 17 Aug 1995 22:29:40 GMT
Organization: School of Physics, University of Melbourne.

blue@pilot.msu.edu (Richard A Blue) wrote:
>
>
[Much appologizing deleted ]
>
>
>As a nuclear physicist I say the the nuclear aspects of cold
>fusion is pure crap.
>
>

I agree with Dick. The nuclear Physics of CF is by far the weakest point of
the whole implausible scenario. How can there be 10^12 reactions nuclear
reactions per second and produce  no measurable radiation? Even if there are
interesting and exotic Quantum Mechanical processes that bring
hydrogen nuclei close together and enable tunneling through the coulomb barrier
as described in the MIT patent, we're still left with a REALLY mysterious
process that supresses neutron and gamma emmission by factors in excess of
10^10. Contrary to what some people in this group have said it is relatively 
easy to measure even 10 neutrons per second with half way decent techniques.
Far
easier than measuring the heat generated by say, 10^10 reactions. 
Finally there's the whole question of light water results. What reaction
mechanism can explain those?

Dick Blue then says:
>
>Now if the rest of you will hold up
>your end of the discussion we should be able to put this topic
>to rest in short order!
>

Well I'm not an expert in calorimetry but this is the whole point isn't it?
There continue to be a large number of anomalus calorimetry results that cannot
be easily dissmissed. Some of them (such as Craven's) are extremely robust
and show large effects in very simple setups. Others, such as the E-QUEST
data, show helium production that cannot be explained away.
Really the whole CF saga is quite fascinating and is not showing the trajectory
of previous "pathalogical" science examples. As time goes on the results are
more widely reproduced and become harder to explain.

Martin Sevior

cudkeys:
cuddy17 cudenmsevior cudfnMartin cudlnSevior cudmo8 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.08.22 / Robert Eachus /  Re: Droege's experiments proved nothing
     
Originally-From: eachus@spectre.mitre.org (Robert I. Eachus)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Droege's experiments proved nothing
Date: 22 Aug 1995 01:26:26 GMT
Organization: The Mitre Corp., Bedford, MA.

In article <416op6$ei7@newsbf02.news.aol.com> johmann@aol.com (Johmann) writes:

  > As I recall, Droege has admitted to a lack of proper credentials: he has
  > no Ph.D.

  > Thus, his experimental efforts were those of an amateur, and he had no
  > more qualification to do those experiments than my neighborhood garage
  > mechanic.

   Let's lay this to rest right.  Whether or not Tom has a PhD has
nothing to do with whether or not he is an amateur.  I think that the
fact that Tom built (or helped built) many of the instruments at
Fermilab qualifies him as a professional.

   But more important, AFAIK he is the only person to make money from
selling the products of cold fusion research for power production.
Namely his "water machine" which is being used to measure scaling in
boiler pipes. ;-)

   When Jed starts selling Mr. Fusion machines then maybe he can
question Tom's credentials. ;-)


--

					Robert I. Eachus

with Standard_Disclaimer;
use  Standard_Disclaimer;
function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is...
cudkeys:
cuddy22 cudeneachus cudfnRobert cudlnEachus cudmo8 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.08.21 / Paul Budnik /  Re: FYI98 - PCAST Report on DOE Fusion Program
     
Originally-From: paul@mtnmath.com (Paul Budnik)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion,sci.energy,sci.physics
Subject: Re: FYI98 - PCAST Report on DOE Fusion Program
Date: 21 Aug 1995 17:18:01 -0700
Organization: Mountain Math Software, P. O. Box 2124, Saratoga. CA 95070

Jeffrey A. Dracup (attilasw@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
: I'd have to agree with Mr. Budnik.

Pehaps ypou are confusing Paul Koloc with Paul Budnik,

[...]

: If the goal is to increase the net standard of living for our
: particular species, we will require a) more land and b) more energy. 
: There has always been a direct correlation between the average quantity
: of usuable energy available per capita and the global average standard
: of living.

I disagree. To accomplish a higher standard of living will not necessarily
require more energy per capita in developed countries. It will not
require more land. It will require wiser use of the resources we have.

Paul Budnik
cudkeys:
cuddy21 cudenpaul cudfnPaul cudlnBudnik cudmo8 cudqt3 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.08.21 / Bill Rowe /  Re: Droege's experiments proved nothing
     
Originally-From: browe@netcom.com (Bill Rowe)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Droege's experiments proved nothing
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 1995 20:41:19 -0700
Organization: AltNet - $5/month uncensored news - http://www.alt.net

In article <BPPATHK.jedrothwell@delphi.com>, jedrothwell@delphi.com wrote:

>Bill Rowe <browe@netcom.com> writes:
> 
>>From what Jed has posted here, it seems he thinks those who get positive
>>results are competent experimenters and those who don't get positive
>>results are incompetent experimenters. I think this says a lot more about
>>Jed than CF.
> 
>That is incorrect. I never said anything like that. I know of lots of groups
>that have gone for long periods without positive results. KEK, for example,
>the group I just cited, went for four years without a positive result.

In fact, I think if you read what I wrote I did not say you did say that.
I agree you have not actually stated what I posted. However, I do believe
it is a reasonably accurate summary of the tone of your posts.
-- 
William Rowe                                                   browe@netcom.com
MD5OfPublicKey: F29A99C805B41838D9240AEE28EBF383
cudkeys:
cuddy21 cudenbrowe cudfnBill cudlnRowe cudmo8 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.08.21 / Bill Rowe /  Re: Currently accepted formulations of QM
     
Originally-From: browe@netcom.com (Bill Rowe)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Currently accepted formulations of QM
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 1995 20:53:52 -0700
Organization: AltNet - $5/month uncensored news - http://www.alt.net

In article <9508201412.AA29245@pilot06.cl.msu.edu>, blue@pilot.msu.edu
(Richard A Blue) wrote:

>Dave Oldridge suggests that cold fusion research proceeds as follows:
>
>(1)The experimenters forget about accepted theories and just make measurements
>totally unbiased by any expectations regarding the outcome their experiments.

In addition to Dick Blue's comments, I would like to doing any experiment
as suggested by (1) above is totally impratical. To make any accurate
measurement of any experiment you must have a reasonably good idea of what
you expect to happen. Take for example a straight forward measurement of a
dc voltage source. If the source is a 1.5V battery and I choose an
instrument which peggs at say 0.25V I clearly won't have a meaningful
measurement.

The choice of measurment equipment, experimental setup and experimental
conditions almost always involves tradeoffs. Without some idea of expected
experimental results there is unlikely to be a very accurate measurement.
-- 
William Rowe                                                   browe@netcom.com
MD5OfPublicKey: F29A99C805B41838D9240AEE28EBF383
cudkeys:
cuddy21 cudenbrowe cudfnBill cudlnRowe cudmo8 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.08.21 / Bill Rowe /  Re: Off the deep end
     
Originally-From: browe@netcom.com (Bill Rowe)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Off the deep end
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 1995 21:10:46 -0700
Organization: AltNet - $5/month uncensored news - http://www.alt.net

In article <21cenlogic-2008951654490001@austin-1-4.i-link.net>,
21cenlogic@i-link.net (Mitchell Jones) wrote:

>In article <9508181445.AA22541@pilot01.cl.msu.edu>, blue@pilot.msu.edu
>(Richard A Blue) wrote:
>
>> Raman Prasad charges that, "Academic science has opted for
>> <i> - deny that it (cold fusion) exists."
>> 
>> WRONG.  Academic science has given cold fusion very careful
>> consideration in all the ways you suggest.  You simply have
>> not been paying attention to what has been going on.
>> 
>> One can always suggest that more effort should go to investigate
>> cold fusion.  There is no limit to the resources that could
>> be redirected into such investigations, but how do you justify
>> the allocation of more resources to a field of research that
>> is most notable for the number of dead ends it has produced.
>
>***{A good question, Dick! Since this is a perfect description of "hot
>fusion" research, how *do* you justify it? (Just curious.) --Mitchell
>Jones}***

There is a key difference between conventional (hot) fusion and cold
fusion. There are numerous fully replicated experiments by independent
labs that fusion does take place in tokamaks as well as other "hot" fusion
machines. The same cannot yet be said of cold fusion.
-- 
William Rowe                                                   browe@netcom.com
MD5OfPublicKey: F29A99C805B41838D9240AEE28EBF383
cudkeys:
cuddy21 cudenbrowe cudfnBill cudlnRowe cudmo8 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.08.21 / Bonnie Nestor /  Re: Is Griggs Experiment Hot Water Simplicity Incarnate?
     
Originally-From: mnj@ornl.gov (Bonnie Nestor)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Is Griggs Experiment Hot Water Simplicity Incarnate?
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 1995 16:49:35 -0400
Organization: Oak Ridge National Laboratory

In article <41aaps$js0@anemone.saclay.cea.fr>, Mario Pain
<pain@drfc.cad.cea.fr> wrote:

> 21cenlogic@i-link.net (Mitchell Jones) wrote:
> 
> >Oddly, after forty years and untold billions looted from the taxpayers,
> >hot fusion is nowhere near as close to unity as the Griggs device, and yet
> >those very self-same "hard nosed project managers" are eager to fight to
> >the death to get it funded! Why do you suppose that is? Here is the
> >answer, in case you are interested: it will only take $40-50k to prove,
> >once and for all, that the Griggs device is over unity. That's chump
> >change for "hard nosed project managers" who are in the habit of looting
> >billions. Worse, if the Griggs device is proven, the "hot fusion" cash cow
> >will dry up permanently, and be replaced with a technology that is ideally
> >suited to tinkerers who do their work in garages and basements. People
> >will be doing calorimetry on their kitchen blenders, running outboard
> >motors in 55 gallon drums, etc., as a new age of individual
> >experimentation begins, all without the involvement of, or need for,
> >government funding! *That* is the dirty little secret which explains why
> >"hard nosed project managers" (read "bloodsuckers") don't want any work to
> >be done on the Griggs device or on anything similar. 
> >
> >--Mitchell Jones
> >
> What I find fascinating about the debate about cold fusion is the
> little zest of paranoia cold fusioners exhibit at the slightest
> provocation. I can believe that the (nasty) people of the hot
> fusion world will keep quiet about something which could deprive
> them of their livelyhood. But how do you interpret the fact that
> people who stand to win a lot if cold fusion worked, namely, 
> corporation who could exploit the patents, do not finance the
> research projects on cold fusion ?

Precisely my question. Have the unspeakably evil hot fusion people so
intimidated the major corporations of this country that none of them --
no, not one -- will pony up the "chump change" needed to prove that the
Griggs device is over unity and capitalize on the results?

And one other thing. All those "untold billions looted from the taxpayers"
have been provided to the wicked welfare queens of hot fusion courtesy of
the U.S. Congress. Either your elected representatives are (1) not smart
enough to figure out that DOE is hoodwinking them or (2) corrupt. Either
way, the public has only itself to blame.

Bonnie Nestor
mnj@ornl.gov
DISCLAIMER: I work at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, for Lockheed
Martin Energy Systems, which is under contract to the U.S. Department
of Energy -- but I don't speak for any of them, and they return
the favor.
cudkeys:
cuddy21 cudenmnj cudfnBonnie cudlnNestor cudmo8 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.08.18 / Scott Little /  Re: Droege's experiments proved nothing
     
Originally-From: little@eden.com (Scott Little)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Droege's experiments proved nothing
Date: 18 Aug 1995 04:06:24 GMT
Organization: EarthTech Int'l

In article <pLFDTmH.jedrothwell@delphi.com>, jedrothwell@delphi.com says:

<snip>

>...and they also know far more than he does about calorimetry.

If you contact Tom, request copies of the two papers he wrote about
his calorimeters, and read them, you will find that this is likely not
to be true.  Tom Droege is one of those rare engineers that truly
understands automatic controls and he used this understanding to create
some of the most sophisticated and successful calorimeters I have ever
seen.  


cudkeys:
cuddy18 cudenlittle cudfnScott cudlnLittle cudmo8 cudqt3 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.08.21 / Robin Spaandonk /  Re: FYI98 - PCAST Report on DOE Fusion Program
     
Originally-From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion,sci.energy,sci.physics
Subject: Re: FYI98 - PCAST Report on DOE Fusion Program
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 1995 23:21:38 GMT
Organization: Improving

In article <411hun$g7p@ixnews4.ix.netcom.com>, Jeffrey A. Dracup
wrote :

>I'd have to agree with Mr. Budnik.  I don't believe it is too
>outlandish to set goals which are workable at the hundred-year mark. 
>It certainly helps focus short-term, and limited-resource efforts (such
>as conservation or local-star solar.)

>If the goal is to increase the net standard of living for our
>particular species, we will require a) more land and b) more energy. 
>There has always been a direct correlation between the average quantity
>of usuable energy available per capita and the global average standard
>of living.

>In order to get more land, for the short term (next 30 to 50 years) we
>need the energy to constuct something along the lines of thousand
>square mile seaworthy barges - useable for agriculture or living space.

It would be far more cost effective, to make land which is borderline,
or uninhabitable, into habitable land. Frequently this requires only
water and proper land management. Water can be obtained from the sea,
with the investment of energy. Where deserts border on the sea, solar
distillation on a huge scale, could add arrable land far cheaper than
building barges. (Which BTW would also need a fresh water supply).
In short, there is no shortage of land, only water and energy.

>With only one-seventh the Earth's surface now covered by land, we could
>add a substantial surface area without significantly effecting the
>current land/ocean ratio.

>For the long term, development of controllable energy devices, fusion
>or otherwise, with capacities far in excess of what could be achieved
>even by coating the entire Earth and Moon with solar cells, is
>necessary.  It is necessary both for what we would now consider
>large-scale engineering projects, and the power to travel to other land
>masses (planets).  Travelling to other planets also has the added
>benefit of possibly broadening our pool of available materials. 
>Remember what titanium did for aircraft?

>Who knows, with enough energy, and the computing power to control it,
>maybe we'll have the ability to create our own materials, to suit, and
>in large quantities, in the next 100 or so years.

>The key to it all is energy - lots of it.  The idea that we have enough
Agreed!
>energy now reminds me of the U.S. Government research and conclusion in
>the 60's that a total of 50 Mainframe computers would meet the needs
>for the entire U.S. for the forseeable future.

>     - Jeff Dracup.



>In <3vo4ks$59f@mtnmath.com> paul@mtnmath.com (Paul Budnik) writes: 
>>
>>Paul M. Koloc (pmk@prometheus.UUCP) wrote:
>>: In article <3vip26$9a1@mtnmath.com> paul@mtnmath.com (Paul Budnik)
>writes:
>>: >Bruce D. Scott (bds@ipp-garching.mpg.de) wrote:
>>: >: Paul Budnik (paul@mtnmath.mtnmath.com) wrote:
>>
>>: >: [...]
>>: >: :                                             We have a perfectly
>>: >: : good fusion reactor conveniently delivering to us more energy
>than
>>: >: : we could ever safely use and that is far more reliable than
>anything
>>: >: : we will ever be able to build on earth. It is located at a safe
>>: >: : distance of 93 million miles so we do not have to worry about
>the
>>: >: : radioactive products it creates.
>>
>>: I don't think so.  Few people are aware that the solar constant
>isn't.  
>>: There have been periods extending for several hundred years when
>>: the orb has either underpreformed or over performed, with quite 
>>: serious effects to man's economy and well being.  
>>
>>You think we can make a fusion reactor that will produce output
>>even above or below expectations for several hundred years?
>>
>>: Further it doesn't provide energy which we can untilize safely in
>>: high densities for driving fast transport for example.
>>
>>Of course there are issues of storage of energy. But these all seem
>>more tractable than fusion. Keep in mind that we can use solar
>>energy to make just about any fuel. It is only a question of cost,
>>efficiency and the environmental impact of the entire cycle of
>>manufacturing and using the fuel.
>>
>>: >: Having deleted the first sentence, I heartily agree with this
>rest.
>>: >: Unfortunately, there is a good reason why this won't work for
>most
>>: >: countries:  too many people, and the attendant demands on land
>use.
>>
>>: >That is ridiculous. For most of the worlds population enough power
>>: >could be generated for individual use with solar roofs. You need
>solar
>>: >farms only for industrial or high density populations. There are
>plenty
>>: >of desserts in the world that are not usable for much else. 
>>
>>: I have a different opinion!  We will need the desserts, and your
>shingle 
>>: every roof for solar is vastly too expensive. These things don't 
>>: last forever, and they aren't very efficient.  Or do you count 
>>: subsidized projects as cheap?
>>
>>A recent issue of Business Week pointed out that solar is expected
>>to be cost competitive with grid power in many urban areas by the
>>year 2000. Once that crossover happens I expect the use of solar
>>to grow rapidly and the costs to continue to fall as efficiencies
>>rise. The research that is making this possible was motivated by
>>the need to expand electrical capacity without increasing pollution
>>in LA. Solar is ideal for this since its output is at a peak when
>>demand for air conditioning is also at a peak. The breakthrough
>>came when TI was able to manufacture solar cells from amorphous
>>silicon. This greatly reduced costs. If the money that has been
>>thrown down the rat hole of fusion research had been well invested
>>in solar research solar would probably be in wide spread use today.
>>
>>: >The *only* long term alternatives are solar
>>: >or nuclear (including fusion). There is a finite amount of fossil
>>: >fuel and we seem to already be suffering the ill effects of using
>too
>>: >much of this. The origin of the energy in all fossil fuel
>>: >is solar. It is not a question of converting to solar power but
>rather
>>: >of using solar in a way that is not environmentally damaging and
>>: >is sustainable.
>>
>>: Quite the contrary.  We haven't been using nearly enough ff.  What
>>: is required to raise the level of the biosphere on earth is to
>>: restore huge amounts of atmospheric CO2 (the levels present during 
>>: the carbonaceous period).
>>
>>First fossil fuel is solar power. It is just solar power in a
>>form that is not sustainable. Second we need to understand the
>>atmosphere and the planet far better before we start reengineering
>>the atmosphere. Large scale engineering projects taken on with
>>too narrow an understanding of the entire system regularly lead
>>to disasters that cost a fortune to undo. It is possible that
>>projects on this scale cannot be undone.
>>
>>: Then there would be an accelerated plant 
>>: growth which would result in far more density tonage of biosphere 
>>: and surface coverage (including those desserts).  What's required
>>: is to clean the CO2 of other acid gases, and that can be done
>>: with lime stone.  Or use fusion energy to release C02 from such
>>: stone formations and use the remaining basic oxides to de-acidify 
>>: exiting acid regions.  The advantage here, is that O2 is increased 
>>: as well as C02.    
>>
>>Fuel from plants (as opposed to fossil fuel) might be a significant
>>element in a solar economy.
>>
>>The rest of what you suggest is bizarre and dangerous. Lets solve the
>>problems we understand. Solving problems we do not understand is a
>good
>>way to get into a great deal of trouble as recent history has
>demonstrated
>>over and over.
>>
>>: Then there are those energy intensive (actually power intensive)
>>: applications, that solar hasn't a chance of fixing.  These would
>>: be terra-forming projects, super sonic high payload earth and
>>: planetary transport and power space (asteroids) and planetary 
>>: soil reconditioning or generation for agriculture efforts, mining 
>>: and building.  
>>
>>Dream on, just please do not try to actually do any of these things.
>>Perhaps you should seek employment as a writer for Star Trek.
>>
>>: >Nuclear is obscenely expensive when you
>>: >take into account the cost of storing and monitoring the
>radioactive
>>: >by products for 50,000 years or more. Solar is the only practical
>>: >alternative. A recent issue of Business Week mentioned that it is
>expected
>>: >to be competitive with grid power in many major urban areas by the
>>: >year 2,000. With wide spread use prices will fall much more rapidly
>>: >and efficiencies will increase significantly. It is only a matter
>of
>>: >time and thinking with a little common sense.
>>
>>: Besides God prohibits the use of fission, or so I'm told.  And
>>: that leaves just one cheap, clean and powerful alternative which 
>>: is high density aneutronic (fusion) energy devices.  There are 
>>: three commercial companies devoted to developing just such beasties.
> 
>>: It's too tough a problem for the DoE and its pet Labs.  
>>
>>You cannot say solar power does not work because the world for the
>>most part is run on solar power. It is only a question of converting
>>to a sustainable and environmentally benign form of solar power.
>>
>>Many companies invest in technological solutions that never pan out.
>>I cannot say that it is impossible to develop a clean safe form of
>fusion
>>but I think it quite unlikely with any foreseeable technology.
>>In contrast solar can solve the problems economically and with
>>existing technology. Some parts of the puzzle such as energy storage
>>for transportation are not yet economical but they will be in
>>a foreseeable time frame. Were other forms of power required to
>>pay their full cost (including pollution damage) solar would be
>>widely competitive today.
>>
>>Paul Budnik


Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa@netspace.net.au>
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything,
Learns all his life,
And leaves knowing nothing.
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

cudkeys:
cuddy21 cudenrvanspaa cudfnRobin cudlnSpaandonk cudmo8 cudqt3 cudszL cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.08.20 / Mitchell Jones /  Re: Off the deep end
     
Originally-From: 21cenlogic@i-link.net (Mitchell Jones)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Off the deep end
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 1995 16:54:49 -0500
Organization: 21st Century Logic

In article <9508181445.AA22541@pilot01.cl.msu.edu>, blue@pilot.msu.edu
(Richard A Blue) wrote:

> Raman Prasad charges that, "Academic science has opted for
> <i> - deny that it (cold fusion) exists."
> 
> WRONG.  Academic science has given cold fusion very careful
> consideration in all the ways you suggest.  You simply have
> not been paying attention to what has been going on.
> 
> One can always suggest that more effort should go to investigate
> cold fusion.  There is no limit to the resources that could
> be redirected into such investigations, but how do you justify
> the allocation of more resources to a field of research that
> is most notable for the number of dead ends it has produced.

***{A good question, Dick! Since this is a perfect description of "hot
fusion" research, how *do* you justify it? (Just curious.) --Mitchell
Jones}***
> 
> McKubre's results were among the more frequently cited, but
> clearly his continued investigations provided diminishing
> returns such that further expenditures were not justified.
> The same could be said for the work at the institute of the
> University of Utah, and it now appears that Pons and Fleischmann
> may have terminated their efforts.  I could make a very long
> list of all the very promising experiments that have led
> nowhere.  A random search for a needle in the haystack that
> may not even be there is seldom a good experimental plan
> yet that is what you seem to advocate.
> 
> Dick Blue

===========================================================
cudkeys:
cuddy20 cuden21cenlogic cudfnMitchell cudlnJones cudmo8 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.08.20 /  jedrothwell@de /  Re: Droege's experiments proved nothing
     
Originally-From: jedrothwell@delphi.com
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Droege's experiments proved nothing
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 95 18:02:36 -0500
Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice)

Thomas H. Kunich <tomk@netcom.com> writes:
 
>So, where's the beef? Over five years after P&F have announced discovery
>of it, after countless scientists both privately and publically have
>experimented with these ideas -- there is NOTHING to show for it.
 
You pretend there is nothing to show for it, you pretend there are no
results, but you are wrong. There are many results, and they grow stronger
with each passing year. When the Japanese NHE consortium was formed, it
included only 10 corporations. The number has now increased to 20. During
ICCF5, research groups from Hitachi, Toshiba, Canon and elsewhere attended.
As I noted in my report, they announced that they had *certain proof* of
nuclear reactions, in the type of evidence we have seen all along: tritium,
neutrons, massive excess heat far beyond chemistry.
 
Of course I will grant that progress is frustratingly slow. Basic science is
like that; it cannot be helped. But the progress is real, the reports and
the published papers are real, and the S/N ratios are so high that there can
be no rational, scientific basis to doubt that the phonomenon is real. That
fact forces a "skeptic" like you into a corner. You have no alternatives left.
All you can do is hysterically deny *everything* and pretend that *none of
this is happening* and that all of the reports from Los Alamos, from KEK,
from Toyota, Hitachi and the others do not even exist! You have gone so far
into denial that you have left reality far behind. You are not fooling anyone,
probabably not even yourself.
 
You, of course, will say "I have not seen any of these reports" or "Jed is
just citing all these names, and making up all these report titles in his
ICCF5 paper" or "those groups from Los Alamos, KEK, Toyota, NTT and Hitachi
are all a bunch of idiots who have made obvious errors that I could spot
in an instant, if I ever bothered to read their papers." I am sure you will
think up something. But your words are an irrational denial of reality; a
silly attempt to defect the coversation away from published experimental data
towards hysteria and escapist denial instead. You are not doing science. Your
messages add nothing. You are merely wasting bandwidth and time.
 
- Jed
cudkeys:
cuddy20 cudenjedrothwell cudmo8 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.08.20 /  jedrothwell@de /  Re: Off the deep end
     
Originally-From: jedrothwell@delphi.com
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Off the deep end
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 95 18:07:14 -0500
Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice)

MRichar353 <mrichar353@aol.com> writes:
 
>I suppose this is what psychologists refer to as "projection".
 
What is your point? Are you here to defend Richard Blue's theory regarding
the Cravens / CETI calorimeter? That is the crackpot theory I cited. Do you
or do you not think it is valid? Blue claims that he can store energy in
water without raising the temperature of the water, and then he can
release that energy farther down the loop with electrolysis. That is his
theory. I say that is crackpot nonsense. Are you saying it is good science?
Do you believe it? Do you want to defend it? Dick Blue himself is too
embarrassed or to stupid to try and defend it, maybe you should try in his
place. We will see if you know your ass from your elbow. Dick Blue obviously
does not.
 
- Jed
cudkeys:
cuddy20 cudenjedrothwell cudmo8 cudqt3 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.08.20 /  jedrothwell@de /  Re: Off the deep end
     
Originally-From: jedrothwell@delphi.com
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Off the deep end
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 95 20:21:22 -0500
Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice)

Dick Blue posts more fatuous bullshit:
 
     "My claim is that the readings of two thermometers cannot provide
     sufficient evidence to confirm that cold fusion is occurring.  The
     reason is quit obvious.  A thermometer simply does not provide adequate
     signal-to-noise ratio.
 
This such amazing garbage! We are talking about a 4 deg C Delta T temperature.
Back in the year 1795 people made thermometers capable of measuring a 4 deg C
Delta T with an astronomically high S/N ratio. We are talking absolute, 100%,
no-doubt-about-it reliability 200 YEARS AGO!!! Any dime-store thermometer can
measure that temperature with confidence.
 
 
     "For example, I can get an elevated temperature reading by sticking the
     thermometer up my .... well, under my tongue.  That does not demonstrate
     that I run on cold fusion."
 
If you did not eat any food for 30 years, it sure as hell WOULD prove you run
on cold fusion. No chemical machine the size of a human being could maintain
activity and a body temperature above ambient for decades without chemical
fuel. That would require some form of energy storage with far greater energy
density than the very best possible chemical fuel. When you operate a small
cell weighing only 30 grams or so for a full day at a temperature elevated 4
deg C above ambient, that also proves the cell is not operating on chemical
energy. It is, in short, exactly like a match that burns for a week.
 
This is so elementary, so simple, SO BLINDINGLY OBVIOUS that I am sure even a
certified idiot and congenital liar like Dick Blue understands it. He posts
comments like this because he wants to confuse the issue. He is trolling for
fools who are even stupider than he is. He hopes some poor wretch out there
does not even understand why a people have to eat to survive, and why a match
cannot burn for a week. This kind of garbage, plus the crackpot, crack-brained
"magic energy storage" theories prove that Dick Blue knows nothing about
science and that he and his fellow "skeptics" are only here to make trouble
and to confuse people. I never dreamed that such ignorance and such
scientifically illiterate nonsense still existed in the modern world.
 
- Jed
cudkeys:
cuddy20 cudenjedrothwell cudmo8 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.08.20 / Bill Rowe /  Re: Droege's experiments proved nothing
     
Originally-From: browe@netcom.com (Bill Rowe)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Droege's experiments proved nothing
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 1995 18:34:07 -0700
Organization: AltNet - $5/month uncensored news - http://www.alt.net

In article <416op6$ei7@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, johmann@aol.com (Johmann) wrote:

>Jed is criticizing Droege justifiably, I believe.
>
>As I recall, Droege has admitted to a lack of proper credentials: he has
>no Ph.D.

Since when is having a Ph.D a requirement for doing proper experiments or
understanding measurement techniques? 

>Thus, his experimental efforts were those of an amateur, and he had no
>more qualification to do those experiments than my neighborhood garage
>mechanic.
>
>Jed likes to quote the positive CF results of domestic and foreign
>Ph.D's, whereas the skeptic camp (mostly composed of welfare queens)
>likes to quote the likes of Droege, an uncredentialed amateur, as their
>authority on the subject. To me, this says a great deal about which side
>is likely to be correct.

From what Jed has posted here, it seems he thinks those who get positive
results are competent experimenters and those who don't get positive
results are incompetent experimenters. I think this says a lot more about
Jed than CF.

Jed has repeatedly stated he understands business completely but does not
have a thorough understanding of physics and engineering. In fact, he has
demonstrated a lack of understanding in several posts. Given this, why
should anyone feel Jed is competent to judge the quality of experiments
being done?
-- 
William Rowe                                                   browe@netcom.com
MD5OfPublicKey: F29A99C805B41838D9240AEE28EBF383
cudkeys:
cuddy20 cudenbrowe cudfnBill cudlnRowe cudmo8 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.08.21 / Dick Jackson /  Re: tornado article
     
Originally-From: jackson@soldev.tti.com (Dick Jackson)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: tornado article
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 1995 04:18:15 GMT
Organization: Citicorp-TTI at Santa Monica (CA) by the Sea

In article <507765180wnr@almide.demon.co.uk> sandy@almide.demon.co.uk writes:
>Edward Lewis writes,
>
>    "...I classify both ball lightning and tornadoes, storms, clouds, 
>and other phenomena as kinds of a phenomena that I call plasmoid 
>phenomena. Galaxies and atoms are other types of this kind of 
>phenomena, according to my theory..."
>
>    How strange.  
>
>    I classify both raindrops and kittens, tooth-fairies, monday 
>mornings, and other phenomena as kinds of a phenomena that I call 
>doobeewahwah phenomena.  Universes and tax returns are other types 
>of this kind of phenomena, according to MY theory.
>
>   We can't BOTH be right, can we?    

 Wow! **Two** new theories of everything.  An embarassment of riches
indeed.  Sure is hard to choose between them, though.

Dick Jackson
cudkeys:
cuddy21 cudenjackson cudfnDick cudlnJackson cudmo8 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.08.21 / Ramon Prasad /  Re: Currently Accepted Formulations of QM
     
Originally-From: <100437.530@compuserve.com (Ramon Prasad)>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Currently Accepted Formulations of QM
Date: 21 Aug 1995 08:18:20 GMT
Organization: CompuServe Incorporated


blue@pilot.msu.edu (Richard A.Blue) wrote (amongst other things):

>...you have to worry about whether you can even interpret the 
>experimental results without the theory you expect to replace. That
>is to say you must use a theory that you are now calling suspect.

Yes you do have to worry, and you must now use a suspect theory!
This situation every time there is a paradigm change. The fact is that
you do not know for certain what has gone wrong. Only that 
something has. You must try one thing and then another. It may be
that what you suspect is wrong is not wrong at all, and that what you 
think is OK is completely wrong. The logic of your argument is that
you are stuck with the current theories for ever, because to question
them invalidates your interpretations. What happens is that you must
work by means of slow systematic elimination from the old situation
to the new one. This is the normal process of science. Every time we
want to change a theory, it does not mean that the whole circus is 
closed down. It means intensive investigation to find out just exactly
what it is that has to be changed.

>I see no good reason to assume that the many-body formulations
>for the atomic aspects of the problem are all "correct" but that
>none of the nuclear aspects of the problem need be given any
>consideration because that is the theory to be trashed.

You are right! Nobody knows if the many-body prblem formulations
are valid in this domain. Nobody knows if it is the nuclear processes
that need looking at. So both have to be given a very carefull 
examination to see if there are any hidden (or not) assumptions
that might be in-applicable.

>Would you want to detect the energy early in its release while it
>is still clearly different from ordinary thermal sources, or would you
>prefer to let the energy degrade until it cannot be differentiated
>from other potential thermal sources.

You are right again Richard! Yes I would want to devise an 
experiment to detect the energy at the moment of its creation and
thus unambiguously nail down its source. But how to do this? What
is that experiment? You have singled youself out, Richard, as the
ideal man to sort this out for us! Why don't you sign up as a cold
fusion theorist and make some proposals for some experiments which
would yield the information we are after!

Very Best Wishes, Yours sincerely,
Ramon Prasad <internet:100437.530@compuserve.com>
cudkeys:
cuddy21 cuden530 cudfnRamon cudlnPrasad cudmo8 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.08.16 / Martin Sevior /  MIT Patent again.
     
Originally-From: Martin Sevior <msevior@physics.unimelb.edu.au>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: MIT Patent again.
Date: 16 Aug 1995 22:20:31 GMT
Organization: School of Physics, University of Melbourne.

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

 --------------------------------20659269233654
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

As requested here is the MIT Patent that Marshall Dudley originally posted
a week or so ago.

Martin Sevior

 --------------------------------20659269233654
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: 
 --------------------------------20659269233654--
cudkeys:
cuddy16 cudenmsevior cudfnMartin cudlnSevior cudmo8 cudqt3 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.08.21 / Mario Pain /  Re: Is Griggs Experiment Hot Water Simplicity Incarnate?
     
Originally-From: Mario Pain <pain@drfc.cad.cea.fr>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Is Griggs Experiment Hot Water Simplicity Incarnate?
Date: 21 Aug 1995 16:04:12 GMT
Organization: cea

21cenlogic@i-link.net (Mitchell Jones) wrote:

>Oddly, after forty years and untold billions looted from the taxpayers,
>hot fusion is nowhere near as close to unity as the Griggs device, and yet
>those very self-same "hard nosed project managers" are eager to fight to
>the death to get it funded! Why do you suppose that is? Here is the
>answer, in case you are interested: it will only take $40-50k to prove,
>once and for all, that the Griggs device is over unity. That's chump
>change for "hard nosed project managers" who are in the habit of looting
>billions. Worse, if the Griggs device is proven, the "hot fusion" cash cow
>will dry up permanently, and be replaced with a technology that is ideally
>suited to tinkerers who do their work in garages and basements. People
>will be doing calorimetry on their kitchen blenders, running outboard
>motors in 55 gallon drums, etc., as a new age of individual
>experimentation begins, all without the involvement of, or need for,
>government funding! *That* is the dirty little secret which explains why
>"hard nosed project managers" (read "bloodsuckers") don't want any work to
>be done on the Griggs device or on anything similar. 
>
>--Mitchell Jones
>
What I find fascinating about the debate about cold fusion is the
little zest of paranoia cold fusioners exhibit at the slightest
provocation. I can believe that the (nasty) people of the hot
fusion world will keep quiet about something which could deprive
them of their livelyhood. But how do you interpret the fact that
people who stand to win a lot if cold fusion worked, namely, 
corporation who could exploit the patents, do not finance the
research projects on cold fusion ?
The other fascinating thing about cold fusion is the way it 
correspond to the American fantasy: a cheap, non polluting way of
producing energy would please everybody. But in addition cold
fusion promises that you can do the thing in your garage, with
no special knowledge! Too good to be true ?


cudkeys:
cuddy21 cudenpain cudfnMario cudlnPain cudmo8 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.08.21 /  jedrothwell@de /  Re: Off the deep end
     
Originally-From: jedrothwell@delphi.com
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Off the deep end
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 95 12:11:45 -0500
Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice)

Wolf247698 <wolf247698@aol.com> writes:
 
     "My Goodness, such a strong statement.  Don't let them get to you like
     that Jed; it only gives them more fuel (pun intended)."
 
I will give the "skeptics" all the fuel they like. Let them say anything they
like about me. My statement was not half strong enough. Dick Blue has spent
six years denying the most obvious, most fundamental, most basic laws of
science. He has done this in order to deceive people and to derail rational
discussion. He wants to replace the science of calorimetry with his voodoo
theories of magic energy storage in water. He wants to tear out all the laws
of physics going back to the days of James Watt and J.P. Joule. He knows that
a person cannot go for 30 years without eating, a match cannot burn for a
week, and small chemical cell cannot remain significantly hotter than the
surroundings all day. At the most basic levels of human experience people have
known that for hundreds of thousands of years! That is why Hanukkah is
celebrated as the anniversary of a miracle.
 
Dick Blue denies this. He has denied it again and again, year after year. Not
because he disagrees! He knows the limits of chemistry as well as I do. No, he
pretends to disagree because if he admits this is true, he will be forced to
admit that the evidence proves overwhelmingly I am right. He employs the "big
lie" technique. He blatantly and shamelessly denies the facts and fundamental
laws known throughout all of human history! He repeats these absurd lies,
distortions and denials endlessly, until people fall into a trance and believe
him. He murders truth in order to promote an emotional and political agenda.
He wants stifle an experimental result that he does not understand. He is
fighting to defend the status quo of established high energy physics at any
cost. This is a betrayal of science.
 
I have not said half enough. I agree with the late Nobel Laureate Julian
Schwinger, who said of cold fusion:
 
     "The pressure for conformity is enormous. I have experienced it in
     editors' rejection of submitted papers, based on venomous criticism of
     anonymous referees. The replacement of impartial reviewing by censorship
     will be the death of science."
 
For the sake of politics and to defend their egos, people like Dick Blue would
murder truth, murder science, and suppress the most beneficial discovery in
history. They have done that throughout history! They tried to strangle every
breakthrough from the telescope, to germ theory, evolution, electric lighting
and the airplane. They are the sworn enemies of progress and enlightenment.
They would return us to the dark ages if they could.
 
- Jed
cudkeys:
cuddy21 cudenjedrothwell cudmo8 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.08.21 / Tom Droege /  Re: Off the deep end
     
Originally-From: Droege@fnal.fnal.gov (Tom Droege)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Off the deep end
Date: 21 Aug 1995 16:19:20 GMT
Organization: fermilab

In article <RRDDbim.jedrothwell@delphi.com>, jedrothwell@delphi.com says:

(snip)

"I can be as abusive as any of you, ..."

>- Jed

You have got that one thing right Jed.  

Tom Droege
cudkeys:
cuddy21 cudenDroege cudfnTom cudlnDroege cudmo8 cudqt3 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.08.21 / Tom Potter /  alt.my.dick.is.bigger.than.your.dick
     
Originally-From: tdp@ix.netcom.com (Tom Potter )
Newsgroups: talk.philosophy.misc,alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci.astro,
ci.energy,sci.misc,sci.physics,sci.physics.electromag,sci.physics.fusion
sci.physics.particle,sci.research,sci.skeptic
Subject: alt.my.dick.is.bigger.than.your.dick
Date: 21 Aug 1995 16:37:53 GMT
Organization: Netcom

an211894@anon.penet.fi (DORAEMON) writes:

>Tom Potter [*] (tdp@ix.netcom.com)
>N: none
>C: Tries to start off-topic flame wars.  Usually does not have much to
>say about physics. Unconfirmed rumor that Potter is known for strange
>behaviour in other parts of USENET.  The following is copied without
>permission from a post by Doug Merritt (doug@netcom.com):
>``Tom Potter: major crackpot. Does units conversions and thinks it
>proves something everyone else missed. Can't understand why everyone
>claims they already know how to do units conversions.''
>URL: http://nucleus.ibg.uu.se/elektromagnum/physics/USENET-news/
>PottersNewPhysicsTheory

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

Note that Doug Merrit subsequently wrote about "Potter's Theory".

>From: doug@netcom.com (Doug Merritt)
>Message-ID: <dougDBIruJ.A38@netcom.com>
>Date: Mon, 10 Jul 1995 21:32:43 GMT

>In article <3ts3jh$8bg@ixnews5.ix.netcom.com> tdp@ix.netcom.com (Tom
Potter ) writes:
>
>>My real point is that all properties arise from the unit of
>>information, the BIT ( BInary uniT ). All properties can be equated
>>through constants to time, which in turn can be equated to an
>>external cycle, which is in turn a binary unit.
>
>You may be right; Kantor's "Information Mechanics" also tried that
>sort of approach. You might want to look at it. The current fad of
>cosmology via cellular automata takes a related approach as well.

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

Although, the "Crackpot FAQ" is lots of fun,
and I am honored to be in it,
I think that it is immature, irrational and unscientific to:

1. Infer anything from "Unconfirmed rumors".

2. Use a random sample of information to make a case.
   And one that is, in fact, contradicted by the original
   poster in a subsequent post.

I suggest that anyone who wants to compare the quality of my work with
that of an anonymous poster, download my PHYSICST.ZIP hypertext,
graphic and sound oriented, physics tutorial, which happens to be the
most popular, Windows-based, physics tutorial in the world. It is
available from many FTP sites around the world, and at the Web site:
http://coyote.csusm.edu/cwis/winworld/educate.html

I also suggest that they note that I have never started a flame war,
but that I have never run from one. As I have made clear on several
occasions, my philosophy is "tit squared for tat". Why should we keep
God's Karma mill working overtime when he gave us the means to take
care of most of the problems immediately?

It is my belief that "tit for tat" at the lowest level is far more
efficient and fair than pushing the responsibility for dispensing
rewards and punishments up a hierarchy. ( Mom, dad, boss, teacher, cop,
FBI, the BATF, Congress, the maximum leader, God, etc. )

The reason that I don't have much to say about physics in these forums
is that no one here seems to care about physics. Most of the posters
here are immature people with ego problems. They are more concerned
with sharpshooting and trying to build up their egos, than they are in
learning about physics, or sharing any knowledge they might possess.

Regarding Ben Joe Bullock's suggestion about renaming sci.physics,
I suggest it be renamed: alt.my.dick.is.bigger.than.your.dick


cudkeys:
cuddy21 cudentdp cudfnTom cudlnPotter cudmo8 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.08.21 / Bruce TOK /  Re: FYI98 - PCAST Report on DOE Fusion Program
     
Originally-From: bds@ipp-garching.mpg.de (Bruce Scott TOK )
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion,sci.energy,sci.physics
Subject: Re: FYI98 - PCAST Report on DOE Fusion Program
Date: 21 Aug 1995 17:19:44 GMT
Organization: Rechenzentrum der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft in Garching

Doug Merritt (doug@netcom.com) wrote:

: However, outside of cities, the Earth doesn't appear to be at all crowded
: (been out in the countryside recently???) And cities account for only
: a tiny, tiny fraction of world land area.

The most important effect of crowding is environmental impact.  It is
measurable in the US by the fact that the entities conducting the
general deforestation cannot put themselves in equilibrium with the
natural regeneration.  The same goes for water and soil management.  The
derivatives are in the wrong direction in all cases.  I have seen this
for myself by travelling to the Northwest forests in the 1970s and again
in 1992.  The devastation is inescapable.

--
Mach's gut!
Bruce Scott                                The deadliest bullshit is
Max-Planck-Institut fuer Plasmaphysik       odorless and transparent
bds@ipp-garching.mpg.de                               -- W Gibson
cudkeys:
cuddy21 cudenbds cudfnBruce cudlnTOK cudmo8 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.08.21 / Bruce TOK /  Re: FYI98 - PCAST Report on DOE Fusion Program
     
Originally-From: bds@ipp-garching.mpg.de (Bruce Scott TOK )
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion,sci.energy,sci.physics
Subject: Re: FYI98 - PCAST Report on DOE Fusion Program
Date: 21 Aug 1995 17:22:18 GMT
Organization: Rechenzentrum der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft in Garching

One more thing, Doug...  "the Unabomber" is a strawman.  Most of us,
including the people from the third world who make their choice emphatic
by what they go through to enter countries like this one, want both
technology and a clean environment.  This puts a limit on the acceptable
population much lower than the one you get by demanding only that people
be fed and clothed.

--
Mach's gut!
Bruce Scott                                The deadliest bullshit is
Max-Planck-Institut fuer Plasmaphysik       odorless and transparent
bds@ipp-garching.mpg.de                               -- W Gibson
cudkeys:
cuddy21 cudenbds cudfnBruce cudlnTOK cudmo8 cudqt3 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.08.21 / Mitchell Jones /  Re: Vacuum energy
     
Originally-From: 21cenlogic@i-link.net (Mitchell Jones)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Vacuum energy
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 1995 12:31:41 -0500
Organization: 21st Century Logic

In article <411fuh$g3b@otis.netspace.net.au>, rvanspaa@netspace.net.au
(Robin van Spaandonk) wrote:

> One frequently sees solutions to QM problems, that involve "borrowing"
> energy from the vacuum. Could someone explain to me in relatively
> simple terms, exactly what mandates that this energy must be returned?

***{Robin, nothing mandates that it must be returned. However, you will
have no luck figuring out what is going on with "cold fusion" until you
form a classical, mechanical visualization of what is going on in the
"vacuum." What we are dealing with here is an all pervading, particulate
medium which bears a strong resemblance to what 19th century physicists
called the "ether." So long as "modern" physicists continue to deny that
their 19th century predecessors were onto something and, as a consequence,
continue to shy away from thinking about the structure and internal
dynamics of this substance which they call "vacuum," no progress will be
made in the understanding of CF. --Mitchell Jones}***
   
> Please do not invoke the law of conservation of mass-energy, as it is
> precisely this which I am trying to expand into a  law of conservation
> of mass-energy-zero-point-energy.
> Regards,
> 
> Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa@netspace.net.au>
> -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
> Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything,
> Learns all his life,
> And leaves knowing nothing.
> -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

===========================================================
cudkeys:
cuddy21 cuden21cenlogic cudfnMitchell cudlnJones cudmo8 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.08.21 /  meron@cars3.uc /  Re: FYI98 - PCAST Report on DOE Fusion Program
     
Originally-From: meron@cars3.uchicago.edu
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion,sci.energy,sci.physics
Subject: Re: FYI98 - PCAST Report on DOE Fusion Program
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 1995 19:47:03 GMT
Organization: CARS, U. of Chicago, Chicago IL 60637

In article <41af7g$gnv@sat.ipp-garching.mpg.de>, bds@ipp-garching.mpg.de
(Bruce Scott TOK ) writes:
>Doug Merritt (doug@netcom.com) wrote:
>
>: However, outside of cities, the Earth doesn't appear to be at all crowded
>: (been out in the countryside recently???) And cities account for only
>: a tiny, tiny fraction of world land area.
>
>The most important effect of crowding is environmental impact.  It is
>measurable in the US by the fact that the entities conducting the
>general deforestation cannot put themselves in equilibrium with the
>natural regeneration.  The same goes for water and soil management.  The
>derivatives are in the wrong direction in all cases.  I have seen this
>for myself by travelling to the Northwest forests in the 1970s and again
>in 1992.  The devastation is inescapable.

Actually, the total forested area in the US is growing currently and, to the
best of my knowledge have been growing ofer the last 20-30 years.  True, it is 
declining in the NW, but growing elsewhere.  As for water and soil management,
I don't have the data.

Mati Meron			| "When you argue with a fool,
meron@cars3.uchicago.edu	|  chances are he is doing just the same"
cudkeys:
cuddy21 cudenmeron cudmo8 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.08.16 / Martin Sevior /  MIT Patent
     
Originally-From: Martin Sevior <msevior@physics.unimelb.edu.au>
Originally-From: mdudley@brbbs.brbbs.com (MARSHALL DUDLEY)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: MIT Patent
Subject: MIT CF patent (full text - long)
Date: 16 Aug 1995 22:21:57 GMT
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 1995 16:56 -0500 (EST)
Organization: School of Physics, University of Melbourne.

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

 --------------------------------269621940314467
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

As requested here is the MIT Patent posted by Marshall Dudley a week or so
ago.

Martin Sevior

 --------------------------------269621940314467
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain

Xref: CERN.ch sci.physics.fusion:22050
Path: CERN.ch!EU.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!emory!darwin.sura.ne
!goldsword!brbbs!news
Originally-From: mdudley@brbbs.brbbs.com (MARSHALL DUDLEY)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: MIT CF patent (full text - long)
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 1995 16:56 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <WAF2PCB958074936@brbbs.brbbs.com>
Reply-To: mdudley@brbbs.brbbs.com
X-Mailer: WAF2PCB Gateway version 090d
Lines: 1539

I obtained the MIT CF patent from a friend at ORNL.  Here is the full text
for those interested, reformatted for 80 column screens:

PATN  Patent Bibliographic Information
WKU     Patent Number:				05411654
SRC     Series Code:				8
APN     Application Number:			0868213
APT     Application Type:			1
ART     Art Unit:				112
APD     Application Filing Date:		19930702
TTL     Title of Invention:			Method of maximizing anharmonic oscillatio
s in deuterated alloys
ISD     Issue Date:				19950502
NCL     Number of Claims:			16
ECL     Exemplary Claim Number:			1
EXP     Primary Examiner:			Valentine; Donald R.
NDR     Number of Drawings Sheets:		12
NFG     Number of Figures:			22

INVT  Inventor Information
NAM     Inventor Name:				Ahern; Brian S.
CTY     Inventor City:				Boxboro
STA     Inventor State:				MA

INVT  Inventor Information
NAM     Inventor Name:				Johnson; Keith H.
CTY     Inventor City:				Cambridge
STA     Inventor State:				MA

INVT  Inventor Information
NAM     Inventor Name:				Clark, Jr.; Harry R.
CTY     Inventor City:				Townsend
STA     Inventor State:				MA

ASSG  Assignee Information
NAM     Assignee Name:				Massachusetts Institute of Technology
CTY     Assignee City:				Cambridge
STA     Assignee State:				MA
COD     Assignee Type Code:			02

CLAS  Classification
OCL     Original U.S. Classification:			204242
XCL     Cross Reference Classification:			204292
XCL     Cross Reference Classification:			204293
XCL     Cross Reference Classification:			204290R
EDF     International Classification Edition Field:	6
ICL     International Classification:			C25B  900
ICL     International Classification:			C25B 1108
ICL     International Classification:			C25C  700
ICL     International Classification:			C25C  702
FSC     Field of Search Class:				156
FSS     Field of Search Subclass:			656
FSC     Field of Search Class:				204
FSS     Field of Search Subclass:			129.1;129.55;140;129.35;224
M;129.43;DIG. 9;129.35;129.7;242;292;293;290 R

UREF  U.S. Patent Reference
PNO     Patent Number:					3219481
ISD     Issue Date:					19651100
NAM     Patentee Name:					Chodosh et al.
XCL     Cross Reference to U.S. Classification:		204140

UREF  U.S. Patent Reference
PNO     Patent Number:					3620844
ISD     Issue Date:					19711100
NAM     Patentee Name:					Wicke et al.
OCL     Original U.S. Classification:			429 44

UREF  U.S. Patent Reference
PNO     Patent Number:					4222900
ISD     Issue Date:					19800900
NAM     Patentee Name:					Bohl
XCL     Cross Reference to U.S. Classification:		156656

UREF  U.S. Patent Reference
PNO     Patent Number:					4284482
ISD     Issue Date:					19810800
NAM     Patentee Name:					Yahalom
OCL     Original U.S. Classification:			204140

UREF  U.S. Patent Reference
PNO     Patent Number:					4925538
ISD     Issue Date:					19900500
NAM     Patentee Name:					Matsumoto et al.
XCL     Cross Reference to U.S. Classification:		204140

UREF  U.S. Patent Reference
PNO     Patent Number:					5078834
ISD     Issue Date:					19920100
NAM     Patentee Name:					Witte
OCL     Original U.S. Classification:			156656

OREF  Other Reference

Clerjaud and Gelineau, "Strong spin-lattice coupling of Kramers doublets",
Phys. Rev. B, vol. 16, No. 1, Jul. 1977, 82-85.

Singh et al., "Effect of anharmonicity on superconducting metal-hydrogen
systems," Phys. Rev. B, vol. 18, No. 7, Oct. 1978, 3271-74.

Huberman et al., "Chaotic States of Anharmonic Systems in Periodic Fields,"
Phys. Rev. Let., vol. 43, No. 23 Dec. 1979 1743-47.

Kohara et al., "NMR Study of Size Effects in . . . ," Jnl. Phys. Soc. Jap.,
vol. 54, No. 4, Apr. 1985, 1537-1542.

Hamann et al., "Anharmonic vibrational modes of Chemisorbed H . . . ,"
Phys. Rev. B, vol. 37, No. 8, Mar. 1988, 3847-3855.

Hemmes et al., "Isotope effects and pressure dep . . . ," Phys. Rev. B.
vol. 39, No. 7, Mar. 1989, 4110-4118.

Fleschmann et al., "Electrochemically induced nuclear fusion . . . ," J.
Electroanal. Chem., 261, Mar. 1989, 301-308.

Jones et al., "Observation of cold nuclear fusion . . . ," Nature, vol.
338, Apr. 1989, 737-740.

Yokoyama et al., "Temperature-dependent EXAFS Study . . . " Jap. J. Appl.
Phys., vol. 28, No. 5, Apr. 1989, L851-L853.

Yokoyama et al., "Temperature dependent EXAFS Study . . . ," Physica B,
158, no month 1989, 255-256.

Johnson et al., "Hydrogen-Hydrogen/Deuterium-Deuterium . . . ," Mod. Phys.
Lett., vol. 3, No. 10, no month 1989, 795-803.

McNally, "On the possibility of a nuclear mass-energy . . . ," Fusion
Tech., vol. 16, May 1989, 237-239.

Prelas, "Advanced energy conversion methods for cold fusion," Fus. Tech.,
vol. 16, May 1989, 240-242.

Ragheb et al., "On the possibility of deuteron disintegration . . . ," Fus.
Tech., vol. 16, May 1989, 243-247.

Rogers, "Isotopic hydrogen fusion in metals," Fusion Tech., vol. 16, May
1989, 254-259.

Oka, "Electrochemically induced deuterium-tritium fusion," Fusion Tech.,
vol. 16, May 1989, 260-262.

Oka et al., "D.sub.2 O-fueled fusion power reactor . . . ," Fusion Tech.,
vol. 16, May 1989, 263-267.

Stacey, "Reactor prospects of muon-catalyzed fusion . . . ," Fusion Tech.,
vol. 16, May 1989, 268-275.

Yokoyama et al., "Temperature-dependent EXAFS study," Jap. J. Appl. Phys.,
vol. 29, No. 10, Oct. 1990, 2052-58.

Huot et al., "Low Hydrogen overpotential Nanocrystalline . . . " J.
Electrochem. Soc., vol. 138, No. 5, May 1991, 1316-1320.

Potvin et al., "Study of the Kinetics of the Hydrogen . . . ," J.
Electrochem. Soc., vol. 138, No. 4, Apr. 1991, 900-905.

Galbaatar et al., "On the influence of anharmonicity . . . ," Physica C,
185-189, no month 1991, 1529-1530.

Suryanarayana et al., "The structure and Mechanical Props . . . ," Mettal.
Trans. A, vol. 23A, Apr. 1992, 1071-1081.

Kolesnikov et al., "Strong anharmonic H(D) vibrations," Physica B 180 &
181, no month 1992, 284-286.

Cahen et al., "Room-temperature, Electric-field . . . ," Science, vol. 258,
Oct. 1992, 271-274.

Koleske et al., "Temperature dependence and anharmonicity of . . . ,"
Surface Science, 298, Jul. 1993, 215-224.

Fleischmann et al., "Calorimetry of the Pd-D20 System . . . ," Physics
Letters, A 176, Mar. 1993, 1-12.

Flach et al., "Integrability and localized excitations . . . ," Physical
Review E, vol. 49, No. 1, Jan. 1994, 836-850.

Reifenschweiler, "reduced radioactivity of tritium . . . ," Physics Letters
A, 184, Dec. 1994, 149-153.

LREP  Legal Information
FR2     Combined Principal Attorney(s):		Lober; Theresa A.

ABST  Abstract

For a condensed matter system containing a guest interstitial species such as
hydrogen or its isotopes dissolved in the condensed matter host lattice, the
invention provides tuning of the molecular orbital degeneracy of the host
lattice to enhance the anharmonicity of the dissolved guest sublattice to
achieve a large anharmonic displacement amplitude and a correspondingly small
distance of closest approach of the guest nuclei.  The tuned electron
molecular orbital topology of the host lattice creates an energy state giving
rise to degenerate sublattice orbitals related to the second nearest
neighbors of the guest bonding orbitals. Thus, it is the nuclei of the guest
sublattice that are set in anharmonic motion as a result of the orbital
topology. This promotion of second nearest neighbor bonding between
sublattice nuclei leads to enhanced interaction between nuclei of the
sublattice. In the invention, a method for producing dynamic anharmonic
oscillations of a condensed matter guest species dissolved in a condensed
matter host lattice is provided. Host lattice surfaces are treated to provide
surface features on at least a portion of the host lattice surfaces; the
features have a radius of curvature less than 0.5 microns. Upon dissolution
of the guest species in the treated host lattice in a ratio of at least 0.5,
the guest species undergoes the dynamic anharmonic oscillations.

GOVT  Government Interest

                     GOVERNMENT RIGHTS IN THE INVENTION

     This invention was made with U.S. Government support under contract No.
F19628-90-C-0002, awarded by the Force. The Government has certain rights in
this invention.

BSUM  Brief Summary

                           FIELD OF THE INVENTION

     This invention relates to techniques for enhancing conditions for
causing anharmonic oscillations in protonated and deuterated alloys, leading
to enhanced electron tunneling between degenerate molecular orbitals and
enhanced nuclei interaction; and more particularly relates to materials
processing techniques for maximizing anharmonic oscillations of hydrogen
isotope nuclei in the interstices of such alloys.

                        BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

     Strong force nuclear interaction of hydrogen isotopes, deuterium in
particular, have been extensively studied in the regime above 30,000 eV.
Tunneling phenomena through the Coulomb barrier has been well characterized
and described as requiring tunneling through a barrier of 0.7 .ANG. in width
and 400,000 eV in height.

     Interaction of nuclei in a palladium-deuterium condensed matter system
has been shown to be 10.sup.7 times more probable than the Coulomb tunneling
described above. The reposed successes in this system are best accounted for
by a palladium-deuterium interaction scheme occurring in the presence of
strong wave function overlap. It has been shown that such wavefunction
overlap may be achieved via specific molecular orbital degeneracy conditions.

     Fundamental shifts in the molecular orbital topology of a condensed
matter system are known to be achievable via sub-micron, nanometrically-sized
surface features. Such nanometric space features alter the surface and near
surface electrochemistry of a condensed matter system, and thereby effect the
orbital topology of the system. This effect cannot be attributed to a simple
increase in surface area; rather, the surface character at the nanoscale can
only be predicted from a real-space molecular orbital perspective. The
resulting properties are purely quantum-mechanical in nature, i.e., they
cannot be derived by a simple extension of continuum elasticity theory to the
nanoregime. Thus, nanometric, low-dimensional surface features can be
expected to interact with electromagnetic fields and radiation in a
corresponding quantum-mechanical nature.

                          SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

     In view of the above considerations, the inventors herein have
recognized that for a condensed matter system containing a guest interstitial
species such as hydrogen or its isotopes dissolved in the condensed matter
host lattice, tuning of the molecular orbital degeneracy of the host lattice
via the methods of the invention enhances the anharmonicity of the dissolved
guest sublattice to achieve a large anharmonic displacement amplitude and a
correspondingly small distance of closest approach of the guest nuclei. The
electron molecular orbital topology of the host lattice creates an energy
state giving rise to degenerate sublattice orbitals related to the second
nearest neighbors of the guest bonding orbitals.  Thus, it is the nuclei of
the guest sublattice that are set in anharmonic motion as a result of the
orbital topology.

     The invention provides methods for enhancing this guest lattice
anharmonicity such that promotion of second nearest neighbor bonding between
sublattice nuclei leads to enhanced interaction between nuclei of the
sublattice.

     In one aspect, the invention provides a method for producing dynamic
anharmonic oscillations of a condensed matter guest species dissolved in a
condensed matter host lattice. In the method, host lattice surfaces are
treated to provide surface features on at least a portion of the host lattice
surfaces; the features have a radius of curvature less than 0.5 microns.
Thereupon dissolution of the guest species in the host lattice in a ratio of
at least 0.5, the guest species undergoes the dynamic anharmonic
oscillations.

     In preferred embodiments, the host lattice comprises palladium, a
palladium silver alloy, preferably Pd.sub..77 Ag.sub..23, or nickel. The
guest species comprises hydrogen or deuterium. Preferably, the surface
features of the host lattice have a radius of curvature less than 0.3
microns, and more preferably, less than 0.2 microns. The guest species is
dissolved in the host lattice preferably in a ratio of at least 0.8. In
prefer, red embodiments, the dynamic oscillations are characterized by an
oscillation amplitude of at least 0.5 .ANG. and an oscillation frequency of
at least 10.sup.10 Hz. Preferably, the dynamic oscillations are sustained
over time such that interaction of guest species nuclei is initiated and
maintained over time.

     In other preferred embodiments the host lattice comprises a sheet of
palladium silver alloy, preferably wound to form a coiled tube of the sheet.
The gust species dissolution is preferably accomplished by submerging the
host lattice is an electrolytic solution of the guest species. A
platinum-coated anode is submerged in the solution and a voltage is applied
between the host lattice and the anode; preferably the voltage is a square
wave signal having a DC offset voltage, where the signal is characterized by
a time varying amplitude no less than 0.93 volts and a frequency between
about 5 Hz and 2000 Hz.

     In other preferred embodiments, a host lattice is provided by a
continuous wire that is drawn through a diamond die which has been processed
to include relief structures on inner surfaces, the relief structures having
a radius of curvature less than 0.5 microns. Preferably, the wire is a
continuous nickel wire or a multiclad wire consisting of a nickel core
surrounded by a layer of palladium, and the inner surfaces of the die result
from laser processing of the inner surfaces.

     In other preferred embodiments, the host lattic surface is treated by
lapping the surface using a polishing slurry or scribing the surface with a
diamond stylus. Preferably, the diamond stylus has a working tip diameter
less than 0.5 microns; more preferably the scribing is accomplished using an
array of tips all positioned on a common stylus fixture, and after the
scribing, the surface is anodically etched with a hydrochloric acid solution
undergoing ultrasonic agitation.

     In other preferred embodiments, the lattice surface is treated by anodic
etching of the surface, or chemical vapor deposition or molecular beam
epitaxy of host lattice material on a substrate. Preferably, the host lattice
surface is treated by lithographically defining a pattern of surface features
on at least one surface and etching the patterned surface to produce the
surface features. Preferably, the patterned surface is anodically etched, and
the etching results in V-shaped surface grooves, rectangular-shaped surface
channels, or prismatic asperities.

     In another aspect, the invention provides apparatus for producing
dynamic anharmonic oscillations of a condensed matter guest species. The
apparatus includes a condensed matter host lattice having surface features of
a radius of curvature less than 0.5 microns on at least a portion of its
surfaces, and apparatus of dissolving the guest species in the host lattice
in a ratio of at least 0.5, the guest species undergoing the oscillations
upon dissolution in the host lattice.

     In preferred embodiments, the guest species is provided in an
electrolytic solution of the guest species; the electrolytic solution is
preferably a solution of heavy or light water and K.sub.2 CO.sub.3.

     In another aspect the invention provides a host lattice for causing a
guest species dissolved in the host lattice to undergo dynamic anharmonic
oscillations according to the methods of the invention. Preferably, the host
lattice comprises a coiled tube formed of a sheet of palladium silver alloy.
In other preferred embodiments, the host lattice comprises a superlattice of
first and second submaterials alternately layered in layers of between 10 and
100 nanometers in thickness. Preferably, the host lattice submaterials are
nickel and copper, or nickel and palladium, or copper and palladium. In other
preferred embodiments, the host lattice structure has been cold worked, and
comprises a nanograined polycrystalline morphology.

     Other features and advantages of the invention will be apparent from the
description of a preferred embodiment, and from the claims.

DRWD  Drawing Description

                     BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

     FIG. 1 is a rendering of a conventional X-ray photo-spectroscopy plot of
X-ray intensity as a function of molecular orbital energy for a hypothetical
condensed matter sample;

     FIG. 2A is a plot of the Jahn-Teller coupling parameter .beta. as a
function of the percent bond overlap of electron molecular orbitals of second
nearest neighbor hydrogen atoms near the Fermi energy;

     FIG. 2B is a plot of nuclear displacement oscillation amplitude as a
function of the Jahn-Teller coupling parameter .beta.;

     FIGS. 3A-3D illustrate the steps of producing a palladium-nickel clad
wire according to one aspect of the invention;

     FIGS. 4A-4F illustrate the steps of a first method for lithographically
defining nanoscopic surface features according to another aspect of the
invention;

     FIGS. 5A-5F illustrate the steps of a second method for lithographically
defining nanoscopic surface features according to another aspect of the
invention;

     FIG. 6 schematically illustrates a cell activation and measurement
set-up according to one aspect of the invention;

     FIG. 7 schematically illustrates the activation cell of FIG. 6 in more
detail; and

     FIG. 8 schematically illustrates the anode of FIG. 7 in more detail.

DETD  Detail Description

                   DESCRIPTION OF A PREFERRED EMBODIMENT

     We first present a discussion of anharmonicity in condensed matter.
Referring to FIG. 1, there is shown a conventional X-ray photo-spectroscopy
plot of X-ray intensity (horizontal axis) as a function of molecular orbital
energy (vertical axis) for a hypothetical condensed matter sample. The
vertical axis also depicts specific molecular orbital energy levels for the
sample. Beginning with the orbital of lowest energy, some number of molecular
orbitals of the sample are fully occupied, up to an energy level above which
the molecular orbitals are unoccupied. The fully occupied orbitals are each
associated with a specific symmetry and steric state. The Fermi energy,
E.sub.f, is defined as that energy level halfway between the energy level of
the highest occupied molecular orbital (HOMO) and that of the lowest
unoccupied molecular orbital (LUMO). The energy gap, .DELTA.E, is defined as
the energy difference between the energy levels of the HOMO and LUMO.

     As the temperature of a sample is increased or radiation is applied to
the sample, the population of the HOMO shifts toward the LUMO, and the mean
energy of the molecular orbitals shifts a corresponding amount. Under certain
arrangements of matter, the HOMO and LUMO can actually co-exist at the same
energy level. This condition is referred to as orbital degeneracy. Under
degenerate molecular orbital conditions, condensed matter systems generally
find it energetically favorable to lower the free energy of the system by
dynamically distorting, or in extreme cases, statically distorting to a state
of symmetry lower than its existing symmetry state. An example of such a
distortion is a cubic material undergoing a trigonal lattice distortion.

     This static distortion is one embodiment of the well-known Jahn-Teller
effect, relating to condensed matter distortion. According to the Jahn-Teller
effect, when electron molecular orbital degeneracy conditions are achieved,
both static distortions and dynamic distortions are possible and both result
in an energetically more favorable state. Of great importance is the fact
that under dynamically degenerate conditions the electrons in the degenerate
molecular orbitals can tunnel back and forth in space between degenerate
orbitals, centered on separate atoms, at very high rates, where the tunneling
rate is denoted as .omega..sub.c. The amplitudes of these tunneling
oscillations are under certain conditions so large that the positive nuclei
of the parent atoms to the tunneling electrons respond to the oscillations in
some fashion, i.e., the electron oscillations may couple to the parent nuclei
lattice. In this case, the amplitude of the oscillations of the parent
nuclei, in response to the electron tunneling oscillations, is termed
delta..

     Referring to FIG. 2A, the Jahn-Teller coupling parameter, .beta.,
characterizes the degree of degeneracy of a particular molecular orbital
energy configuration, and correlates that degree to a measure of the
electronic molecular orbital overlap of the configuration. The coupling
parameter .beta. has a range between 0 and 1/2. For a condensed matter
lattice characterized by .beta.=1/2, the lattice is not experiencing
Jahn-Teller tunneling oscillations, but rather, oscillations are
characterized as thermal parabolic oscillations expected of harmonic
oscillation behavior. As the local bonding arrangements of the condensed
lattice are shifted towards degeneracy, the .beta. parameter decreases below
1/2, and the overlap of molecular orbitals increases. The tunneling
oscillations of electrons in the degenerate molecular orbitals become less
and less harmonic in character. This type of tunneling oscillation is
referred to as anharmonic oscillation because the oscillations are derived
from statistical fluctuations in molecular orbital occupancy and are nearly
insensitive to temperature, unlike harmonic oscillations, which are thermal
in nature. In general, systems characterized by a .beta. parameter less than
about 1/4 become so structurally unstable during dynamic tunneling
oscillations that they statically distort to a lower symmetry and settle into
a new harmonic condition, like the cubic to trigonal distortion mentioned
above.

     A method for predicting the molecular orbital overlap resulting from a
given orbital degeneracy is given in "Hydrogen-hydrogen/deuterium-deuterium
bonding in palladium and the superconducting/electrochemical properties of
PdH.sub.x PdD.sub.x," by Dr.  Keith Johnson, et al, Modern Physics Letters B,
Vol. 3, no. 10, pp.  795-803, July 1989, and is herein incorporated by
reference. Based on this orbital overlap prediction technique, which provides
a method for quantizing the Jahn-Teller coupling parameter, .beta., the
orbital degeneracy of a condensed lattice system may be selectively "tuned",
or specified, to provide a desired degree of molecular orbital overlap. By
tuning the degeneracy of the system to, e.g., increase the system degeneracy,
the .beta. coupling parameter characterizing the material is in turn (or
inherently) decreased.

     Referring again to FIG. 1, as the degeneracy of a condensed matter
system is tuned so that the HOMO and LUMO come closer together, the energy
gap,
DELTA.E, between the HOMO and LUMO approaches zero. The magnitude of this
energy gap is directly related to the rate of molecular orbital electron
tunneling, T.sub.R, by:

EQU  T.sub.R =Ae.sup.-.DELTA.E/KT                               (1)

where:

 K is the Boltzmann constant

 T is degrees Kelvin.

From this relationship (1) it is clear that as the energy gap between the
HOMO and LUMO approaches zero, the electron tunneling rate T.sub.R
correspondingly increases.

     At high tunneling rates, the tunneling electrons impart their
oscillatory motion to the corresponding parent nuclei; the nuclei are
effectively "dragged" through the anharmonic oscillatory motion of the
tunneling electrons. Thus, the corresponding rate of anharmonic nuclei
oscillation, is also, as expected, related to the degree of molecular orbital
overlap, via the coupling parameter .beta.. The frequency of nuclei
oscillations,
omega..sub.c, in terms of the coupling parameter, is given as:

EQU  .omega..sub.c =h(m.sub.e /M.sub.i).sup..beta. /2m.sub.e d.sup.2 (2)

where:

 m.sub.e =mass of electron

 M.sub.i =mass of parent nuclei

 .beta.=Jahn-Teller coupling parameter (quantified based on the orbital
overlap-degeneracy prediction model)

 d=separation between second nearest neighbor nuclei (the correlation
distance between molecular orbitals of opposite phase, .PSI..sup.+  and
PSI..sup.-  (not the lattice parameter))

 h=Plank's constant.

     Referring to FIG. 2B, the amplitude of parent nuclei oscillation,
delta., resulting from the degree of anharmonicity caused by orbital
overlap, as given by the coupling parameter .beta., mathematically ranges
between 0-1.7 .ANG., for .beta. ranging between 0-0.5, although, as explained
above, .beta. values dose to zero are physically meaningless. The details of
bonding overlap, however, restrict the value of .beta. to above 0.1.  Thus,
referring also to FIG. 2A, a measure of the coupling parameter
beta. provides a means for correlating a degree of molecular orbital
overlap, or degeneracy, to the amplitude of nuclear displacement resulting
from anharmonic oscillations of electrons in the degenerate molecular
orbitals. The relationship nuclear displacement amplitude, .delta., to the
Jahn-Teller coupling parameter, .beta., is quantified as:

EQU  .delta.=(m.sub.e /M.sub.i).sup..beta. d.                   (3)

Based on this relationship, as illustrated in FIG. 2B, it is seen that as
beta. decreases from 0.5 toward 0.1 (becoming more degenerate) the parent
nuclei (e.g., deuteron) displacement amplitude .delta. increases to over 10
times the amplitude associated with thermal (harmonic) oscillations. In fact,
the parent nuclei displacement amplitude may realistically approach or exceed
0.6 .ANG..

     The average distance of closest approach of adjacent parent nuclei which
are anharmonically oscillating is determined based on the displacement
amplitude .delta., described above, and the interstitial site distance
between two such oscillating nuclei. With this interstitial distance between
the nuclei, or bond separation parameter, given as d, the average distance of
closest approach for adjacent anharmonically oscillating nuclei is given as
d-2.delta.. This distance may be equivalently considered as the average
distance of penetration into the coulomb barrier achieved by adjacent
oscillating nuclei.

     The inventors herein have recognized that the probability for
interaction of neighboring nuclei may be dramatically increased via
enhancement of the anharmonic nuclei oscillation phenomenon discussed above,
and further that this anharmonic oscillation may be "tuned" by specifying a
particular molecular orbital degeneracy (and corresponding electron orbital
tunneling) via a corresponding degree of molecular orbital overlap. Both the
anharmonic oscillation nuclei displacement amplitude, .delta., and the
frequency of anharmonic oscillation, .omega..sub.c, were shown above to be
strongly dependent on .beta., the Jahn-Teller coupling parameter, which
provides a measure of the molecular orbital overlap, or degeneracy, for a
given system. The probability for two nuclei to interact will be shown below
to be strongly dependent on the distance of closest approach between any two
nuclei, given above as d-2.delta., and the frequency at which this closest
approach occurs. The coupling parameter .beta. thus provides a mechanism for
correlating a given state of molecular orbital degeneracy with a probability
of nuclei interaction. To achieve a maximum probability for interstitial
nuclei interaction, then, a molecular orbital degeneracy state is selected
which, for a given condensed matter system, minimizes the distance of closest
approach of nuclei during oscillations while at the same time maximizing the
frequency of those oscillations.

     For a condensed matter system containing hydrogen, deuterium, tritium,
or other interstitial species dissolved in a host lattice, the inventors
herein have recognized that by "tuning" the molecular orbital degeneracy of
the host lattice, the anharmonicity of the dissolved hydrogen or deuterium
nuclei sublattice residing in the host lattice may be enhanced to achieve the
conditions described above, i.e., a large displacement amplitude, .delta., of
the hydrogen or deuterium nuclei and a correspondingly small distance of
closest approach, and a high oscillation frequency of deuterium or hydrogen
nuclei. It must be emphasized that it is the electron molecular orbital
topology of the host lattice that creates an energy state giving rise to
degenerate sublattice orbitals related to the second nearest neighbors of,
e.g., H--H guest bonding orbitals. Thus, it is the nuclei of the guest
sublattice that are set in anharmonic motion as a result of the orbital
topology.

     The invention herein provides methods for enhancing this sublattice
anharmonicity via "tuning" of the host lattice molecular orbital degeneracy.
These methods, described below, all provide common results: they act to
promote second nearest neighbor bonding between sublattice nuclei; and they
thereby promote maximization of the anharmonic oscillation amplitude and
oscillation frequency of the sublattice nuclei.

     A variety of metal alloys have been investigated to determine that
alloy, which by the nature of its molecular orbital degeneracy, maximizes
anharmonic oscillations of deuterium or hydrogen dissolved in the alloy
lattice. The molecular orbital overlap, corresponding coupling parameter
beta., and anharmonicity of deuterated palladium alloyed with lead,
bismuth, titanium, silver, copper, zirconium, germanium, silicon, aluminum,
thallium, and gold has been investigated, as well as deuterated nickel
alloyed with titanium. "Deuterated" is here defined to include any of the
three hydrogen isotopes deuterium, tritium, and protons. All of the
investigated alloys possess tetrahedral and octahedral interstitial sites,
yet not all of the alloys serve to enhance the molecular orbital degeneracy
of interstitial guest species. Based on an analysis of the degree of
molecular orbital degeneracy of each of the palladium alloys, palladium
silver is the preferred alloy, as it maximizes hydrogen isotope
anharmonicity.

     In pure palladium and palladium alloys, the lattice parameter, a, of the
palladium atoms in the lattice .apprxeq.3.6 .ANG.. The space in the palladium
lattice may be populated by a guest species, e.g., introduction of deuterium
nuclei dissolved in the lattice to occupy octahedral and tetrahedral
interstitial locations of the lattice, via electrolytic charging. After this
charging, the deuterium nuclei constitute second nearest neighbors (with each
other) in a degenerate orbital condition.  Deuterium is the preferred guest
nuclei species, but hydrogen is also an acceptable guest species.

     While the separation between second nearest neighbor deuterium nuclei
located at octahedral interstitial sites within the host lattice is 3.6
ANG., the same length as the palladium lattice parameter, once
electrolytic charging of deuterium reaches a high level, the deuterium nuclei
begin to populate the smaller tetrahedral interstitial sites of palladium and
its alloys, and the distance between a neighboring interstitial tetrahedral
and octahedral site is 1.7 .ANG., less than one-half the lattice parameter
distance. Thus, deuterium nuclei populating adjacent octahedral and
tetrahedral sites are closer together, and have a higher spatial density,
than nuclei populating only octahedral sites.

     This small equilibrium distance between tetrahedral and octahedral sited
deuterium nuclei, in combination with enhanced anharmonic oscillations of
those nuclei, create the conditions necessary for enhanced interaction
between the deuterium nuclei.

     Of the metal alloys investigated, it is found that palladium silver
provides the highest degree of guest deuterium nuclei anharmonicity. This
silver compound increases the d.DELTA.-s.sigma., antibonding component of the
palladium-deuterium molecular orbitals, at concentrations up to about 23%
silver, thereby promoting more overlap of the second nearest neighbor
D--D(s.sigma.) bonding molecular orbitals and providing an enhanced molecular
orbital degeneracy. A particular deuterated palladium silver compound,
Pd.sub..77 Ag.sub..23 D, is preferred for a bulk alloy embodiment, but other
palladium silver compounds, as well as other metal compounds such as Au--Ni,
Cu--Pd, Cu--Ni, Ni--Pd, Cu--Ni, Ni--Ti, Zr--P, Pd--P, Ni--Zr, Zr--Pd, and
Zr--Ti also provide a degree of anharmonicity sufficient to enhance
interaction of deuterium nuclei in the alloy lattice. Thus, while the
following discussion focuses on palladium silver, it must be recognized that
other alloy compounds are also suitable.

     Using the molecular orbital overlap modeling technique of Johnson
described above, the computed bond overlap of Pd.sub..77 Ag.sub..23 D (near
the Fermi level) is calculated to be 35%. Using the graphical relationships
in FIGS. 2A and 2B, this bond overlap correlates to a Jahn-Teller coupling
parameter .beta. of 0.13, and a deuterium nuclei anharmonic oscillation
amplitude, .delta., equal to 0.6. Then, using the relationship (d-2.delta.),
given above, for determining the average distance of closest approach for
anharmonically oscillating deuterons in the palladium ahoy lattice, with the
bond separation parameter, d, being 1.7 .ANG. between an octahedral and
tetrahedral deuterium nuclei, the average distance of closest approach of a
D--D nuclei pair is 0.5 .ANG.. This distance is closer than even the bond
distance in deuterium gas, which is 0.7 .ANG..  The average distance of
closest approach must be reduced below 0.5 .ANG.  to observe any strong force
interactions at a rate above the expected background rate. Thus, the
probability, or expectation value, of finding an anharmonically oscillating
deuteron pair inside the strong force envelope is dramatically enhanced by
small reductions in this distance of closest approach to reduce this distance
below 0.5 .ANG..

     Specific details of the energy potential between the deuterium atoms in
this anharmonic system are unknown. However, a semi-qualitative analysis may
be performed using an expression derived by Sichlen and Jones for the rate,
R, of D--D nuclei interaction, using a Morse potential, as follows:

EQU  R=Ae.sup.(-.lambda.(r.sub.d))                              (4)

where

 A=the nuclei interaction attempt rate

 .lambda.(r.sub.d)=the reaction distance

 (r.sub.d)=the Coulomb barrier penetration factor.

Factoring out the barrier width, such that
lambda.(r.sub.d)=[(d-2.delta.)-.lambda.'(r.sub.d)] and using
(d-2.delta.)=1.05 and .lambda.(r.sub.d)=180 for a D.sub.2 molecule, and
setting A equal to the anharmonic oscillation frequency, .omega..sub.c the
interaction rate of deuterium nuclei in a deuterium molecule is 10.sup.-70
interactions/D--D pair/sec, at room temperature.

     Using the substitutions given above for the palladium system at room
temperature, the equation is correlated to a PdD system given by:

EQU  R=.omega..sub.c e.sup.-(d-2.delta.)171.                    (5)

     Substituting the values of (d-2.delta.) as 1.05 .ANG. for the system of
PdD, a deuterium nuclei interaction rate of 10.sup.-50 is indicated. In
contrast, substituting 5.times.10.sup.11 rad/sec and 0.5 .ANG. for the values
of .omega..sub.c and (d-2.delta.), respectively, computed for the system of
Pd.sub..77 Ag.sub..23 D, indicates a deuterium nuclei interaction rate of
7.times.10.sup.-27 interactions/D--D pair/sec under the enhanced anharmonic
conditions set up by the Pd.sub..77 Ag.sub..23 host lattice. Based on this
analysis, it is clear that deuterium nuclei interaction is significantly
promoted by anharmonic oscillation conditions.

     The nature of the strong force nuclei interaction having a rate
quantified by the above equation is not here specified; rather, the chemical
and physical conditions that amplify the probability for the occurrence of
this strong force interaction are provided by the enhanced anharmonicity
system of the invention.

     Optimally, the strong force interaction of deuterium nuclei which are
anharmonically oscillating occurs in the host lattice with a high degree of
coherency. The more non-linear, or anharmonic, the deuterium sub-lattice
behaves, the higher the coherency of the anharmonic oscillations. Condensed
matter systems in which the deuteron nuclei motions are synchronized to such
a high degree are expected to generally tend toward conditions that favor 3-
and 4-body strong force interactions.  Such many-bodied, cooperative
oscillations permit 3 nuclei to be confined in, or close to, the strong force
envelope simultaneously, providing a corresponding increase in interaction
potential. Prediction of reaction by-products of 3- and 4-body strong force
interactions are beyond current understanding. High energy scattering
experiments are of no predictive use, owing to the immeasurably low
probability of even a 3-body interaction.

     It must also be recognized that the anharmonic tunneling oscillations
described herein occur in a space regime such that the inertial wavelength of
the deuterons is much greater than that typically associated with high-energy
events. Thus, substantial overlap of the wave-functions of nearby nuclei,
even those outside of the interaction envelope of a nuclei pair, can be
expected. Additionally, interference effects of the low-energy tunneling
oscillations can not be dismissed. Indeed, the energy of the deuterated
palladium silver system is computed to be seven orders of magnitude lower
than the lowest energy scattering experiments (.apprxeq.20,000 eV compared
with 20 meV). Conversely, the deBroglie wavelength of a wave/particle
deuteron is increased by .sqroot.107 over that of scatter high energy
experiments. Thus, interference effects of the tunneling phenomena can not be
discounted.

     Anharmonic oscillations resulting from specific molecular orbital
degeneracy may be understood from another viewpoint. The amplitude,
delta., of the anharmonic oscillations may be equated with the energy of
the oscillating system. The energy of the oscillator thereby correlates a
wavelength with the oscillating particle. When the wavelength, .lambda., of
an anharmonically oscillating deuteron coincides with the length of a
potential well, here the Coulomb barrier, a resonance is expected. Tuning of
the anharmonicity of a condensed matter system thus acts to adjust the
wavelength of the wave/particle entity (here, the deuteron) to induce
particular resonances. The induced resonance further enhances the oscillation
amplitude, .delta., and can dramatically increase the probability of a strong
force interaction between neighboring nuclei.

     The inventors herein have recognized that in addition to precisely
selecting an alloy host lattice for enhancing anharmonicity of guest
deuterium nuclei, the application of an electric field may be employed to
shift the HOMO and LUMO populations and energy spectra of a given host
lattice to achieve molecular orbital degeneracy and enhanced anharmonicity.
It is recognized, however, that E-fields are confined to the near-surface
region of conducting materials. Therefore, E-fields only control the system
anharmonicity in a region of the system whose depth is less than about 200
ANG.-deep into the bulk of a host material.  Additionally, the inventors
herein have recognized a third mechanism for tuning the degeneracy and
anharmonicity of a system, namely, using nanometric surface preparation (NSP)
techniques on the host lattice. Such preparation is intended to impart
nanoscale surface topology to the host lattice; this topology acts to create
a low coordination of the surface atoms. Surfaces with a low coordination of
atoms develop anharmonic properties owing to orbital de-localization at
regions of high curvature, where the radius of curvature of such regions is
generally less than 0.2
mu.m. Nanometric surface preparation, like the application of E-fields,
is confined to effect only the surface and near surface regions of a host
lattice. Each of these anharmonicity tuning mechanisms will be described in
tun below.

     Electric fields, which are limited to the near surface of a metal, make
substantial changes to the local force constants and accompanying vibrational
response of near-surface atoms of a metal. Anharmonic oscillations driven by
molecular orbital degeneracy are modified by the applications of electric
fields, mediated by the local adjustments to the force constants. However,
these effects are distributed over the interaction distance of the anharmonic
potentials, which may extend normal to the surface over many lattice
parameters.

     As described below it is intended that a "tuned" degenerate host lattice
be charged, via electrolysis, to populate interstitial sites with deuterium.
The strong electric fields developed during such electrolysis is recognized
to provide two effects, based on an understanding of the system: a strong
E-field insures that a high concentration of deuterium (or other guest
species) is obtained and maintained within the lattice; and a strong E-field
provides a driving force to further delocalize the D(1s) orbitals of the host
lattice nuclei, beyond that resulting from a particular selection of host
alloy. Fields on the order of 10.sup.4 - -10.sup.7 Volts/cm occur within and
at the surface of conducting materials undergoing electrolysis, extending
normal to the surface on the order of nanometers, The exact quantification of
the effect of an E-field on the surface can not be made at this time.
However, Hellman-Feynman theory suggests that the E-fields act on the
population of electron molecular orbitals, which action can be systematically
employed to shift the Fermi energy in a direction leading to further
degeneracy, for the proper E-field polarity. Of course, the E-field may
detract from a particular orbital population as well, depending on the
E-field polarity; hence it is appropriate to consider the application of an
E-field as degeneracy tuning.

     Consider Pd.sub..77 Ag.sub..23 D, discussed above as providing a high
degree of enhanced deuterium anharmonicity and a rate of deuterium nuclei
interaction of 7.times.10.sup.-27 interactions/D--D pair/sec. The application
of an electric field to this system during, e.g., electrolysis, further
delocalizes the already degenerate molecular orbitals by an additional 5-10%,
resulting in an increase of the anharmonic oscillation amplitude, .delta., of
the deuterium nuclei by an additional 0.1 .ANG. beyond the 0.6 .ANG.
oscillation amplitude caused by the anharmonic conditions of the Pd.sub..77
Ag.sub..23 D alloy lattice alone. In this case, the barrier penetration
parameter, or average distance of closest approach, of two deuterium nuclei,
is then 0.5 .ANG., and the rate of deuterium nuclei strong force interactions
increases from 7.times.10.sup.-27 interactions/D--D pair/sec to
4.6.times.10.sup.-10 interactions/D--D pair/sec. Thus, the application of an
E-field, e.g., during electrolysis, increases the interaction rate by
seventeen orders of magnitude. As explained previously, the nature of these
interactions is not here specified; rather, chemical and physical conditions
that promote the occurrence of these interactions are provided by the
enhanced anharmonicity system of the invention.

     For the majority of materials having properties which lend them as a
host lattice, and particularly for nickel and nickel alloys, the
anharmonicity tuning mechanisms of E-field applications and nanometric
surface preparation do not present a hinderance to system performance,
because ideal heat transfer favors a surface phenomenon, and these mechanisms
promote anharmonicity at the surface, rather than the bulk of the material.

     The third anharmonicity tuning mechanism of the invention, nanometric
surface preparation (NSP), acts to adjust the local coordination of surface
atoms, as explained above. High curvature surfaces, such as prismatic edges
and asperities, are optimal low atomic coordination surfaces, and may be
fabricated with existing technology to create a high density of such features
with nanometric curvature radii of less than 0.2
mu.m. The new atomic coordinations produced by the resulting surface
topology induce variations in electron molecular orbitals expected of atoms
of a smooth surface; these electron molecular orbitals have different size,
shape, orientation and, perhaps most importantly, population than those
associated with a smooth surface. The new molecular orbital occupancy levels
associated with this lower atomic coordination tend to shift the Fermi level
such that the degeneracy of the system is increased, and the anharmonicity of
the system is correspondingly increased. Additionally, NSP surfaces enhance
the dissolution of hydrogen isotopes in a host lattice during electrolysis,
thereby promoting population of tetrahedral sites in the host lattice.

     Considered in another way, partitioning of a highly nonlinear, i.e.,
anharmonic, solid such as the Pd.sub..77 Ag.sub..23 D alloy so that the alloy
is nanometrically discretized, using, for example, NSP methods of the
invention, leads to enormous vibrational instabilities in the solid, and
correspondingly large vibration spectra. That is, atomic scale discreteness
effects give rise to localized vibrational states that would not exist in a
continuum, nondiscretized system. It is these localized vibrational states
that provide the large amplitude anharmonicity recognized by the inventors
herein as the foundation for enhancing nuclear interaction between nearest
neighbor guest species in a host lattice. The existence and quantification of
the correlation between nanometric partitioning and vibrational instabilities
is provided by, for example, Dauzois and Peyard, "Energy Localization in
Nonlinear Lattices," Physical Review Letters, Vol. 70, No. 25, Jun. 21, 1993,
pp. 3935-3938; and Kivshar and Peyard, "Modulational instabilities in
discrete lattices," Physics Review A, Vol. 46, No. 6, Sep. 15, 1992, p. 3198.

     Several host lattice surface preparation techniques are preferred to
produce this effect, but those skilled in the art will recognize that other
techniques are equally applicable to achieve the desired increase in
anharmonicity. These techniques can be classified into two categories: first,
post-processing techniques, such as wire drawing, nanoscribing, lithography,
and back-etching, and secondly, materials synthesis techniques, such as CVD,
MBE, ED,or PVD over articulated surfaces, surface coatings, and selective
binary compound etching, all of which are described below.

     In a first technique for providing nanoscopic topology to the surface of
a host lattice material, the host lattice material, in the form of wire, is
drawn through a diamond die which has been processed to include relief
topology. Such a topology is achieved on a diamond die by positioning a
high-power laser, for example, a CO.sub.2 or YAG laser, focussed to a spot
size of less than 30 .mu.m, at sufficient power to ablate diamond, to locally
evaporate carbon on the inside radial surface of the die. The laser is
focused to a desired diameter spot size, which is preferably not more than 30
mu.m, and either raster scanned or modulated in a pulsed fashion along the
inner wall of the diamond die.

     This rastering or pulsing action results in the effective "drilling" of
bevelled holes in the diamond die. Pulsed laser sources, as opposed to
continuous wave sources, provide the most flexibility for "customizing" the
imparted relief topology. By selectively programming the rastering and dwell
time of the laser as it is applied to the inner wall of a diamond die, the
inner wall surface of the die may be sculptured in a predefined way to
provide bevelled features. The resulting features may be smoothed with a
laser annealing step or subsequent diamond paste polishing step to remove
rough spots on the interior of the holes. Preferably, in this application,
the diamond die is processed to intentionally impart nanometric and
microscopic features into the trailing edge, i.e., smallest diameter, of the
die.

     In an alternative technique, a diamond abrasive, in the form of a paste,
may be applied to a diamond die to provide topology on the inner surface of
the die by scoring that surface as the paste is passed through the die.

     Once a diamond die is processed to include on its inner surface
nanometric-sized bevelled features or scored asperities, host lattice wire,
e.g., nickel or palladium wire, is drawn through the die. After being drawn
through the die, the wire will take on the relief structure of the die;
handling care is called for to avoid post-process rounding of the
nanometrically sharp features on the drawn wire. Indeed, conventional wire
drawing technology is designed to minimize topological features on drawn
wire, and thus, typically includes a surface polishing step. Such a polishing
step is disadvantageous for this process.

     Specific preferable steps of the wire drawing process are as follows.
Prior to being drawn through a prepared diamond die, the wire to be processed
is cleaned via a series of solvent washes, for example: wash (1)--15 minute
immersion in 40.degree. C. trichloroethane with ultrasonic agitation; wash
(2)--15 minute immersion in fresh 40.degree. C. trichloroethane with
ultrasonic agitation; wash (3)--15 minute immersion in room-temperature
acetone with ultrasonic agitation; wash (4)--15 minute immersion in
room-temperature methanol with ultrasonic agitation; wash (5)--15 minute
immersion in room-temperature isopropanol with ultrasonic agitation; and
final wash (6)--30 minute rinse in distilled water. After this cleaning
process, the wire is drawn through the die while being lubricated. A suitable
lubricant is selected based on the need to avoid organic contamination of the
alloy surface.

     In an alternate embodiment, multi-clad wire of nickel and palladium may
be fabricated to provide enhanced anharmonicity due to both a specific alloy
combination and surface topology. Referring to FIG. 3A, such multi-clad wire
is fabricated using a solid, cylindrical copper rod 10, a solid, cylindrical
nickel rod 12 of a diameter less than the diameter of the copper rod, and a
palladium sheet 14 having a length equal to that of the copper and nickel
rods. The length and diameters of the rods are determined based on the
desired final length and diameter of the multi-clad wire to be produced. In a
first fabrication step, shown in FIG.  3B, the copper rod 10 is machined to
remove copper from the interior of the rod, thereby creating a copper tube.
The inner diameter 16 of the copper tube is preferably machined to match the
diameter of a cylindrical assembly 18 comprising the nickel rod 12 around
which is wrapped the palladium sheet 14. In a next step, shown in FIG. 3C,
the nickel rod-palladium sheet assembly 18 is pressed into the copper tube 10
to form a billet. As shown in FIG. 3D, a copper cap 20 having a centrally
located hole is then welded to one end of the billet and a pumping lead. 22
is attached to the cap hole.

     The pumping lead 22 is connected to a vacuum system and the billet is
evacuated via the system for approximately 12 hours at a temperature of
300.degree. C. At the end of the evacuation period, the pumping lead 22 is
weld-sealed to isolate the billet from atmosphere, and the assembly is cooled
to room temperature. Once the billet is cooled, it is extruded, using
conventional extruding techniques, to have an outside diameter of not more
than 2 inches. Then, using a group of successively smaller dies, the extruded
billet (now a wire) is drawn through the dies from largest die to smallest,
in sequence, to reach a final desired diameter. After the final die drawing,
the copper cladding tube is etched off of the palladium sheet to expose the
palladium-nickel assembly. A solution of Hf/HNO.sub.3 at room temperature,
using standard etching and rinsing techniques, adequately removes the copper
and cleans the palladium surface. The resulting multi-clad wire may be used
as is or alternatively, the wire may be drawn through a diamond die having
surface features on its inner walls, using the process described above, to
form the desired surface asperities on the wire.

     In an alternative embodiment, an arbitrarily-shaped host lattice
material piece may be mechanically processed to create a planar surface
having nanometric topology using a lapping process as follows. If the piece
is rather small, it is first mounted on a quartz optical fiat using a
low-melting point temperature wax. The optical fiat is first positioned on a
hot plate at approximately 90.degree. C. The temperature of the optical fiat
is then increased until a small portion of wax melts on the fiat, at which
point the rectangular piece is positioned on the melted wax. The optical
fiat, now supporting the rectangular sample, is then removed from the hot
plate and cooled to room temperature.

     The host lattice sample alone, or a supported smaller sample is
positioned on a nylon lapping pad of a standard lapping plate on a polishing
wheel. A polishing slurry consisting of standard soluble 5 .mu.m diamond oil
paste and mineral kerosine is loaded on the wheel to lubricate the sample
during the lapping process. With the lubricated sample in place, the wheel is
run for about 30 minutes, throughout which time the lubrication is
maintained.

     At the end of the 30 minute-lapping period, the nylon lapping pad is
replaced with a new pad and the sample is positioned on the pad and
lubricated with standard 2 .mu.m diamond oil paste and mineral kerosine.  The
wheel is then run again for 30 minutes. In a third lapping process, the nylon
pad is again replaced and the sample is run on the wheel for 45 minutes using
0.5 .mu.m diamond oil paste and mineral kerosine as the lapping lubricant.
Finally, in a fourth lapping process, the nylon pad is again replaced and the
sample is run on the wheel for 2 hours using 0.1
mu.m diamond oil paste and mineral kerosine as the lapping lubricant.
This last lapping process using diamond paste imparts the desired nanometric
features on the planarized surface.

     If the arbitrarily-shaped host lattice sample was of such a small size
that it was mounted on an optical fiat, the sample is removed from the flat,
after the last lapping process, by melting the wax on the fiat using a hot
plate and removing the sample from the melted wax. Whether or not an optical
fiat support was employed, the sample is preferably cleaned at the end of the
lapping procedure, following the multistage solvent cleaning process
described above in connection with the wire drawing procedure, or other
suitable cleaning procedure.

     Alternative mechanical processing techniques may be employed to produce
nanometric surface topology for enhancing condensed anharmonicity according
to the teachings of the invention herein. For example, in one method
according to the invention, a diamond stylus is used to mechanically scribe
the surface of a host lattice material in a predetermined scribe pattern. The
diamond stylus is preferably "ultrasharp" in that the effective working tip
diameter of the stylus is of nanometric proportions, and can thereby produce
nanometric-sized scribe patterns. The stylus is precisely moved across the
surface of the material using a computer-controlled actuating mechanism. Such
a system and methods for using the system to produce nanometric scribe
patterns are disclosed in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 929,341, entitled
"Method and apparatus for forming nanometric features on surfaces," filed on
Sep. 13, 1992, by Harry Clark et al., and herein incorporated by reference.
An extension of this diamond stylus patterning technique employs a stylus
fixture having an array of such diamond tips which each are characterized by
nanometic-sized tip radii. The array of tips provides the ability to in
tandem scribe many patterns across the surface.

     Using such a system, scratched relief topology is imparted to the
surface of, e.g., a sheet of host lattice material. It is not required that
the original surface topology of the sheet be planar, but rather, the
topology may even be slowly undulating. Active sensors, for example, or other
means of the computer-controlled actuating mechanism permit an array of styli
to ride lightly on the surface, no matter its topology, and additionally,
restrict the depth of cut to, e.g., less than 2 .mu.m. In this way, a large
surface area can be processed in an acceptable time period. As described
below, such a nanometrically processed sheet may be used in its initial form
as a sheet or may be wound into a small spatial volume, to form a coiled
tube, much in the manner of an electrolytic capacitor design.

     According to a preferred embodiment of the invention herein, nanometric
surface features are produced using the diamond stylus scribing scheme
described above, in combination with a "post-scribe" ultrasonic anodic etch
process. The application of an E-field during the etching serves to populate
antibonding orbitals in the near surface of the host lattice, thereby
facilitating decohesion of, typically, metallic bonds. Such an anodic etch is
carried out using, e.g., a solution of hydrochloric acid diluted with three
parts water. A platinum electrode may be employed, for example. The anodic
cell is operated under :reverse bias at several milliamps/cm.sup.2 for a
selected time period, such as 300 seconds, sufficient to produce a high
density of nanoscale features on the surface of the host lattice material.
Ultrasonic agitation of the anodic etch bath promotes feature formation. The
two-step scribe-anodic etch process produces a high density of nanoscale
features on any size host lattice sheet.

     There are still other materials processing techniques that result in
surfaces with sub-microscopic features. For example, diamond turning, fly
cutting, and milling techniques are suitable for creating surface structures.
Alternatively, various metallurgical techniques may be employed; suitable
metallurgical methods include the process of co-solidification of a binary
mixture with low solubility in the solid phase. The resulting solidified
matrix will have dendritic (needle-like) filaments in the midst of the second
phase element. Selective etching of the second phase element results in a
porous, spongy material with high curvature surfaces. Ni--Al and Pd--B are
two examples of relatively insoluble metal systems that are preferred for
this technique. Vapor deposition techniques that are customized to favor
discontinuous, rather than smooth and continuous deposition characteristics
result in sub-micron sized nucleation sites that enhance the anharmonicity of
the underlying substrate surface. Conversely, vapor deposition of a smooth
coating over a highly textured surface achieves this same result of
sub-micron sized asperities. An example of this process is the autoclaving of
open-cell polystyrene. The decomposition resulting from the autoclaving
produces a carbonaceous skeleton with very small feature sizes.

     Chemical vapor deposition (CVD) is a molecular level process whereby two
molecules react only when conjoined on a hot surface. This thermally
activated process is thus useful in producing a selected surface topology,
because the two or more molecular species employed in the process do not
react in the gas phase. Deposition onto a heated substrate can be precisely
controlled with adjustments to the temperature of the substrate, as well as
the relative composition of the gas phase constituents.

     For this application, deposition quality and thickness are best obtained
at low pressures, an operating regime providing the ability to produce very
thin layers. This is especially true for an articulated surface, such as a
pyrolized organic foam. Coating the interior regions of such a surface is
referred to as chemical vapor infiltration (CVI). Clearly, ultrathin coatings
are preferred for this application, lest the small pores of the foam plug up
and obstruct the nanometric surface reactivity.

     Whatever mechanical technique is chosen for imparting sub-micron sized
surface features to a material surface, that technique should optimally
provide a high density of surface asperities, which preferably include
points, prisms, and corners, or comprise any geometries having features with
a radius of curvature less than 0.5 .mu.m, but preferably less than 0.2
mu.m. Such features provide a location 29 of small radius curvature.
Geometries having a radius of curvature more than 0.2 .mu.m will enhance
anharmonicity to some extent, but to a lesser degree than smaller curvature
surface features.

     While nanometric surface features, as described above, have been shown
to be effective in enhancing anharmonicity, techniques of the invention
herein for discetization of metallic grain size at nanometric dimensions also
provides the ability to promote enhanced anharmonicity. Based on prior work
by Peyrad, et al., "Energy Localization in Nonlinear Lattices," Physical
Review Letters, Vol. 70, no. 25, p. 3935, 1993, it is known that energy
localization occurs in one-dimensional nonlinear lattices. The inventors
herein have recognized that in three dimensions, discrete nanodots or
nanocrystals of anharmonic metals can develop large amplitude oscillations
resulting from quantum size effects. Rather than damping large oscillations,
nonlinear nanodot structures favor the growth of large amplitude, low
frequency anharmonic lattice oscillations. Such intrinsically localized
vibrational states augment the anharmonicity enhancement provided by the
schemes described above and provide a mechanism for sustaining resonant
dynamic Jahn-Teller oscillations.

     Such resonant oscillations are only to be expected to be observable in
materials that have in some way been partitioned or discretized. In contrast
to the expected material behavior, partitioning of condensed matter on a
nanoscale relaxes the assumption of equi-partitioning of energy. Thus, local
modes of vibration that would normally decay in a harmonic lattice
spontaneously grow in amplitude in a nonlinear, anharmonic lattice. These
massive, but localized oscillations do not follow classical continuum
mechanics principles.

     For example, it has been shown by Suryanarayana, in "The Structure and
Mechanical Properties of Metallic Nanocrystals," Metallurgical Trans. A, Vol.
23, p. 1074, 1992, that materials with ultrafine grain dimensions are
characterized by extremely high diffusion rates. Such high diffusion rates
provide the ability to diffuse a guest species, e.g., a hydrogen isotope such
as deuterium, in a host lattice, e.g., nickel or a palladium silver alloy, to
a high ratio.

     There are many materials processing techniques within the scope of the
invention for introducing resonant anharmonic oscillations into a guest
species of a host lattice. Grain boundaries, stacking faults, free surfaces
and abrupt compositional variations are materials structures that discretize
or partition condensed matter to develop the vibrational instabilities that
are recognized by the inventors herein to promote nuclei interaction. The
simplest such method is grain refinement, which may be produced via splat
cooling, atomization, selective deposition techniques, and cold working. Cold
working by mechanical attrition has been shown to provide nanograined,
polycrystalline material composition by Koch, in "The Synthesis and Structure
of Nan, crystalline Materials Produced by Mechanical Attrition,"
Nanostructured Materials, Vol. 2, p.  109, 1993.

     Cold working or work hardening tends to result in metal morphology that
is brittle and prone to fracture. Such fracture, i.e., large cracking, of
surfaces is to be avoided here because an electric field applied to such a
cracked surface would not penetrate into cracks and fissures. As a result,
dissolved guest hydrogen isotopes in a host lattice would have an available
path to be reemitted from the host material, thereby preventing the ability
to attain a high guest to host ratio. Thus, optimization of grain size must
be balanced against tendency of a grained material to fracture. Annealing is
not a viable technique because it causes grain growth.

     As an alternative to mechanical and metallurgical techniques for
producing nanometric surface features, lithographic wet-etch techniques may
be used.  For example, referring to FIG. 4A, in a first lithographic process,
a bare substrate 30 of a selected host lattice material, for example, nickel,
is provided with a selected crystallographic orientation, for example, the
110 or 100 orientation. The 110 crystal faces are favored in the case of a
nickel host lattice substrate because the 110 planes support the highest
solubility of hydrogen isotopes of any crystallographic planes.

     As shown in FIGS. 4B, 4C and 4D, photoresist 32 is spun on the substrate
and exposed using a patterned lithographic mask 34 having a selected pattern
of sub-micron sized geometries. Preferably, the maximum pattern dimension, d,
or "duty cycle" of repeated pattern is about 0.2 .mu.m in length. Such
nanoscale features require the use of thin, state of the art photoresists.
The unexposed resist is then removed using standard techniques to produce a
photoresist etch mask. As shown in FIGS. 4E and 4F, the underlying substrate
is then anisotropically etched using an appropriate etch to produce grooves
in the substrate surface having a depth, h, of less than about 1 .mu.m.
Grooves of a greater height are less preferable because they would allow the
prismatic faces of grooves exceeding about 1 .mu.m to reconstruct to a more
harmonic, high atomic coordination state. After removing the resist etch mask
using standard photoresist processing techniques, the substrate 30 is
provided with a topology of steps 36 which all ideally exhibit sharp corners
and straight walls.

     In a second lithographic process, shown in FIGS. 5A-5F, a bare substrate
30 oriented in a preferred crystallographic orientation of [100] has
photoresist spun on its surface. The resist is then exposed using a mask
having a maximum pattern width, d, of 1 .mu.m in a grid pattern. The
unexposed resist is removed using standard resist process techniques and the
substrate is preferentially etched through openings in the remaining
photoresist etch mask. The preferential etch stops on the 111
crystallographic planes of the substrate lattice, which act as etch stop
planes and cause the etch to end at the intersection of the 111 planes within
the substrate.

     At the completion of the etch and after the removal of the photoresist
etch mask using standard photoresist process techniques, the substrate
surface comprises a pattern of grooves 38 having sharp points at the peak of
the groove and a correspondingly reverse pointed indentation into the
substrate surface. As explained in the discussion earlier, these grooves act
to produce a low coordination of surface atoms, and consequently, to increase
the anharmonicity of the hydrogen or hydrogen isotope dissolved in the
surface material. It is intended that alternative lithographic techniques may
also be employed to create suitable surface topology structures which enhance
the anharmonicity of the surface material.

     The inventors herein have found that mechanically derived surface
nanofeatures manifest a different set of properties than lithographically
etched features. By their nature, etch processes attack the most reactive
regions of a surface preferentially over the less reactive regions. The less
reactive regions are then, in turn, what is left exposed at the end of the
etch process. These exposed regions are generally characterized by localized
molecular orbitals. In contrast, mechanical processes, as opposed to etch
processes, do not selectively modify surface regions of particular
reactivity, thereby retaining the original surface reactivity, to a large
extent.

     However, wet-chemistry techniques, such as electroplating and
chromatography, also provide mechanisms for creating finely dispersed
nanometric structures on the surface of a material to enhance the material
anharmonicity. For example, in one method according to the invention,
enhanced anharmonicity of a material is achieved using nanometric-sized
particles of a second material to promote selected surface geometry via a
process such as electroplating the material of interest. In one scheme,
nanometric particles such as fullerenes are coated with 3-20 atomic layers of
a selected host lattice material, such as Ni, Ti, Pd, Zr, or their alloys
discussed above. In this scheme, the diameter of the coated fullerene
(C.sub.60)-material coating combination is between 10-30 .ANG..  The outer
metal atomic layers have such a low coordination of atoms in this geometry
that the outermost electron molecular orbitals of the layers de-localize and
enhance the anharmonicity of the metal layer at its surface. To be useful,
coated particles such as metalized fullerenes must be distributed in some
inert media, such as xeolites or carbonaceous devitrified foams. The inert
media serves two functions: it provides a support structure for the
fullerenes, and it accommodates suspension of each C.sub.60 Fullerene ball
such that they each provide the entire 4.pi.r.sup.2 of active surface area
per ball. The inert media must be of a porous nature such that it is
permeable, so that the fullerene balls can be charged via, e.g., an
electrolyte, that provides the charging interstitial species, such as
hydrogen, deuterium, or tritium.

     In an alternative embodiment according to the invention, a superlattice
of alternating materials is produced to enhance anharmonicity of the
alternating materials at each superlattice layer interface. In one scheme,
alternating layers of two materials are created using molecular beam epitaxy,
organo-metallic chemical vapor deposition, evaporation, laser ablation, or
sputtering techniques to fabricate a prespecified superlattice configuration.
Ideally, these deposition and growth processes are highly controlled such
that they produce high quality superlattice structures having abrupt
interfaces at each layer. Preferred material groups for the alternating
superlattice layer pairs include Au--Ni, Cu--Pd, Cu--Ni, Ag--Pd, Ni--Pd,
Cu--Ni, Ni--Ti, Zr--P, Pd--P, Ni--Zr, Zr--Pd, and Zr--Ti. Other layer
material groups may also be suitable. The layer thicknesses preferably vary
from about 1-30 nm, depending on the growth or deposition technique. At these
small layer thicknesses, the interfacial regions where one material layer
meets the next are characterized by lattice distortion, altered atomic
coordinations and orbital de-localization. As explained in the discussion
above, these conditions promote an enhancement of the system's anharmonicity,
and corresponding enhancement of nuclei interaction rate.

     Ion sputtering of metallic targets is perhaps the superlattice
fabrication process most amenable to a large area processing scheme. Such
large area processing is ideal for creating a host lattice structure of
desired size.  In this process, the substrate is placed is a vacuum chamber,
after which the chamber is evacuated. An ion beam is directed at, for
example, a Nickel target located in the chamber or with access to the
chamber, and nickel vapors are deposited onto the substrate. To produce the
superlattice, the ion beam is alternately directed at the nickel target and,
for example, a copper target, for a prescribed amount of time sufficient to
deposit alternating layers of nickel and copper. Typical deposition times are
based on a deposition rate of less than about 2 nanometers/minute. Based on
this rate, a superlattice of 30 Ni--Cu layers, each 2 nm-thick, may be
processed in one hour. The temperature of the superlattice substrate is
selected to maximize the abruptness of each layer junction, keeping in mind
that low temperature depositions reduce the amount of alloying at, for
example, each Ni--Cu interface.

     Superlattice structures so created enhance local anhamonic conditions
not only at the external surface of the structures, but also at every
interface in the superlattice array. Thus, for a 40-50 layer superlattice,
the active volume of less than about 5 .mu.m in thickness generates heat, due
to anharmonicity effects on deuterium nuclei interaction at each interface of
the superlattice, that cannot be transferred away from the interface as
effectively as heat generated at the external surface of the superlattice. In
this case, the interior of the lattice begins to "overheat" as the heat
production via anharmonic interactions exceed the thermal diffusivity of the
lattice materials. Temperature does not strongly effect anharmonic
oscillation, as it does harmonic oscillation, but several hundred degrees
Centigrade of generated heat may be sufficient to initiate a static
Jahn-Teller distortion that results in quenching anharmonic oscillations.

     Still other surface processing techniques are intended by the invention
herein. For example, ion implantation of, for example, Cr into Ni, creates
surface damage of the Nickel and provides a mechanism for producing the
desired atomic delocalization.

     Referring to FIG. 6, there is shown an experimental setup 40 for
producing and measuring the effect of enhanced anharmonicity on the
interaction of guest sublattice nuclei dissolved in a host lattice. This
setup 40 comprises, for example, an interaction cell 45, which is monitored
to provide indicative signals via a pressure line 47, a current line 48, a
radiation line 50, and a voltage line 52. Each of these signal lines are
provided to an analog to digital converter (A/D) 54, which is connected to a
PC 56, provided with a display 580

     As shown in FIG. 7, the interaction cell 45 consists of, for example, a
30 liter Pyrex calorimetry vessel 46 containing heavy water, light water, or
a suitable mixture of the two, and a suitable electrolyte, such as 0.6 Molar
potassium carbonate (K.sub.2 CO.sub.3) 48 in which are submerged electrodes
50, 52, described below. Nonwater-based electrolytic solutions may also be
suitable. The containment vessel 46 serves primarily to contain the
electrolyte and not decompose contamination into electrodes submerged within
it. The electrolyte provides a source of protons or deuterons without
contaminating the surface of the electrodes. It also serves to establish a
high double potential just outside the surface of the electrodes that
provides a voltage gradient which shifts the dynamic equilibrium of solvation
and favors a high density of protons or deuterons in the solid, once such
species dissolves in the solid, as explained below. The volume of electrolyte
is of secondary importance. Heat transfer mechanisms are the main purpose of
the water. Water is excellent in this capacity because it is chemically
stable, inflammable, and has a large specific heat. Other electrolytes may be
used. The electrical conductivity as well as the polarizability of the
electrolyte may be preferably optimized for a given type of electrode
material. For example, NaCO.sub.3 or RbCO.sub.3 may be used.

     Also submerged in the liquid within the containment vessel are two
thermocouples 54, 56, for determining the temperature in the liquid and the
air above the liquid, respectively, within the vessel. Each of the
thermocouples is monitored by suitable apparatus, such as the PC 56 of the
experimental setup.

     The containment vessel 46 is provided with a teflon lid (not shown),
which is to be loosely mounted on the vessel once the vessel configuration is
in place. The looseness of the mounting is intended to allow pressure release
during operation such that no hazardous pressure build-up occurs within the
vessel. Additionally, a pressure relief valve 58 may be provided on the
vessel lid. The lid also provides for the pressure line mentioned above, and
sensing lines for a gauge, for example, a Bourdon gauge, and a radiation
detector 50. The radiation detector may be mounted either inside or outside
the vessel, or preferable, one detector is mounted inside while a second
detector is mounted outside of the vessel. The detector located inside the
vessel may be located, for example, very dose to the electrode 50. One
suitable detector (for Tritium) is the Bicron Industries Corp.  scintillation
detector.

     A programmable DC power supply 62 is connected to the electrodes 50, 52
within the vessel via corresponding connections 66, 64, in a configuration as
given below. The electrodes within the vessel comprise a cathode 50 and an
anode 52. The cathode 50 consists of, for example, a perforated teflon spacer
68 having an 8-inch diameter, around which is wound a suitable host lattice
material, such as nickel wire 70, or other selected material. A suitable
amount of nickel wire is approximately 2-20 pounds of wire.

     Such nickel wire 70 might comprise 0.003" nickel-200 wire. This
commercially available wire is composed of >98.5% nickel, with small amounts
of iron and cobalt. The wire may be treated with any of the surface topology
processes described above to enhance the anharmonicity of the wire system.
For example, the wire may be pulled through a laser-treated diamond die (as
described above) such that surface relief structures on the die impart
corresponding nanometric topological structures on the wire surface. The wire
may be loosely braided into a cable of 125 strands, or some other braid
scheme. The cable is wrapped loosely around the teflon spacer such that a
maximum amount of wire surface area is exposed. The braiding scheme also
provides the ability to increase the surface area for a given amount of wire
material. Other cathode wire and material alternatives are also suitable. The
wrapped spacer 68 is entirely submerged in the liquid 48 within the
containment vessel. From its location in the vessel, the cathode 50,
comprising the spacer 68 and wire 70, is connected to the negative line 66 of
the power supply 62 via a spot-welded solid nickel rod 72, or other
connecting line.  This rod is thick enough to carry a high current density
without overheating a connecting fitting 74 in the vessel lid.

     In an alternate cathode configuration, a scintillation material is
plated with nickel and attached to the cathode configuration 50 described
above.  This configuration provides a radiation detector mechanism in
intimate contact with host lattice material, and may be connected to the
radiation detector line 50 described above.

     In a further alternative cathode configuration (not shown), a sheet of
planar nickel or palladium alloy NSP processed as described above via, e.g.
diamond scribing and anisotropic etching, is used in its sheet form as a
cathode, or alternatively, rolled in a manner like that of electrolytic
capacitors, forming a coiled tube which provides a large cathode surface area
within a comparatively small volume. Such a cathode configuration, like the
others, is entirely submerged in the liquid within a containment vessel. The
rolled structure is particularly efficient in that it allows the liquid to
deliver the protons or deuterons while at the same time providing a surface
cooling mechanism via flushing of the liquid across the cathode surface.

     Referring to FIG. 8, the anode 52 is shown in more detail. The anode
consists of, for example, a cage 76 of chemically inert metal, such as
titanium or nickel, which is plated with 0.0005" platinum. The cage diameter
is 6" and the cage height is 6". Such a cage is made of top and bottom metal
tings 78, 80, respectively, connected between which are metal fins 82, each
fin having the dimensions of 0.030" in thickness and 5/8" in width. A number
of such fins, five for example, are spot-welded to the top and bottom tings
78, 80. The particularly chosen size and number of fins is based on the
amount of the cathode material used. Without an adequate anode surface size,
the operation of the cell set-up may become current limited. The top ring 78
is also spot-welded to a 1/8" nickel rod 84 for connection to the positive
line 64 of the power supply 62.

     In operation, the power supply is set to provide a voltage drop of not
less than 0.5 volts below the hydrogen overvoltage of 1.43 V forward biased
between the anode and cathode. Electrolysis proceeds during the voltage
application to dissolve a large ratio of hydrogen isotope, e.g., deuterium,
into the host lattice; ideally a guest-host ratio of greater than 0.8 is
achieved via the electrolysis.

     As discussed above, nanoscale features on the host lattice, e.g., the
nickel wire surface, enhance the transport of deuterium into the nickel
surface and thereby promote such a high loading ratio. Further enhancement is
provided using a chopped DC voltage rather than a constant DC voltage.  The
use of this signal scheme is motivated as follows. Maintenance of a high
guest loading ratio requires a strong electric field gradient at the host
surface. However, unintentional impurities in the electrolytic cell may
hinder the existence of this gradient; such impurities in the cell invariably
transport to the surface of the cathode, where they deposit on the cathode
host surface. The impurities generally establish a polarization layer on the
surface that reduces the effectiveness of the E-field there. This is due to
the nature of the polarization layers responding in a capacitive manner; that
is, the transport of charge across the polarization layer decays under the
application of a constant DC field, as would be expected to occur across
capacitor plates. Thus, such polarization layers act as an open circuit to an
applied constant DC voltage. Accordingly, it is preferred that an AC voltage
component be superimposed on a quiescent DC voltage to sustain transport
across any polarization layers; such capacitive polarization layers act as a
short circuit, rather than an open circuit, to the AC component.

     The applied voltage is thus preferred to be a positive DC voltage with a
duty cycle of between 5-2000 Hz, e.g., a square wave signal with a positive
DC offset voltage, and an amplitude switching no less than 0.5 V below the
hydrogen overvoltage of 1.43 V. With such a voltage scheme, the near surface
of the host cathode acts like a diode, magnifying charge transport in the
forward bias mode and restricting transport of dissolved guest species back
out of the surface. In chemical terms, the DC chopping voltage acts to shift
the dynamic equilibrium to a state favoring higher concentrations of guest
species.

     The current density of the operating cell is determined based on the
cell's operating environment; the current density of the cathode host
material is preferably not more than 100 .mu./cm.sup.2. Given a requirement
to keep the power density to a reasonable level, and considering the fact
that the anharmonicity enhancement techniques of the invention are surface
phenomenon, the power density is minimized via a cathode design providing an
increase in surface to volume ratio of the cathode. For example, the cathode
host material may be fabricated, as described above, as large, thin sheets,
and then the two electrodes may be interleaved with anode structures wound in
parallel with the cathode in a design like that of an electrolytic capacitor.
In such a design, the electrode sheets are ideally fabricated thinly, for
example, as thin as 0.001", separated by a distance of 0.025". This
separation distance is provided by some insulating media, e.g., even the
liquid itself. Heat resulting from the operation of such an anode-cathode
configuration in the ,operating cell electrolyte is transferred via cycling
of the electrolyte through the cylindrical volume.

     During cell operation, the electrolyte temperature is operated at a
selected point for optimizing transport of heat from the electrodes. For
example, the electrolyte may be maintained at or near its boiling point
because this phase change can transport energy at a constant temperature.

     Operation of a cell in the manner described above provides optimization
of the materials and system for enhancing anharmonic oscillations of the
system and correspondingly enhancing the probability for interaction of
nuclei within the lattice. As discussed above, the methods of the invention
taught herein for producing this enhancement are all based on recognition by
the inventors herein that nanometric discretization of highly nonlinear
materials produces large localized vibrational instabilities, giving rise to
large-amplitude oscillation of nuclei within the material. Such oscillation
provides a corresponding enhancement of the potential for nuclei in the
material to interact.

     Other embodiments, features, and processing methods are intended within
the scope of the invention, as defined by the claims.

CLMS  Claims STM     Claim Statement:			We claim: NUM
Claim Number:				1.

     1. Apparatus for producing dynamic anharmonic oscillations of a
condensed matter guest species comprising:

 a condensed matter host lattice having surfaces upon at least a portion of
which are provided surface features, said features having a radius of
curvature less than 0.5 microns, and

 means for dissolving said guest species in said host lattice in a ratio of
at least 0.5, the guest species undergoing said dynamic anharmonic
oscillations upon dissolution in said host lattice.  NUM     Claim Number:
2.

     2. The apparatus of claim 1 wherein said guest species is dissolved in
said host lattice in a ratio of at least 0.8.  NUM     Claim Number:
3.

     3. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the host lattice comprises
palladium.  NUM     Claim Number:				4.

     4. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the host lattice comprises an alloy
of palladium silver.  NUM     Claim Number:				5.

     5. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the host lattice comprises the
palladium silver alloy Pd.sub..77 Ag.sub..23.  NUM     Claim Number:
6.

     6. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the host lattice comprises nickel.
NUM     Claim Number:				7.

     7. The apparatus of any of claims 3, 4, 5, or 6, wherein the guest
species comprises hydrogen.  NUM     Claim Number:
8.

     8. The apparatus of any of claims 3, 4, 5, or 6, wherein the guest
species comprises deuterium.  NUM     Claim Number:
9.

     9. The apparatus of claim 1 wherein the means for dissolving said guest
species comprises a container for an electrolytic solution containing said
guest species.  NUM     Claim Number:				10.

     10. The apparatus of claim 9 wherein the condensed matter host lattice
comprises a palladium silver alloy cathode, and the means for dissolving said
guest species farther comprises:

 a platinum-coated anode,

 a support for the cathode such that the cathode is submerged when in the
electrolytic solution, and

 a support for the anode such that the anode is submerged when in the
electrolytic solution.  NUM     Claim Number:				11.

     11. The apparatus of claim 10 wherein the cathode comprises a sheet of
palladium silver alloy rolled to form a coil tube of said sheet.  NUM
Claim Number:				12.

     12. The apparatus of claim 9 wherein the condensed matter host lattice
comprises a cathode, and the means for dissolving said guest species further
comprises:

 an anode,

 a support for the cathode such that the cathode is submerged when in the
electrolytic solution, and

 a support for the anode such that the anode is submerged when in the
electrolytic solution.  NUM     Claim Number:				13.

     13. The apparatus of claim 12 wherein the cathode comprises a wire.  NUM
Claim Number:				14.

     14. The apparatus of either of claims 11 or 13 wherein the anode
comprises at least one platinum-coated wire.  NUM     Claim Number:
15.

     15. The apparatus of either of claims 11 or 12 wherein the electrolytic
solution comprises a solution of heavy water and K.sub.2 CO.sub.3.  NUM
Claim Number:				16.

     16. The apparatus of either of claims 11 or 12 wherein the electrolytic
solution comprises a solution of light water and K.sub.2 CO.sub.3.


 --------------------------------269621940314467--
cudkeys:
cuddy16 cudenmsevior cudfnMartin cudlnSevior cudmo8 cudqt3 cudszXL cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.08.21 / Ieromnimon F /  Re: An Apology to Archimedes Plutonium
     
Originally-From: ierof@brave4.essex.ac.uk (Ieromnimon F)
Newsgroups: sci.physics,alt.sci.physics.plutonium,sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: An Apology to Archimedes Plutonium
Date: 21 Aug 1995 10:18:24 GMT
Organization: University of Essex, Colchester, UK

In article <40bl9l$189@news.xs4all.nl> cjacobs@xs4all.nl (Chris Jacobs) writes:
>tarl@tarl.net (Tarl Neustaedter) writes:
>
>>In article <3vp2ua$8t@dartvax.dartmouth.edu>, Archimedes.Plutonium@dar
mouth.edu (Archimedes Plutonium) writes:
>>>   I therefore feel it necessary to put a time limit on the acceptance
>>> of a money order in the amount of 500 bucks as of 3 Sept 93. [95]
>
>>And now, net-Blackmail! A new low, even for Ludwig!
>
>I don't understand why jou consider it blackmail if Archimedes does not 
>accept medical checkups paid by Barry Merriman if they are worth less 
>than a certain amount or if the cash comes in after a certain date. In 
>fact he is not obliged to accept any 'help' from Barry at all, and I 
>would certainly not accept it if I were him. 
>
>>> A physics journal reserved space and
>>> later declined due to the Internet posts calling me "mentally insane"
>
>>If you think _THAT's_ why they declined to publish your articles, you
>>are mistaken. Matter of fact, one might presume paranoid delusions.
>
>You pretend to *know* why these articles were rejected. Well, prove you 
>know this indeed. I guess regardless if those articles are or are not 
>below scientific standards you *cannot* know if they are because you 
>never saw them. If I am wrong on this prove so by quoting *any* part of them.
>
>I claim you cannot do this because you evaluate the articles of 
>Archimedes _just_ from the reputation of Archimedes and not from the 
>contents of said articles. 
>
>That is you are now doing exactly the same that Archmedes claims said 
>scientific journal did.
>

Could i ask people to please get off this kind of poor sophistry and amateur
lawyerism? This group has a bad enough S/N as it is, without these battles In
the Name of Freedom of Speech of Crackpots  & Loonies everywhere, and may i
suggest to Mr. Merriman to suggest to Mr. Pu to get a life or some sort of
inebriating substance, that he so clearly needs. Enfin!

>
>

Frank
cudkeys:
cuddy21 cudenierof cudfnIeromnimon cudlnF cudmo8 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.08.20 / Thomas Zemanian /  Re: Off the deep end
     
Originally-From: ts_zemanian@pnl.gov (Thomas S. Zemanian)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Off the deep end
Date: 20 Aug 1995 20:02:54 GMT
Organization: Battelle PNL

In article <ZFDDras.jedrothwell@delphi.com>, jedrothwell@delphi.com wrote:

> Yessir, we should all applaud this genius who believes he can
> store energy in water without raising the temperature. 

Well, at the risk of being an utter pedant...

You can store energy in water without raising the temperature by boiling
liquid water at 100 deg C or melting frozen water at 0 deg. C.

--Tom

--
The opinions expressed herein are mine and mine alone.  Keep your filthy hands off 'em! 
cudkeys:
cuddy20 cudents_zemanian cudfnThomas cudlnZemanian cudmo8 cudqt3 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.08.21 /  jedrothwell@de /  Re: Off the deep end
     
Originally-From: jedrothwell@delphi.com
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Off the deep end
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 95 08:00:33 -0500
Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice)

Thomas S. Zemanian <ts_zemanian@pnl.gov> writes:
 
>Well, at the risk of being an utter pedant...
>
>You can store energy in water without raising the temperature by boiling
>liquid water at 100 deg C or melting frozen water at 0 deg. C.
 
That is not what Dick Blue claims. He says you can store 4 calories in a gram
of water at room temperature and the temperature will not rise at all. Then,
when you run the water through an electrolysis cell, the electrolysis will
magically "release" the energy, and the temperature will rise 4 degrees.
He says you can "grab" the energy from a pump, store it, and release a few
minutes later down the pipeline. That is his explanation of how Craven's
flow calorimeter works.
 
My question is: do the other "skeptics" consider this good science, or
crackpot science? None a single one of them has posted any message telling
Dick that this is impossible. These people are always eager to find mistakes.
Even when they find an imaginary mistake in a CF experiment, theycome down
en mass like a ton of bricks. Since they are now perfectly silent, I presume
that means they all go along with Dick Blue, and they swallow his theory.
I guess that makes him a kind of cult leader. He can say absolutely anything,
no matter how stupid, and the other skeptics will nod their heads and go
along like sheep. That is because they are all crackpots, and all true
believers.
 
- Jed
cudkeys:
cuddy21 cudenjedrothwell cudmo8 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.08.21 / A Plutonium /  Re: Pulsar mechanism, why they pulse, why they shut down
     
Originally-From: Archimedes.Plutonium@dartmouth.edu (Archimedes Plutonium)
Newsgroups: alt.sci.physics.plutonium,sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.physics.
lectromag,sci.physics.fusion,sci.chem
Subject: Re: Pulsar mechanism, why they pulse, why they shut down
Date: 21 Aug 1995 11:15:15 GMT
Organization: Plutonium College

In article <DDMKDK.L27@midway.uchicago.edu>
holden@oddjob.uchicago.edu (Bradford Holden) writes:

> Ah yes, the exploding planet hypothesis.  Where is Tom van Flandren when
> we need him?  Most people (TvF excepted) do not think that the Exploding 
> Planet Hypothesis is reasonable.  Why?  Where does the energy to destroy an
> entire planet come from?  If you add up all the mass in all the planets you
> get something the size of a moon (its smaller then Pluto) which is a lot of
> energy to break apart.  Most solar system theorist type believe that the
> part of the proto-planetary disk which the asteroid belts are now in just 
> didn't have enough mass to form anything of note especially with Jupiter so
> close.  The iron was just there, just like it was just there for the earth,
> Mars (Mars is red right?  red means iron) and all the rest of the inner 
> planets.

  No modern day scientist has a reasonable explanation for the missing
2/3 neutrino count for the sun. Yet, do you think that would stop a
Nobel Committee from handing out a prize two years ago for stars
millions and millions of light years away making pitiful assumptions?
No.

  No modern day scientist can explain that 2/3 missing neutrino count,
except me.

  No modern day scientist can explain why the superfluid Helium of
Jupiter escapes its gravitational field. Noone except me.

  No modern day scientist can explain the Titius-Bode rule except me.
Others see this rule as a mere coincidence, not me.

  In the future, as we bring together the Schroedinger Equation into
astronomy, it will be seen that all solar systems provide for
"exploding planets" as their systems grow.

  The big trouble with modern day scientists just like Newton in his
prime, is that they think their "present" work will stand the test of
time -- forever. When in fact their theories are all delapitated and
last for a mere couple hundred years if lucky.
cudkeys:
cuddy21 cudenPlutonium cudfnArchimedes cudlnPlutonium cudmo8 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.08.21 / A Plutonium /  Re: Pulsar mechanism, why they pulse, why they shut down
     
Originally-From: Archimedes.Plutonium@dartmouth.edu (Archimedes Plutonium)
Newsgroups: alt.sci.physics.plutonium,sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.physics.
lectromag,sci.physics.fusion,sci.chem
Subject: Re: Pulsar mechanism, why they pulse, why they shut down
Date: 21 Aug 1995 11:26:42 GMT
Organization: Plutonium College

In article <DDJu7q.DuD@prometheus.UUCP>
pmk@prometheus.UUCP (Paul M. Koloc) writes:

> I don't know what the mechanism of cold fusion is, and if I 
> did I would likely try it out.  
> 
> >  Do the elements from element 20 up to iron show a statistical
> >abundance towards neutron excess?
> 
> Why do you think so?

  I asked whether the isotopes clustered around stable iron have
"excess" neutrons, because if they do would indicate that the mechanism
of "spontaneous neutron materialization" is the operative mechanism.

  If it is verified that the isotopes around stable iron have
overabundance of neutrons, then, I conjecture that the Radioactive
Spontaneous Neutron Materialization (rsnm) is true, and that the cold
fusion experiments are a piss poor design of this mechanism. In other
words, what cold fusioners ought to use is not water, but those
isotopes deficient in neutrons around "stable iron". And, cold
fusioners ought to use a changing magnetic field, not the electric
current. As to what magnetic field. Scale down from the Sun for the Sun
is our number one example of a Radioactive Spontaneous Neutron
Materializer, or even Jupiter. Use the Sun and Jupiter as models.

  And perhaps the isotopes around stable iron are not the only place to
get rsnm. Perhaps rsnm occurs around thorium or uranium area of the
periodic chemical elements.
cudkeys:
cuddy21 cudenPlutonium cudfnArchimedes cudlnPlutonium cudmo8 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.08.21 /  jedrothwell@de /  Re: Droege's experiments proved nothing
     
Originally-From: jedrothwell@delphi.com
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Droege's experiments proved nothing
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 95 08:05:30 -0500
Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice)

Bill Rowe <browe@netcom.com> writes:
 
>From what Jed has posted here, it seems he thinks those who get positive
>results are competent experimenters and those who don't get positive
>results are incompetent experimenters. I think this says a lot more about
>Jed than CF.
 
That is incorrect. I never said anything like that. I know of lots of groups
that have gone for long periods without positive results. KEK, for example,
the group I just cited, went for four years without a positive result.
 
It is true however, that anyone who learns to do the experiment properly
will get a positive result, because the laws of nature are uniform. Even people
who try *not* to get a positive result will get one. In 1989 Harwell, Cal Tech,
and MIT all got positive results, even though they reported negative results.
I would not call them "competant" but their results are positive.
 
- Jed
cudkeys:
cuddy21 cudenjedrothwell cudmo8 cudqt3 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.08.21 / Johan Wevers /  Re: FYI98 - PCAST Report on DOE Fusion Program
     
Originally-From: johanw@vulcan.xs4all.nl (Johan Wevers)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion,sci.energy,sci.physics
Subject: Re: FYI98 - PCAST Report on DOE Fusion Program
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 1995 14:53:13 +0200
Organization: Vulcan Academy of Sciences

Doug Merritt <doug@netcom.com> wrote:

>>What about decreasing the number of humans? Earth is much too crowded now
>>anyway.

>This is a popular point of view with radical environmentalists
>(see the book Green Rage), including at its most extreme the Unabomber.

I don't know what the unabomber is all about, but giving all people on earth
the same living standards as are comon in Europe and most parts of the USA
will certainly cause environmental problems. And besides that, till now most
increased medical care in 3rd world countries has increased the population
density, not increased living standards for individuals.

>However, outside of cities, the Earth doesn't appear to be at all crowded
>(been out in the countryside recently???)

I'm happy to live in a relative uncrowded area. However, most uninhabited
area's are very unfriendly - mountains, deserts, too cold. So that's hardly
a solution. Further you need land to produce the food for all those people,
and keeping some free nature would also be preferable. I don't say Earth
could not sustain more people, but why would we want more?

>So I wonder in what vague removed-from-reality armchair sense you
>think Earth is "much too crowded"; I don't see it.

Travel to almost every place in northern Europe and look.

>The Unabomber writes of visiting remote areas in the Sierras, so I
>guess he doesn't actually say "too crowded"; he just dislikes technology
>and pollution, come to think of it.

I do like technology but I prefer not too much pollution.

--
ir. J.C.A. Wevers          ||    The only nature of reality is physics.
johanw@vulcan.xs4all.nl    ||    http://www.xs4all.nl/~johanw/index.html
Finger johanw@xs4all.nl for my PGP public key.     PGP-KeyID: 0xD42F80B1
cudkeys:
cuddy21 cudenjohanw cudfnJohan cudlnWevers cudmo8 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.08.21 /   /  Re: Off the deep end
     
Originally-From: wolf247698@aol.com (Wolf247698)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Off the deep end
Date: 21 Aug 1995 10:53:47 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)

In article <5lEhbAy.jedrothwell@delphi.com>, jedrothwell@delphi.com
writes:

>This is so elementary, so simple, SO BLINDINGLY OBVIOUS that I am sure
even a
>certified idiot and congenital liar like Dick Blue understands it. He
posts
>comments like this because he wants to confuse the issue. He is trolling
for
>fools who are even stupider than he is. He hopes some poor wretch out
there
>does not even understand why a people have to eat to survive, and why a
match
>cannot burn for a week. This kind of garbage, plus the crackpot,
>crack-brained
>"magic energy storage" theories prove that Dick Blue knows nothing about
>science and that he and his fellow "skeptics" are only here to make
trouble
>and to confuse people. I never dreamed that such ignorance and such
>scientifically illiterate nonsense still existed in the modern world.
> 

My Goodness, such a strong statement.  Don't let them get to you like that
Jed; it only gives them more fuel (pun intended).

Dyan
cudkeys:
cuddy21 cudenwolf247698 cudln cudmo8 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.08.21 / New Dave /  FIBRE OPTICS
     
Originally-From: traianou@cleo.murdoch.edu.au (New Wave Dave)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: FIBRE OPTICS
Date: 21 Aug 1995 09:18:27 GMT

Hi,
        I need some sources of information relating to FIBRE OPTICS.

        Anything at all will be helpful.  ie history, dis/advantages, 
uses, etc. Everything is appreciated.

        Please mail me <preferred> or just post it <I really don't mind>. 
 Thanks.

--
New Wave Dave "surfin' the Net!"
traianou@cleo.murdoch.edu.au

cudkeys:
cuddy21 cudentraianou cudfnNew cudlnDave cudmo8 cudqt3 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
processed by cud.pl ver. 0.5 Tue Aug 22 04:37:07 EDT 1995
------------------------------
