Thread: Seriousness Cold Fusion - To Be Or Not To Be
View Single Post
Old 04-13-2009, 04:03 AM   #23
montsnmags
Grand Sorcerer
montsnmags ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.montsnmags ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.montsnmags ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.montsnmags ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.montsnmags ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.montsnmags ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.montsnmags ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.montsnmags ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.montsnmags ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.montsnmags ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.montsnmags ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 10,155
Karma: 4632658
Join Date: Nov 2007
Device: none
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Jordan View Post
From what I recall, they (and other scientists) have not been able to duplicate the net-positive power output claims from the original experiment. Until they figure that out, they have no place to go with it.

"Conventional" fusion research and equipment is pricey... accelerators can span miles... only major governments can afford the cost. The "cold" fusion research is so controversial and unproven that I think few reputable scientists want to risk their rep by getting near it.
I remember reading, probably in a New Scientist mag', an article on the "chilling effect" of the Pons and Fleischmann story [sorry, link is a subscriber link with a short intro]. If I recall correctly, it talked about a potential thawing of that effect, and that the US Navy(?) was beginning to assign resources and study it(?) (Question marks are because my memory is faulty. I'm pretty sure it was the US Navy that had some involvement). Anyway, by coincidence, not long ago New Scientist online referred to some further studies related to it and "Neutron tracks":

http://www.newscientist.com/article/...-the-cold.html

Not that this means anything, other than that perhaps more study is beginning again by "reputable scientists", with distance from the "controversy" becoming achieved.

(I really should start reading the New Scientist magazine again. The non-subscriber online experience is so unsatisfactory).

Cheers,
Marc

Last edited by montsnmags; 04-13-2009 at 04:06 AM.
montsnmags is offline   Reply With Quote