PDA

View Full Version : COLD FUSION It works! (again) Will it get to market?



revelarts
01-23-2011, 06:57 AM
Italian Scientist say they've done it.
ANOTHER low cost, less polluting, less environment stripping energy source. Will this one make it to market any time soon? I finally looks like electric cars are on the way.

The claim

....Rossi and Focardi say that, when the atomic nuclei of nickel and hydrogen are fused in their reactor, the reaction produces copper and a large amount of energy. The reactor uses less than 1 gram of hydrogen and starts with about 1,000 W of electricity, which is reduced to 400 W after a few minutes. Every minute, the reaction can convert 292 grams of 20°C water into dry steam at about 101°C. Since raising the temperature of water by 80°C and converting it to steam requires about 12,400 W of power, the experiment provides a power gain of 12,400/400 = 31. As for costs, the scientists estimate that electricity can be generated at a cost of less than 1 cent/kWh, which is significantly less than coal or natural gas plants....

the response

Rossi and Focardi’s paper on the nuclear reactor has been rejected by peer-reviewed journals, but the scientists aren’t discouraged. They published their paper in the Journal of Nuclear Physics, an online journal founded and run by themselves, which is obviously cause for a great deal of skepticism. They say their paper was rejected because they lack a theory for how the reaction works. According to a press release in Google translate, the scientists say they cannot explain how the cold fusion is triggered, “but the presence of copper and the release of energy are witnesses.”

The fact that Rossi and Focardi chose to reveal the reactor at a press conference, and the fact that their paper lacks details on how the reactor works, has made many people uncomfortable. The demonstration has not been widely covered by the general media. However, last Saturday, the day after the demonstration, the scientists answered questions in an online forum, which has generated a few blog posts.

One comment in the forum contained a message from Steven E. Jones, a contemporary of Pons and Fleishmann, who wrote, “Where are the quantitative descriptions of these copper radioisotopes? What detectors were used? Have the results been replicated by independent researchers? Pardon my skepticism as I await real data.”

Steven B. Krivit, publisher of the New Energy Times, noted that Rossi and Focardi’s reactor seems similar to a nickel-hydrogen low-energy nuclear reaction (LENR) device originally developed by Francesco Piantelli of Siena, Italy, who was not involved with the current demonstration. In a comment, Rossi denied that his reactor is similar to Piantelli’s, writing that “The proof is that I am making operating reactors, he is not.” Krivit also noted that Rossi has been accused of a few crimes, including tax fraud and illegally importing gold, which are unrelated to his research.

Rossi and Focardi have applied for a patent that has been partially rejected in a preliminary report. According to the report, “As the invention seems, at least at first, to offend against the generally accepted laws of physics and established theories, the disclosure should be detailed enough to prove to a skilled person conversant with mainstream science and technology that the invention is indeed feasible. … In the present case, the invention does not provide experimental evidence (nor any firm theoretical basis) which would enable the skilled person to assess the viability of the invention. The description is essentially based on general statement and speculations which are not apt to provide a clear and exhaustive technical teaching.” The report also noted that not all of the patent claims were novel.

Giuseppe Levi, a nuclear physicist from INFN (Italian National Institute of Nuclear Physics), helped organize last Friday’s demonstration in Bologna. Levi confirmed that the reactor produced about 12 kW and noted that the energy was not of chemical origin since there was no measurable hydrogen consumption. Levi and other scientists plan to produce a technical report on the design and execution of their evaluation of the reactor.

Also at the demonstration was a representative of Defkalion Energy, based in Athens, who said that the company was interested in a 20 kW unit and that within two months they would make a public announcement. For the Rossi and Focardi, this kind of interest is the most important.

“We have passed already the phase to convince somebody,” Rossi wrote in his forum. “We are arrived to a product that is ready for the market. Our judge is the market. In this field the phase of the competition in the field of theories, hypothesis, conjectures etc etc is over. The competition is in the market. If somebody has a valid technology, he has not to convince people by chattering, he has to make a reactor that work and go to sell it, as we are doing.”

He directed commercial inquiries to info(at)leonardocorp1996.com .

fj1200
01-23-2011, 10:07 AM
I'm sure it will be suppressed by a consortium of international conglomerates.

OldMercsRule
01-23-2011, 10:17 AM
If it werks it will not be suppressed.

Trouble is: there have been many many claims of "cold fusion" that when carefully duplicated turn out false.

Most start out similar to this current claim, (in the way it is non specified), and therefore difficult for others to duplicate.

revelarts
01-23-2011, 10:55 AM
I'm sure it will be suppressed by a consortium of international conglomerates.
Sarcasm Alert
Are you some kind of conspiracy NUT?:tinfoil::cuckoo: Int ConGloms don't try to protect their interest by hook or crook in the face of unanswerable competition.:cuckoo::uhoh:


...
Trouble is: there have been many many claims of "cold fusion" that when carefully duplicated turn out false.

Most start out similar to this current claim, (in the way it is non specified), and therefore difficult for others to duplicate.

True, but Hopefully they've pulled it off for real.
But that's Why I said "AGAIN" in the title, this news story comes up every few years.

OldMercsRule
01-23-2011, 12:25 PM
True, but Hopefully they've pulled it off for real.
But that's Why I said "AGAIN" in the title, this news story comes up every few years.

Yuppers........ it would be great if it werked, (and were cheap or at least reasonable [in price]).

I'd have one out on RR island in a New York second. :cool: :thumb:

fj1200
01-23-2011, 12:51 PM
Sarcasm Alert
Are you some kind of conspiracy NUT?:tinfoil::cuckoo: Int ConGloms don't try to protect their interest by hook or crook in the face of unanswerable competition.:cuckoo::uhoh:

Sarcasm Alert
Nor do they invest in promising technologies that will give them a competitive edge so that they can make even more money to further cement their Int Conglom advantages.

revelarts
01-23-2011, 02:06 PM
Sarcasm Alert
Nor do they invest in promising technologies that will give them a competitive edge so that they can make even more money to further cement their Int Conglom advantages.
Sarcasm Alert
Your right, they might stea.. I mean, invest in it.
Sarcasm Alert off

But they could very legitimately invest dominate the market and still make a mint.

fj1200
01-23-2011, 04:27 PM
But they could very legitimately invest dominate the market and still make a mint.

So? Every revolutionary idea does create weal... err, make a mint. ;)

pete311
02-16-2011, 02:17 AM
Italian Scientist say they've done it.

haha funny. unless it can be repeated, whcih it can't, it doesn't mean jack shit

forget about it, cold fusion is crackpot science. always was, always will be. the scientific community is not taking this seriously for a reason.

logroller
02-25-2011, 01:53 AM
haha funny. unless it can be repeated, whcih it can't, it doesn't mean jack shit

forget about it, cold fusion is crackpot science. always was, always will be. the scientific community is not taking this seriously for a reason.

Nothing wrong with skepticism, but be wary of ignorant intentions.


As every past generation has had to disenthrall itself from an inheritance of truisms and stereotypes, so in our time we must move on from reassuring repetition of stale phrases to a new, difficult, but essential confrontation with reality.
For the great enemy of truth is very often not the lie—deliberate, contrived, and dishonest—but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Too often we hold fast to the cliches of our forebears. We subject all facts to a prefabricated set of interpretations. We enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought. -- President John F Kennedy, Commencement address, Yale University, 11 June 1962.

pete311
03-16-2011, 11:10 PM
Nothing wrong with skepticism, but be wary of ignorant intentions.

At this time, there is little or nothing that suggests to the scientific community that "low energy nuclear reactions" are possible. No verified evidence or theoretical basis. Claims of cold fusion cannot be correct unless they overturn firmly established knowledge of nuclear physics. This would be an extraordinary claim, and it would require extraordinary proof. After two decades, no such extraordinary proof has emerged.

logroller
03-18-2011, 05:58 PM
At this time, there is little or nothing that suggests to the scientific community that "low energy nuclear reactions" are possible. No verified evidence or theoretical basis. Claims of cold fusion cannot be correct unless they overturn firmly established knowledge of nuclear physics. This would be an extraordinary claim, and it would require extraordinary proof. After two decades, no such extraordinary proof has emerged.

I'm no nuclear physicist. My comment was based purely on logic, to which scientific reasoning is based; specifically, the ability to be refuted. "Never has, never will be" is an inherently flawed assumption because it rejects all other conclusions prima facie, ie it ignores without actually refuting. What if Einstein would've just said, "yep their right, nothing left to learn about physics." ?

Again, skepticism is good, but not ignorance. extraordinary is different than impossible. With that said, the claims leading to this thread are, thus far, unrepeatable and in accordance with scientific methods, more worthy of skepticism than acceptance.