Sciencemadness Discussion Board
Not logged in [Login ]
Go To Bottom

Printable Version  
 Pages:  1  
Author: Subject: Cold Fusion...........revisited
solo
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 3853
Registered: 9-12-2002
Location: Estados Unidos de La Republica Mexicana
Member Is Offline

Mood: ....getting old and drowning in a sea of knowledge

[*] posted on 22-6-2006 at 17:38
Cold Fusion...........revisited


Quote:
~Cold fusion~
AFTER 16 years, it's back. In fact, cold fusion never really went away. Over a 10-year period from 1989, US navy labs ran more than 200 experiments to investigate whether nuclear reactions generating more energy than they consume - supposedly only possible inside stars - can occur at room temperature. Numerous researchers have since pronounced themselves believers.

With controllable cold fusion, many of the world's energy problems would melt away: no wonder the US Department of Energy is interested. In December, after a lengthy review of the evidence, it said it was open to receiving proposals for new cold fusion experiments.

That's quite a turnaround. The DoE's first report on the subject, published 15 years ago, concluded that the original cold fusion results, produced by Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons of the University of Utah and unveiled at a press conference in 1989, were impossible to reproduce, and thus probably false.

The basic claim of cold fusion is that dunking palladium electrodes into heavy water - in which oxygen is combined with the hydrogen isotope deuterium - can release a large amount of energy. Placing a voltage across the electrodes supposedly allows deuterium nuclei to move into palladium's molecular lattice, enabling them to overcome their natural repulsion and fuse together, releasing a blast of energy. The snag is that fusion at room temperature is deemed impossible by every accepted scientific theory.

“Cold fusion would make the world's energy problems melt away. No wonder the Department of Energy is interested”That doesn't matter, according to David Nagel, an engineer at George Washington University in Washington DC. Superconductors took 40 years to explain, he points out, so there's no reason to dismiss cold fusion. "The experimental case is bulletproof," he says. "You can't make it go away."

From issue 2491 of New Scientist magazine, 19 March 2005, page 30



I have becomed interested on this topic and will periodically add more recent studies ........feel free to contribute and comment.........solo




It's better to die on your feet, than live on your knees....Emiliano Zapata.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Odyssèus
Hazard to Self
**




Posts: 50
Registered: 7-3-2006
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 22-6-2006 at 18:08


Personally I think sonofusion/bubble fusion has more promise for generating more energy than you put in (Though I'm hardly an expert on nuclear chemistry).

Not cold fusion per say: The idea is that you have a liquid of some kind, probably an organic molecule, that contains deuterium or a mix of deuterium and tritium. You blast this liquid with certain frequencies of sound while seeding bubbles in it. The bubbles expand and suddenly collapse, generating extreme temperatures and pressures. I have heard this is why kettles full of water make a pinging sound when being heated.

Wikipedia talks about a sonofusion experement with deuterated acetone:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bubble_fusion

Very interesting... ;)

[Edited on 23-6-2006 by Odyssèus]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
solo
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 3853
Registered: 9-12-2002
Location: Estados Unidos de La Republica Mexicana
Member Is Offline

Mood: ....getting old and drowning in a sea of knowledge

[*] posted on 22-6-2006 at 18:09


Formation of superheavy elements in cold fusion reactions
V. Yu. Denisov 1,2,* and S. Hofmann
PHYSICAL REVIEW C, VOLUME 61, 034606

Abstract
The process of the synthesis of superheavy elements

[Edited on 23-6-2006 by solo]

Attachment: Formation of superheavy elements in cold fusion reactions.pdf (532kB)
This file has been downloaded 1006 times





It's better to die on your feet, than live on your knees....Emiliano Zapata.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
The_Davster
A pnictogen
*******




Posts: 2861
Registered: 18-11-2003
Member Is Offline

Mood: .

[*] posted on 22-6-2006 at 18:10


I used to know the experimental conditions, but now, when it matters, and I have D2O and palladium I cannot find them:mad:



View user's profile View All Posts By User
solo
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 3853
Registered: 9-12-2002
Location: Estados Unidos de La Republica Mexicana
Member Is Offline

Mood: ....getting old and drowning in a sea of knowledge

[*] posted on 22-6-2006 at 18:25


Faradaic Efficiencies Less Than 100% during Electrolysis of Water Can Account for Reports of Excess Heat in “Cold Fusion” Cells
Jonathan E. Jones, Lee D. Hansen,* Steven E. Jones, David S. Shelton, and James M. Thorne
J. Phys. Chem. 1995, 99, 6973-6979 6973

Abstract
The purpose of this study is to evaluate claims of excess heat generation during water electrolysis. Several cells were constructed and operated similarly to low-current-density cells described in the literature. All produced excess heat as defined and calculated in the literature reports, but the production of excess heat
could be readily terminated by the introduction of various barriers to the migration of hydrogen and oxygen. Remarkably, published reports of excess heat fail to disprove the presence of decreased faradaic efficiency (e.g., current that oxidizes H2 or reduces 02) or systematic calorimetric errors. Illustrative examples of both
problems are given. Thus, failure to rule out prosaic explanations probably invalidates all the currently available reports of excess heat in both light water-” and heavy water-PdlPt cells. There is no compelling evidence that excess heat is of a nuclear origin in such electrolytic cells.

Attachment: Faradaic Efficiencies Less Than 100% during Electrolysis of Water CaReports of Excess Heat in Cold Fusion Cells .pdf (133kB)
This file has been downloaded 2546 times





It's better to die on your feet, than live on your knees....Emiliano Zapata.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
solo
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 3853
Registered: 9-12-2002
Location: Estados Unidos de La Republica Mexicana
Member Is Offline

Mood: ....getting old and drowning in a sea of knowledge

[*] posted on 22-6-2006 at 18:48


Fusion by diffusion. II. Synthesis of transfermium elements in cold fusion reactions
W. J . ?Swia?tecki,1 K. Siwek-Wilczy?nska,2 and J. Wilczy?nski3
PHYSICAL REVIEW C 71, 014602 (2005)

Abstract
We describe a method of estimating cross sections for the synthesis of very heavy nuclei by the fusion of two lighter ones. The cross section is considered to be the product of three factors: the cross section for the projectile to overcome the Coulomb barrier, the probability that the resulting composite nucleus reaches the compound nucleus configuration by a shape fluctuation treated as a diffusion of probability in one dimension, and the probability that the excited compound nucleus survives fission. Semi-empirical formulas for the mean Coulomb barrier height and its distribution around the mean are constructed. After overcoming the Coulomb barrier the system is assumed to be injected into an “asymmetric fission valley” by a rapid growth of the neck between the target and projectile at approximately frozen asymmetry and elongation. Diffusion in the elongation coordinate in this valley can occasionally bring the system over the saddle separating the injection point from the compound nucleus configuration. This is the stage that accounts for the hindrance to fusion observed for very heavy reacting systems. The competition between deexcitation of the compound nucleus by neutron emission and fission is treated by standard methods, but an interesting insight allows one to predict in an elementary way the location of the maximum in the resulting excitation function. Adjusting one parameter in the theory causes the calculated peak cross sections to agree within about a factor of 2 or so with 12 measured or estimated values for “cold” one-neutron-out reactions where targets of 208Pb and 209Bi are bombarded with projectiles ranging from 48Ca to 70Zn. The centroids of the excitation functions agree with theory to within 1 or 2 MeV for the six cases where they have been determined, and their widths are reproduced. “Hot” fusion reactions, where several neutrons are emitted, are not treated, except that a comparison is made between the hindrance factors in cold and hot reactions to make elements with atomic numbers 112 to 118. The calculated diffusive hindrances in the hot reactions are less unfavorable by 4 to 5 orders of magnitude

Attachment: PhysRevC_71_014602.pdf (340kB)
This file has been downloaded 970 times





It's better to die on your feet, than live on your knees....Emiliano Zapata.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
solo
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 3853
Registered: 9-12-2002
Location: Estados Unidos de La Republica Mexicana
Member Is Offline

Mood: ....getting old and drowning in a sea of knowledge

[*] posted on 22-6-2006 at 19:08


DOE warms up to cold Fusion
Physics today 2004

Attachment: 12761901.pdf (581kB)
This file has been downloaded 799 times





It's better to die on your feet, than live on your knees....Emiliano Zapata.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Rosco Bodine
Banned





Posts: 6370
Registered: 29-9-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: analytical

[*] posted on 22-6-2006 at 23:04


http://jlnlabs.imars.com/cfr/diycfr/cfrg01.htm
View user's profile View All Posts By User
enhzflep
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 217
Registered: 9-4-2006
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 23-6-2006 at 02:26


[EDIT: Regarding the link posted by Rosco above]

Please, pardon my ignorance.

Are we (who have not the tables nor the knowledge to generalize/calculate) to infer that the specific heat capacity of a 0.2 M K2CO3 solution is equal to that of distilled water, namely 4.18 J/ml/deg C? Though I couldn't have said which way, nor how much - it's my initial thought that a solution containing a salt would have a different specific heat capacity to water.

Also not mentioned, was whether or not the electrolyte solution was changed between each run. This would make a difference of the quantity and concentration of metal ions dissolved in the water as the cathode is gradually consumed and the water slowly evaporated.

Nor is there any mention of a chemical analysis of the electrolyte after each run to examine the state that the Tungsten is found to be in. The reason I say this is that I know not why the cathode may not be consumed and 'combusted' in this apparatus.

It would be interesting to view an experiment where the author starts in the position of eliminating these and other questions firstly and being left with the conclusion that the power generated is indeed coming from fusion. As opposed to the (IMHO) somewhat simplistic conclusion that it's cold fusion. If so, then what's being formed as a result of this fusion.

Nice pictures and an interesting write-up, also a seriously cool thing to start conversations with on the coffee table - but I'm no more impressed in the results than I was when the story broke back in the early 1980's of some similar work.

Hell, there's no mention of the geiger counter readings, not to mention that his spelling and consistancy across the article probably makes one of my typical posts look flawless. My 25 bucks says that the 'extra energy' is a result of the combination of the different heat capacity of a salt-containing solution, combined with burning of the sintered Tungsten cathode.

Hoping to be shown to be fundamentally flawed in my reasoning. Rosco?

[Edited on 23-6-2006 by enhzflep]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Rosco Bodine
Banned





Posts: 6370
Registered: 29-9-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: analytical

[*] posted on 23-6-2006 at 06:40


http://jlnlabs.imars.com/cfr/html/cfr30.htm

http://jlnlabs.imars.com/cfr/lorio/report/index.htm

The second link addresses the oxidation of tungsten .

The missing tungsten and to what it was chemically converted would certainly have to be accounted for
in terms of its effect of adding heat from that chemical reaction to the system . Also the entrainment of water vapor in the escaping gases from electrolysis would
probably change the evaporation rate and rate of
water loss substantially from what would be the effect of ordinary heating to boiling , and this would skew the results of calculations predicting caloric output based on
water loss as if it had been simple boiling . The escaping gases would have to be meaured in volume and kept separated , so a divided cell would have to be used
in order to rule out the added thermal effects of
electrolysis product gases recombining and adding their
heat of combustion to the system which could also skew the calculations concerning heat output .

Ideally , the entire appartus should be capable of
running as a sealed system within a water tank where
the heat rise of the non-reaction water of the tank
caused by the reactor is used to calculate the actual
output from the reactor . This would prevent any
miscalulation or misinterpretation of the * actual *
heat output . The experiment is on the right track
but the conditions must be more stringently controlled
in regards to these things I have mentioned in order
to arrive at valid conclusions about the results .

Transmutation is certainly an interesting observation ,
because it is one very specific evidence of nuclear fusion
reactions .

http://jlnlabs.imars.com/cfr/lorio/index.htm

[Edited on 23-6-2006 by Rosco Bodine]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
enhzflep
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 217
Registered: 9-4-2006
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 23-6-2006 at 17:58


Thanks for the above links Rosco. These point to a rather more rigorous experiment regime. I'm particularly excited by the prospect that electron microscope images of the cathode reveal the presence of Rhenium, Osmium, Gold, Halfnium, Thulium, Erbium and Ytterbium. - as shown on pgs 8 & 9.

Also of particular interest are the appearance of melted 'nodules' found on the cathode, indicating the presence of temperatures exceeding 3400 deg C.

These, combined with a more comprehensive consideration of possible skewing factors have caused this to be a rather exciting read.

Although I'm assuming that the production of sintered Tungsten electrodes to be rather expensive in terms of energy required, one can only assume that this would be offset by the sale of the (rather) expensive elements produced.

Isn't it great to think that with all the billions of dollars being currently invested to construct a (20m diam) torus shaped fusion reactor by many countries, that somebody could come up with this dirt cheap "sticky-tape" job that achies the same basic aims.

Hell, if the expense incurred by the procurement of the various instruments used to take readings is ommited - geiger counter, sampling CRO etc, then one can feasibly set up something like this for not much more than the cost of the glassware. i.e several 100 or 1000. NICE
View user's profile View All Posts By User
ethan_c
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 104
Registered: 5-6-2006
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 25-6-2006 at 16:08


Semi off-topic, but if anyone knows where one might find and purchase a palladium wafer of the type that they use in CF experiments, I would be very gratified to know.

Getting wafers custom-made would likely cost an absolute fortune, not that Pd isn't expensive already, so there SHOULD be some supplier (for a very, very niche market)…
View user's profile View All Posts By User
franklyn
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 3026
Registered: 30-5-2006
Location: Da Big Apple
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 26-6-2006 at 21:28
Just my two cents


Useful resource _
http://www.std.com/~mica/cft.html

The expectation of cold fusion came about from the observation
of anomalous heat present in the enthalpy of the experimental
system. That this is not a chemical process is easily verified
since constituent parts remain unchanged. The supposition then
is that this must be by default a nuclear process. That there
exists an unexplained effect is not much in doubt except for the
difficulties encountered in reproducing the result. Everything after
has been just speculative musing. If indeed some process of
nuclear alchemy has been identified as the one responsible this
would have been as big a story as the initial announcement by
Pond and Fleischmann.

This is not the only explanation possible. A property of electrons
and protons called their spin can also be a source of considerable
energy, and particularly for protons. Spin values occur in two states
with dissimilar energies. It is not unreasonable to suppose that one
spin state of a higher energy may be persuaded to convert to the
lower state with the apparent release of the difference in energy.
Robert L. Forward many years ago had proposed just such a thought.
( google his name )

Definitions -> http://spin-(physics).mindbit.com

References _

wikipedia _ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spintronics

Link _
http://www.whatsnextnetwork.com/technology/index.php?s=spint...

selected from above link _
http://www.whatsnextnetwork.com/technology/index.php/2006/04...

Link _
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=0007A735-759A-1CD...

or full featured with illustrations , PDF 0602000 is the cover , PDF 0602066 is this article
contained herein _
ftp://194.105.193.56/pub/UPLOAD/Scientific.American/Sci.Am.2002/sci.am.2002.06.rar


"The Mystery of Nucleon Spin" PDF 07990000 is the cover , PDF 0790588 is this article
contained herein _
ftp://194.105.193.56/pub/UPLOAD/Scientific.American/Sci.Am.1999/sci.am.1999.07.rar


A related thread in this forum _
http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=2148#p...

.

[Edited on 27-6-2006 by franklyn]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
IrC
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 2710
Registered: 7-3-2005
Location: Eureka
Member Is Offline

Mood: Discovering

[*] posted on 27-6-2006 at 15:00


That mindbit was an interesting link. I found one page there which I thought summed up what the world really thinks of us all:

http://mad-scientist.mindbit.com/
View user's profile View All Posts By User
JohnWW
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 2849
Registered: 27-7-2004
Location: New Zealand
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 29-6-2006 at 01:56


Quote:
Originally posted by ethan_c
Semi off-topic, but if anyone knows where one might find and purchase a palladium wafer of the type that they use in CF experiments, I would be very gratified to know.
Getting wafers custom-made would likely cost an absolute fortune, not that Pd isn't expensive already, so there SHOULD be some supplier (for a very, very niche market)…

I wonder if anyone has investigated the possibility of using Ni as a substitute for Pd or Pt for this purpose, and for catalytic purposes in which large quantities of H2 are required to be absorbed or adsorbed. If sufficient gas pressure was applied, I am sure the relative amount of H2 absorbed or adsorbed by Ni could be increased to near that of Pd or Pt.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Rosco Bodine
Banned





Posts: 6370
Registered: 29-9-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: analytical

[*] posted on 20-8-2006 at 11:48


Transmutation ?

It is all so alchemical ,

plutoniumalistically maniacal :D

http://www.amasci.com/freenrg/carbiron.html
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Quince
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 773
Registered: 31-1-2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 1-10-2006 at 01:34


What's with all the quoting from JNLlabs? Mr. Naudin is a well known crackpot. I suggest you people take a careful look at some of his other projects.

[Edited on 1-10-2006 by Quince]




\"One of the surest signs of Conrad\'s genius is that women dislike his books.\" --George Orwell
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Rosco Bodine
Banned





Posts: 6370
Registered: 29-9-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: analytical

[*] posted on 1-10-2006 at 05:46


Tesla was a crackpot ....
but he was an * interesting * crackpot .

Interesting crackpots are entertaining .
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Oxydro
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 152
Registered: 24-5-2004
Location: NS, Canada
Member Is Offline

Mood: distracted

[*] posted on 1-10-2006 at 10:03


Tesla was a crackpot who came up with some useful ideas. AC (or at least an AC motor, I can't remember the details) first among them. From what I've read, later in life he found his reputation fading and resorted to outrageous claims. Kind of sad.



"Our interest's on the dangerous side of things" -- Browning
View user's profile Visit user's homepage View All Posts By User This user has MSN Messenger
franklyn
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 3026
Registered: 30-5-2006
Location: Da Big Apple
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 1-11-2008 at 01:49


Here's a weird one for Halloween from Monatshefte fur Chemie

( First thing I would do is check for leaks, and a contaminated geiger muller tube )
- UPDATE
Subjecting unsaturated hydrocarbons to electric discharge
will often result in it being reduced to carbon allotropes.
appearing as sooty deposit on vessel surfaces, this may
explain the absence though not the apparent " radiation ".

[Edited on 1-11-2008 by franklyn]

Missing Carbon.jpg - 69kB
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Sedit
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 1939
Registered: 23-11-2008
Member Is Offline

Mood: Manic Expressive

[*] posted on 13-12-2008 at 13:13


http://www.diane-neisius.de/fusor/index_E.html

Links to a homemade cold fusion device invented earlyer 1900 by Farnsworth and Hirsch
No success has been reported on over unity yet and maybe never until someone figures out how to get rid of the grids that are impeading the fussion process

still either way its a pretty cool home project iv had my sites on for sometime now
View user's profile View All Posts By User
hissingnoise
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 3939
Registered: 26-12-2002
Member Is Offline

Mood: Pulverulescent!

[*] posted on 13-12-2008 at 13:22


Reads like pseudo-science---to me, anyway. . .
View user's profile View All Posts By User
chief
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 630
Registered: 19-7-2007
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 13-12-2008 at 20:52


Was it not like this: Fusion occurs, when the _nuclei_ can get close enough together; electrons don't matter for that. So all the above spintronics-stuff is irrelevant.
Besides: From what I saw in the above links, a few suckers of the science-busines are trying to patent the whole field, after others did the pioneering ...
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Sedit
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 1939
Registered: 23-11-2008
Member Is Offline

Mood: Manic Expressive

[*] posted on 25-12-2008 at 18:01


http://www.fusor.net/

Heres a more compleat link to fusors and its history. AFAIK it is not a psudo science but a real technolgy created sometime back but could never truely taken off because of interfearence with the design.

As many know fusion can take place with a partical accelerator and the basis of this machine is as the ions travel from the outer to inner shell it behaves as an accelerator and in the middle some ions will inevitbly collide releasing neutrons which have been detected.

If the ions dont collide they will be drawn back to the center for another go at collision. The down fall of this design is that Some ions will without a doubt hit the inner electrode and lose its energy so without doing away with the innersphere i dont believe this will ever be really efficiant....

Most of the 'Fusors' people make are what are called demo fusors, the show the principles yet are not powerful enough to create the fusion yet there are a few out there that have had success with this machine including its creator.

Hey it may not be a good way to do fusion but how cool could it be to say you have a working fusion reactor in your basement;)
View user's profile View All Posts By User
not_important
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 3873
Registered: 21-7-2006
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 25-12-2008 at 23:35


The Farnsworth, Hirsch, and Bussard fusors are better described as 'cool fusion' rather than cold as the ions have a fair amount of energy. Those methods also have decent theoretical underpinnings and have produced neutrons in a repeatable fashion. For them the arguments is whether or not they can reach break-even energy production.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
 Pages:  1  

  Go To Top