« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Down

Cold Fusion

  • 73 Replies
  • 19634 Views
?

DrQuak

  • 256
Cold Fusion
« on: July 15, 2006, 03:50:14 PM »
For those of you who haven't heard of cold fusion, or who have and don't quite know what it is, cold fusion is the ability to create nuclear fusion (like what happens in the sun or the second stage of the Hydrogen (thermonuclear) bomb) at room temperature.

Fusion itself is simply forcing two nucleii together to form a larger nucleii, giving out energy. To do this they need to overcome a large repulsion from the charges in the nucleus. This is done by either giving the nucleii more energy (heating them up) or increasing the density (like what happens in the sun due to gravity), the longer a combination of these two are kept at the right amount, the more energy you get out of the system.


So as you can see, things need to get pretty hot or pretty big to get fusion. So if you want to make a fusion power plant it is going to be expensive. But if you can do it at room temperature it is going to be a lot cheaper. therefore Cold Fusion.

almost 20 years ago two scientest said that they had done exactly this (Fleischmann and Pons). However instead of releasing there paper to a science journal they went straight to the press (the reasons for doing so i'll talk about later). The two scientists were about to receive a quarter of a million dollars research grant, but When the paper was reviewed independently (by princeton) cited certain errors (such as the neutrons emitted by the process could have been caused elsewhere - very energetic neutrons are a sign of a nuclear interaction) and several other things being omitted.

Now the controversial parts. The reason that Fleischmann and Pons  released their findings to the press instead of to a journal (where it would be checked by there peers for factual errors) was because at the time they had no peers. All other Fusion research done on a large scale was in "hot" fusion - specifically in princeton. Therefore the "hot" fusion experts could not truely comment on cold fusion.

You may have noticed that i said that princeton was the leading light in fusion research at the time. when princeton was reviewing the papers, many key scientist from there fusion department had already denounced the work before considering it. and instead of being impartial they were more vindictive (whether it was because they felt insulted because Fleischmann and Pons  went to the press without consulting the science world, or because they may have felt there research grants being threatened).


There are still several labs that undergo cold fusion research, however none of them have anywhere near adequate funding.


Here are some websites about it:

first the habitiual wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_fusion

here is something that talks about the reoccurence of Cold fusion as a research topic http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/6.11/coldfusion.html

and some more in depth websites if you have a science back ground:
http://www.lenr-canr.org/
http://blake.montclair.edu/~kowalskil/cf/
http://www.ncas.org/erab/contents.htmhttp://www.ncas.org/erab/contents.htm
http://www.tcm.phy.cam.ac.uk/~bdj10/papers/storms/review8.html
http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/StormsEastudentsg.pdf
Logged
?

Ubuntu

  • 2392
Cold Fusion
« Reply #1 on: September 04, 2006, 01:18:58 PM »
Wow thanks for the explanation.
Logged
?

irishpeter

  • 141
Cold Fusion
« Reply #2 on: September 04, 2006, 01:21:49 PM »
Any developments on the sonoluminescence line? I saw a programme about it, but it was almost a decade old.

It also said that British scientists had generated a (hot) fusion reaction that featured a net gain in energy, but was not, unfortunately, self sustaining.

Sorry if these are covered in the links, haven't read them, not enough time!!
Logged
*

dysfunction

  • The Elder Ones
  • 2261
Cold Fusion
« Reply #3 on: September 04, 2006, 05:03:30 PM »
Quote from: "irishpeter"
It also said that British scientists had generated a (hot) fusion reaction that featured a net gain in energy, but was not, unfortunately, self sustaining.


A hot fusion reaction with a net gain in energy, but not self-sustaining? Don't hydrogen bombs already do that?
Logged
the cake is a lie
?

cadmium_blimp

  • 1499
  • funny, you thought I'd convert, didn't you?
Cold Fusion
« Reply #4 on: September 04, 2006, 05:07:05 PM »
I think he meant a controlled reaction.
Logged

Quote from: Commander Taggart
Never give up, never surrender!
?

Ubuntu

  • 2392
Cold Fusion
« Reply #5 on: September 04, 2006, 06:14:15 PM »
Quote from: "dysfunction"
Quote from: "irishpeter"
It also said that British scientists had generated a (hot) fusion reaction that featured a net gain in energy, but was not, unfortunately, self sustaining.


A hot fusion reaction with a net gain in energy, but not self-sustaining? Don't hydrogen bombs already do that?


Hydrogen bombs are not .
Logged
?

Ezkerraldean

  • 372
Cold Fusion
« Reply #6 on: September 05, 2006, 01:53:11 AM »
cold fusion is a conspiracy!
Logged
tf?
?

cadmium_blimp

  • 1499
  • funny, you thought I'd convert, didn't you?
Cold Fusion
« Reply #7 on: September 05, 2006, 05:46:29 AM »
Quote from: "Ubuntu"
Quote from: "dysfunction"
Quote from: "irishpeter"
It also said that British scientists had generated a (hot) fusion reaction that featured a net gain in energy, but was not, unfortunately, self sustaining.


A hot fusion reaction with a net gain in energy, but not self-sustaining? Don't hydrogen bombs already do that?


Hydrogen bombs are not .

Hydrogen bombs are, in fact, a hot fusion reaction with a net gain in energy that isn't self-sustaining.  Do some research.
Logged

Quote from: Commander Taggart
Never give up, never surrender!
?

Ubuntu

  • 2392
Cold Fusion
« Reply #8 on: September 05, 2006, 06:49:38 PM »
Quote from: "cadmium_blimp"
Quote from: "Ubuntu"
Quote from: "dysfunction"
Quote from: "irishpeter"
It also said that British scientists had generated a (hot) fusion reaction that featured a net gain in energy, but was not, unfortunately, self sustaining.


A hot fusion reaction with a net gain in energy, but not self-sustaining? Don't hydrogen bombs already do that?


Hydrogen bombs are not .

Hydrogen bombs are, in fact, a hot fusion reaction with a net gain in energy that isn't self-sustaining.  Do some research.


Hey, just quote Dysfunction, not me! I was the one who said they were NOT self-sustaining!
Logged
*

dysfunction

  • The Elder Ones
  • 2261
Cold Fusion
« Reply #9 on: September 05, 2006, 06:54:25 PM »
Quote from: "Ubuntu"
Quote from: "cadmium_blimp"
Quote from: "Ubuntu"
Quote from: "dysfunction"
Quote from: "irishpeter"
It also said that British scientists had generated a (hot) fusion reaction that featured a net gain in energy, but was not, unfortunately, self sustaining.


A hot fusion reaction with a net gain in energy, but not self-sustaining? Don't hydrogen bombs already do that?


Hydrogen bombs are not .

Hydrogen bombs are, in fact, a hot fusion reaction with a net gain in energy that isn't self-sustaining.  Do some research.


Hey, just quote Dysfunction, not me! I was the one who said they were NOT self-sustaining!


I also said they wre not self-sustaining, as was the one generated by the British scientists, that's why I asked what the difference was between their research and a bomb.
Logged
the cake is a lie
?

Ubuntu

  • 2392
Cold Fusion
« Reply #10 on: September 05, 2006, 07:06:00 PM »
Oops, I guess I misread what you typed. I was still correct anyhow.
Logged
?

cadmium_blimp

  • 1499
  • funny, you thought I'd convert, didn't you?
Cold Fusion
« Reply #11 on: September 05, 2006, 07:12:41 PM »
You were only correct depending on what context it was taken in and in the context we took it (since we had no reason to think otherwise) you were wrong.
Logged

Quote from: Commander Taggart
Never give up, never surrender!
?

irishpeter

  • 141
Cold Fusion
« Reply #12 on: September 06, 2006, 04:31:58 PM »
Sorry, a controlled reaction, and it was initiated by focusing and accelerating into each other two contra-rotating beams of deuterium using magnetic fields, instead of by detonating a fission bomb.
Logged
*

Raa

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 1004
  • http://www.freewebs.com/raacoz/thesunhasnoheat.htm
Re: Cold Fusion
« Reply #13 on: October 19, 2006, 07:55:32 PM »
Quote from: DrQuak
For those of you who haven't heard of cold fusion, or who have and don't quite know what it is, cold fusion is the ability to create nuclear fusion (like what happens in the sun or the second stage of the Hydrogen (thermonuclear) bomb) at room temperature.

..."like what happens in the sun" ... Cold combustion is what happens in the sun ------------- water fuses cold and heat together, otherwise they'll stay apart.
Logged
Everything, is in EMBRYO, not in mathematics. 
Please look at the 1/4 moon when it's around at noon ; We cannot see anything between it and the sun.
?

Kryptid

  • 20
Cold Fusion
« Reply #14 on: October 19, 2006, 09:30:15 PM »
It's a shame that muon-catalyzed fusion isn't more practical. That form of fusion has been demonstrated to occur at room temperature. One of the major problems is that muons are unstable particles, and decay in a fraction of a second. If we wanted to use muon-catalyzed fusion as a practical source of energy, we would need to find some way of producing muons abundantly and cheaply. Otherwise, we wouldn't be able to replenish the muons that decayed during the fusion reaction.
Logged
 want a Flat-Earther to PM me, and tell me why they believe Samuel Rowbotham in the first place. If a Flat-Earther requires proof in order to believe something, then why do they believe this man, even though he provided no proof himself?
?

troubadour

  • 551
Cold Fusion
« Reply #15 on: October 20, 2006, 05:47:04 AM »
Isn't one of these guys same guy that went on the today show to present his cold fusion machine, and then it didn't work, and was laughed into obscurity by the scientific community? Cold fusion is a psuedoscience, any second year physics student can tell you why.
Logged
*

Rogherio

  • 148
  • Me gusta las gambas.
Cold Fusion
« Reply #16 on: November 12, 2006, 09:01:08 AM »
cold fusion is completely illogical

The amount of energy required to fuse two nucleii is obscene and doing it without producing huge amounts of heat is impossible.

The amount of energy required to sustain "hot" fusion would be hardly anything at all anyway. The only energy required in hot fusion is that which gets it started in the first place.  Although the fact that this in itself would be a very large amount of energy, the energy produced by hot fusion is enormous  and the energy would be reclaimed within seconds.

As demonstrated by the hydrogen bomb, hot fusion does not need anything to keep it hot enough to react, it does this itself.

The only thing we should worry about is carrying out hot fusion and being able to control its heat output so it doesnt melt its "receptical".  This can be done using electro magnets and "encasing" it in plasma.
Logged
"My breasts are small and humble so you don't confuse them with mountains"
*

Raa

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 1004
  • http://www.freewebs.com/raacoz/thesunhasnoheat.htm
Cold Fusion
« Reply #17 on: November 12, 2006, 12:21:37 PM »
Quote from: "Rogherio"
cold fusion is completely illogical

The amount of energy required to fuse two nucleii is obscene and doing it without producing huge amounts of heat is impossible.

The amount of energy required to sustain "hot" fusion would be hardly anything at all anyway. The only energy required in hot fusion is that which gets it started in the first place.  Although the fact that this in itself would be a very large amount of energy, the energy produced by hot fusion is enormous  and the energy would be reclaimed within seconds.

As demonstrated by the hydrogen bomb, hot fusion does not need anything to keep it hot enough to react, it does this itself.

The only thing we should worry about is carrying out hot fusion and being able to control its heat output so it doesnt melt its "receptical".  This can be done using electro magnets and "encasing" it in plasma.


What do you know about the structure of Heat and Cold. They are both elements. Do you have an atomic structure or formula for these 2 elements. Heat rises through the earth to the flat surface and cold decends to the earths' flat surface from the sky. By the time they arrive here, they have been fused by water so that they may not be too hot or cold. I think that all your your scientific theories are missing the important fact about heat and cold in their natural states. They are static also, except that one preserves and the other destroys. Only water can fuse them. This should be tested before any fusion theories of any other sort be practised, but we cannot test this because where heat, water and cold meet below the flat earth, is too far and too extreme in temperature and activity. As we know that heat rises and cold desends, this is why we can imagine how hot it is actually way down there and how cold the sky is. You don't need a God damned microscope to be a scientist.
Logged
Everything, is in EMBRYO, not in mathematics. 
Please look at the 1/4 moon when it's around at noon ; We cannot see anything between it and the sun.
?

Nomad

  • Official Member
  • 16983
Cold Fusion
« Reply #18 on: November 12, 2006, 12:49:23 PM »
Quote from: "Raa"
What do you know about the structure of Heat and Cold. They are both elements.


And with that statement alone, I've deduced that you are a complete retard.
Logged
Quote from: PizzaPlanet on March 24, 2011, 11:05:27 AM
Nomad is a superhero.

8/30 NEVAR FORGET
*

Raa

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 1004
  • http://www.freewebs.com/raacoz/thesunhasnoheat.htm
Cold Fusion
« Reply #19 on: November 12, 2006, 01:21:20 PM »
Quote from: "thedigitalnomad"
Quote from: "Raa"
What do you know about the structure of Heat and Cold. They are both elements.


And with that statement alone, I've deduced that you are a complete retard.


I ALREADY KNOW ABOUT HEAT AND COLD MORE THAN ANYONE ELSE ON THE FACE OF THIS FLAT EARTH. I WAS JUST ASKIN' THE SCIENTIST WHAT HE KNOWS.

I DID SOME READINGS ABOUT THE FLAT EARTH AND FLUTE AND SAX AT THE NATIVE FRIENDSHIP CENTER OF MONTREAL LAST NIGHT. IT SEEMS THAT YOU ARE THE ONLY ROUND EARTH BROTHER AROUND.
Logged
Everything, is in EMBRYO, not in mathematics. 
Please look at the 1/4 moon when it's around at noon ; We cannot see anything between it and the sun.
?

Nomad

  • Official Member
  • 16983
Cold Fusion
« Reply #20 on: November 12, 2006, 01:28:24 PM »
Quote from: "Raa"
I ALREADY KNOW ABOUT HEAT AND COLD MORE THAN ANYONE ELSE ON THE FACE OF THIS FLAT EARTH.


Obviously not if you think they are individual elements.  "Heat" is a relative property of matter.  All matter.  Any element can be warm or cold.

Quote from: "Raa"
I DID SOME READINGS ABOUT THE FLAT EARTH AND FLUTE AND SAX AT THE NATIVE FRIENDSHIP CENTER OF MONTREAL LAST NIGHT. IT SEEMS THAT YOU ARE THE ONLY ROUND EARTH BROTHER AROUND.


False.  99% of the folks here are Round Earthers.  You are sadly mistaken.
Logged
Quote from: PizzaPlanet on March 24, 2011, 11:05:27 AM
Nomad is a superhero.

8/30 NEVAR FORGET
*

Raa

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 1004
  • http://www.freewebs.com/raacoz/thesunhasnoheat.htm
Cold Fusion
« Reply #21 on: November 12, 2006, 02:30:58 PM »
Quote from: "thedigitalnomad"
Quote from: "Raa"
I ALREADY KNOW ABOUT HEAT AND COLD MORE THAN ANYONE ELSE ON THE FACE OF THIS FLAT EARTH.


Obviously not if you think they are individual elements.  "Heat" is a relative property of matter.  All matter.  Any element can be warm or cold.

Quote from: "Raa"
I DID SOME READINGS ABOUT THE FLAT EARTH AND FLUTE AND SAX AT THE NATIVE FRIENDSHIP CENTER OF MONTREAL LAST NIGHT. IT SEEMS THAT YOU ARE THE ONLY ROUND EARTH BROTHER AROUND.


False.  99% of the folks here are Round Earthers.  You are sadly mistaken.


Any element can be warm or cold. ??? How do you think they got hot or cold.

You are sadly mistaken ??? You don't watch Raven Tales? That round earth shit started with the Jews and Europeans. Before they invented the round earth, many people were afraid to fall off the earth, but they didn't know that it is too far to get to the end of the earth and that when you get there you will touch the inside side of the round blue sky, but you'll never get there. We now know this knowledge and the whole structure of the flat earth universe. Don't try and make me sad and depressed about flat earth and that it is finally not true that it is flat; that's what happened to you and that will never happen to me, even if I am 1 in 6 billion.
Logged
Everything, is in EMBRYO, not in mathematics. 
Please look at the 1/4 moon when it's around at noon ; We cannot see anything between it and the sun.
*

skeptical scientist

  • 1285
  • -2 Flamebait
Cold Fusion
« Reply #22 on: November 12, 2006, 02:42:43 PM »
Quote from: "Raa"
Any element can be warm or cold. ??? How do you think they got hot or cold.


For a nice high school level understanding of temperature, think of it as the vibrations of individual molecules inside a substance. For example, hot water is water in which the individual water molecules are vibrating quickly. Hot iron is iron in which the individual iron atoms are vibrating quickly. Etc. There is a more nuanced definition involving the derivative of entropy with respect to energy, but this definition is fine for a good understanding of what is at play. There is no element which is heat, or element which is cold.
Logged
-David
E pur si muove!
?

Nomad

  • Official Member
  • 16983
Cold Fusion
« Reply #23 on: November 12, 2006, 02:50:25 PM »
Quote from: "Raa"
Any element can be warm or cold. ??? How do you think they got hot or cold.


Energy and pressure.  Heat itself is energy.

Quote from: "Raa"
You are sadly mistaken ??? You don't watch Raven Tales?


No, I don't.  Never heard of it.

Quote from: "Raa"
That round earth shit started with the Jews and Europeans.


False.  The "round earth shit" was proposed by Pthagoras in around 570BC.  He was not Jewish.  Sure, you could call him European, but the Chinese have followed a similar cycle throughout history finding the same things--also coming to the conclusion that the earth is spherical.

I won't even attempt to interperate the rest of your post since you're both a moron, and your English is horrible.
Logged
Quote from: PizzaPlanet on March 24, 2011, 11:05:27 AM
Nomad is a superhero.

8/30 NEVAR FORGET
?

troubadour

  • 551
Cold Fusion
« Reply #24 on: November 12, 2006, 03:18:55 PM »
i think raa is pretending to be an idiot in a effort to get all of you all riled up. It's working and I think it's funny.
Logged
?

Benjamin1986

  • 21
Cold Fusion
« Reply #25 on: November 12, 2006, 04:14:24 PM »
I have heard the Round Earth theory came Aristotle, not Pythagoras.

And cold fusion just doesn't work.  You need to force two protons extremely close together before the strong nuclear force takes over.  I haven't heard about muon catalysts, but the problems you describe explains why it hasn't been taken advantage of.  The "Cold Fusion" people were idiots, claiming you could cause fusion from a pot on a stove.  Their argument itself was nonsense, "no chemical reaction could create this much heat", which is laughable in itself.  After a short burst of interest, almost every serious scientist has left this where it belongs, in the garbage.

Hot fusion is great, safe (aside from the whole 100,000 degrees farenheit thing), and a nice way for energy.  If you can start is up and contain it without using more energy than you gain.
Logged
?

woopedazz

  • 421
Cold Fusion
« Reply #26 on: November 12, 2006, 05:05:47 PM »
Quote from: "troubadour"
i think raa is pretending to be an idiot in a effort to get all of you all riled up. It's working and I think it's funny.


i also think he is acting like an idiot... but then again, u act ur age
Logged
?

Nomad

  • Official Member
  • 16983
Cold Fusion
« Reply #27 on: November 12, 2006, 09:10:18 PM »
Quote from: "Benjamin1986"
I have heard the Round Earth theory came Aristotle, not Pythagoras.


No, I'm pretty sure it was Pythagoras.  Mostly as Plato had learned about it from his school and taught it to Aristotle.

And I'm sure you guys are right about Raa, but I wouldn't be surprised if he was genuine--there are a lot of idiots out there.
Logged
Quote from: PizzaPlanet on March 24, 2011, 11:05:27 AM
Nomad is a superhero.

8/30 NEVAR FORGET
?

woopedazz

  • 421
Cold Fusion
« Reply #28 on: November 12, 2006, 10:15:16 PM »
Quote from: "thedigitalnomad"
Quote from: "Benjamin1986"
I have heard the Round Earth theory came Aristotle, not Pythagoras.


No, I'm pretty sure it was Pythagoras.  Mostly as Plato had learned about it from his school and taught it to Aristotle.

And I'm sure you guys are right about Raa, but I wouldn't be surprised if he was genuine--there are a lot of idiots out there.


reading his insane posts relating to elements "air, water, earth, etc" makes me believe hes either completely insane, or...no, hes just insane
Logged
*

Rogherio

  • 148
  • Me gusta las gambas.
Cold Fusion
« Reply #29 on: November 13, 2006, 01:50:18 AM »
Fire, water, earth and air.  So whats the fifth element Raa? Do you believe everything you see in shit films? (although Bruce Willis was a bit of a beast in it)

I actually think it was Ptolemaes who first proposed the Round earth idea in 300 BC, he proposed that the universe was earth centred but the earth would "have" to be round for it to work.

Personally I think this is a load of bull because I'm a flat earther but there you go.

Sorry about the retarded FE'ers everyone. We're not all like Raa, the dumb shit.
Logged
"My breasts are small and humble so you don't confuse them with mountains"
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Up
« previous next »