After 20 years: New life for cold fusion?

By | March 24, 2009

Is the science community warming to cold fusion? It’s been 20 years to the day since Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons, electrochemists at the University of Utah in Salt Lake City, announced the discovery of what they believed to be “cold fusion” (now often referred to as low-energy nuclear reactions, or LENR), a room-temperature nuclear reaction that reportedly generated an unexplained amount of heat. The pronouncement spawned a flurry of excitement about a new renewable energy source, but enthusiasm quickly waned after the result wasn’t satisfactorily replicated. Today at the American Chemical Society’s national meeting in the very same city, researchers are recapping recent developments in the field – including images of what some believe are telltale signs of reaction-born subatomic particles, as well as documentation of heat, helium, gamma rays and other products from possible low-energy nuclear reactions.

“We have been working for … years to know what kinds of questions to address,” one of the presenters Antonella De Ninno, a scientist at the New Technolgies Energy and Environment in Italy, said in a statement. “After long term and intensive research, we found ourselves able to give a reasonable … explanation.”

One team, led by Pamela Mosier-Boss, an analytical chemist at the U.S. Navy’s Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center, has announced visual evidence of a fusion-like reaction. “If you have fusion going on, then you have to have neutrons,” Mosier-Boss said in a statement. “People have always asked ‘Where’s the neutrons,'” she said, and in their presentation, they reported finding evidence of these neurons. By exposing a special kind of plastic to the reaction, patterns of minute dents (or “triple tracks” that show three close nearby forms) were made by excited neutrons created from a nuclear reaction, they report.

In other signs of fusion, Tadahiko Mizuno, an assistant professor in the department of nuclear engineering at Hokkadio University in Japan, reports having detected gamma radiation and De Ninno notes the production of helium gas in experiments; both are possible byproducts of a nuclear LENR reaction.

… In the meantime, even the already-demonstrated hot fusion waits for its turn in the sun, as work on the collaborative international ITER thermonuclear fusion reactor project crawls along.

via After 20 years: New life for cold fusion? : Scientific American Blog.

2 thoughts on “After 20 years: New life for cold fusion?

  1. Wladimir Guglinski

    Theoretically cold fusion is impossible according to the principles of Quantum Mechanics, the reason why the physicists refuse to accept the occurrence of the phenomenon.
    The nuclear chemist Mitch Andre Garcia showed by very easy calculations that cold fusion occurrence is theoretically impossible, from the laws of Quantum Mechanics, in a Chemistry Blog where he is the administrator.

    However cold fusion is theoretically impossible because Quantum Mechanics does not consider the zitterbewegung (zbw) as a helical trajectory of the electron (the zitterbewegung appears in the Dirac equation of the electron, but the quantum physicists did not interpret the zbw as a helical trajectory).

    By interpreting the zitterbewegung from a new viewpoint, by considering it as a helical trajectory of the electron, cold fusion becomes theoreticall possible, as Guglinski has shown to Mitch Andre Garcia, along a discussion in the topic “THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN COLD FUSION AND COLD FUSION”, which can be seen in the link:

    Look at the Guglinski’s « Reply #8 on: September 24, 2007 ».

    So the chemists are now getting knowledge that cold fusion is theoretically possible thanks to the adoption of the new interpretation for the zitterbewegung, and they are undertaking the performance of cold fusion experiments, because it seems that they dont trust in the viewpoint of the physicists.

    Clearly, there is a dispute “CHEMISTS vs PHYSICISTS”, and it seems that the controversy on cold fusion will be finally resolved, but not by the physicists.

    The new duel chemists vs physicists has ideological origin. The physicits keep their loyalty to Quantum Mechanics, because they dont accept to change their interpretation on the zitterbewegung, since such a changing requires a very deep modification in the foundations of Modern Physics (the zbw cannot be considered as a helical trajetory in Quantum Field Theory, which is the successor of Quantum Mechanics).

    Unlike, the chemists keep their loyalty to the scientific method, according to which any experiment cannot be neglected only because it defies the principles of a theory, as happens now in this duel between Quantum Mechanics and cold fusion.

    Such new participation of chemists is healthy to science’s develolpment. Because as the physicists have some dogmas which they consider unsourmantable (as for instance their interpretation of the zitterbewegung in Quantum Field Theory), the development of cold fusion requires scientists free of dogmas of Physics, as the chemists.

    In few words, we have to consider the following situation:

    1- as cold fusion is impossible by considering the interpretation of zitterbewegung in Quantum Field Theory…

    2- … but as the experiments prove that cold fusion really occurs, as confirmed now by the experiments made in the US Navy…

    3- … then there is need to change the interpretation on the zitterbewegung (a new alternative that chemists probably will take in consideration starting from now)…

    4- … instead of neglecting the cold fusion experiments (as the physicists insist to do).

Leave a Reply