Quote from JonahMessinger

While we may not agree with every line of the article, I think our community would be served well to respond positively to this type of coverage. It represents a significant shift that an outlet such as Popular Science would give LENR any positive coverage at all.

I guess so. Any publicity is good publicity. But I stopped responding to this kind of thing years ago. As you see, Ed Storms and someone else did respond. I thanked Ed for going to the trouble.

Cold fusion is making a scientific comeback

Physicists and engineers want to forget about missteps from the 1980s and forge ahead with new experiments in low-energy nuclear reactions.

www.popsci.com

Discussion on this thread is normally frowned upon. I believe though, that Jed and Jonah's conversation qualify as newsworthy.

For the rest of you...no discussions!

For some time our friend Dr. William (Bill) Collis has been in declining health due to cancer, and now he is being well cared for in a hospice in Italy since he is not expected to recover. It is thus with a poignant mix of joy and sadness that we announce he has been awarded the society's Preparata Medal, richly deserved for his outstanding service to the society, its members, and to LENR which he devoted so much thought, time, and energy to. This energy was manifested publicly at the conferences and IWAHLM workshops he inspired and sweated over, and privately with wise advice, often mentoring young entrants to the field and helping their careers.

Remarkable for the mix of British old-school charm, good humuor and determination that characterised his service as Secretary of the ISCMNS, creator and CEO of the UK company and Trustee of the UK charity linked with it, Bill will not be at ICCF-25 to accept his medal in front of applauding colleagues. Doubly sad is that he is too ill to join in a Zoom-based award ceremony from his hospital bed.

Bill knows that he has been honoured by his peers, and appreciates it, since on Monday 17th Jean-Paul Biberian made the long drive from his home in France to Italy to tell Bill of the award in person. Jean-Paul found Bill calm and comfortable, and they spent some time together talking about the award, about old times, and the future.

Proper public acknowledgement of Bill's service, his life and outstanding work for the ISCMNS will be made at ICCF-25, and I am sure that all members will join, in spirit at least, with those of us who will be there.

Alan Smith, acting CEO and Lynn Bowen, acting President ISCMNS.

I am sorry to inform you that Francesco Celani messaged me just now to say that our good friend and companion Bill Collis passed away peacefully in Nizza Monferrato a few hours ago, His life and work will be remembered at ICCf-25, and for a long time afterwards.

Best Wishes and Sincere Condolences to all affected.. Alan Smith

Quote from Alan Smith

I am sorry to inform you that Francesco Celani messaged me just now to say that our good friend and companion Bill Collis passed away peacefully in Nizza Monferrato a few hours ago, His life and work will be remembered at ICCf-25, and for a long time afterwards.

Best Wishes and Sincere Condolences to all affected.. Alan Smith

My condolences to Bill’s family and friends.

https://spaceshipone.org/book-club/ - I note that their number one choice is written by a forum member.

SpaceshipOne Book Club

Join our book club! Here’s how it works:

1. You choose which book you’d like to read from our curated selection (see below).
2. We send you the book, free of charge. Give yourself 1-2 months to read and digest.
3. After reading, you’ll review the book (in a written format, video format, or both— you choose!)
4. We provide templates and workshops to help you create a book review that will be useful for other readers.
5. We publish the reviews on SpaceshipOne’s website and social media (and sites like Goodreads & Amazon for further visibility).

Interested? Fill out our Book Club interest form here.

Debunking Myths Surrounding Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (energyportal.eu)

Debunking Myths Surrounding Low Energy Nuclear Reactions

Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR) have been a topic of controversy and debate for decades. Often associated with cold fusion, a term coined in the late 1980s, LENR has been met with skepticism and disbelief by many in the scientific community.

However, recent advancements in research and understanding have begun to debunk some of the myths surrounding this field of study. In this article, we will explore some of the most common misconceptions about LENR and provide evidence to support the validity of this area of research.

One of the most prevalent myths about LENR is that it is synonymous with cold fusion, a term that has become synonymous with scientific failure and fraud. While it is true that the initial claims of cold fusion in the late 1980s were met with skepticism and ultimately discredited, LENR is a broader field of study that encompasses a variety of nuclear reactions occurring at relatively low temperatures. By equating LENR with cold fusion, critics are dismissing an entire field of research based on the shortcomings of one specific experiment.

Another common myth is that LENR is not a real scientific field because it lacks a solid theoretical foundation. While it is true that the exact mechanisms behind LENR are not yet fully understood, this does not mean that the phenomenon itself is not real. Many scientific discoveries, such as the discovery of X-rays and radioactivity, were initially met with skepticism due to a lack of theoretical understanding. As research progresses, it is likely that a more complete understanding of the processes behind LENR will emerge, just as it did for these other scientific phenomena.

Critics of LENR often argue that the lack of reproducibility in experiments is evidence that the phenomenon is not real. However, this argument fails to take into account the complex nature of LENR experiments and the many variables that can impact the results. Researchers in the field have acknowledged the challenges in achieving consistent results, and efforts are being made to develop standardized protocols and methodologies to improve reproducibility. It is important to note that many scientific discoveries, such as the development of the transistor, faced similar challenges in their early stages of research.

Another myth surrounding LENR is that it is a fringe science pursued only by a small group of researchers with little credibility. In reality, LENR research is being conducted by respected scientists and institutions around the world, including NASA, the U.S. Department of Energy, and various universities. Additionally, there have been numerous peer-reviewed publications on the topic, further supporting the legitimacy of the field.

Finally, some critics argue that even if LENR is a real phenomenon, it has no practical applications and is therefore not worth pursuing. This argument is shortsighted, as the potential benefits of LENR are vast. If harnessed, LENR could provide a virtually limitless source of clean, safe, and low-cost energy, with the potential to revolutionize the way we power our world. The potential applications of LENR are not limited to energy production, as the technology could also be used for purposes such as waste remediation and medical treatments.

In conclusion, the myths surrounding Low Energy Nuclear Reactions have hindered the progress and acceptance of this field of research for too long. As our understanding of LENR continues to grow, it is essential that we approach this area of study with an open mind and a willingness to challenge our preconceived notions. The potential benefits of LENR are too great to be ignored, and it is time for the scientific community to embrace this field of research and explore its full potential.

Quote from Shane D.

Debunking Myths Surrounding Low Energy Nuclear Reactions

The author is not listed for this article. There is no "byline." That is odd, and a little disturbing.

Quote from JedRothwell

The author is not listed for this article. There is no "byline." That is odd, and a little disturbing.

I suspect most readers probably won't notice, or care. What will register with them hopefully, is that they are reading another positive article on LENR.

Quote from JedRothwell

The author is not listed for this article. There is no "byline." That is odd, and a little disturbing.

ChatGPT?

Quote from Shane D.

I suspect most readers probably won't notice, or care. What will register with them hopefully, is that they are reading another positive article on LENR.

It has comments disabled, also, bummer.

Quote from Shane D.

One of the most prevalent myths about LENR is that it is synonymous with cold fusion, a term that has become synonymous with scientific failure and fraud.

You never get it. If CF=fraud is repeated in a paper then the paper is fraud by definition.

Journal of Modern Physics > Vol.14 No.7, Ju

Explanation of Cold Nuclear Fusion and Biotransmutations
Auguste Meessen

Explanation of Cold Nuclear Fusion and Biotransmutations

Korea university claim room-temperature ambient-pressure superconductor.

Sounds too good to be true but if it pans out then big news!!!

We await confirmation.

Quote from SearchMe

ChatGPT?

Junk websites filled with AI-generated text are pulling in money from programmatic ads

More than 140 brands are advertising on low-quality content farm sites—and the problem is growing fast.

www.technologyreview.com

Quote from ZenoOfElea

Korea university claim room-temperature ambient-pressure superconductor.

Sounds too good to be true but if it pans out then big news!!!

We await confirmation.

A little more about that:

Breaking Superconductor News | Science | AAAS

I wrote recently about the turmoil in the field of higher-temperature superconductors, but little did I know what was coming. Yesterday two preprints appeared on the rXiv site, the first bearing the attention-getting title “The First Room-Temperature Ambient-Pressure Superconductor”, and the second going into more detail about its behavior. As you’d imagine, this made something of a splash during the day on Tuesday!

Let’s look at what’s being claimed, and how strong the evidence seems to be. The authors describe a lead-based copper-doped material, LK-99, which is made by first preparing a well-characterized mineral (lanarkite, Pb2(SO4)O) from lead oxide and lead sulfate. Separately, copper phosphide (Cu3P), another well-characterized compound, is also freshly prepared from elemental copper and phosphorus. These two substances are ground together in a 1:1 ratio and the mixture is sealed in a vacuum-evacuated quartz tube and heated to 925C, forming LK-99, which is Pb10-xCux(PO4)6O, a dark polycrystalline material. The structure is very similar to lead apatite, a well-characterized phosphate mineral, but its crystallographic unit cell is slightly smaller due to the substitution of particular lead atoms in its lattice by copper ones.

And it’s this effect on the compound’s structure, the authors believe, that leads to its extraordinary superconducting behavior. Honestly, “extraordinary” doesn’t get it across. We’ve been getting excited over the years about superconducting materials that don’t even quite have to be cooled with liquid nitrogen, and this stuff is claimed to superconduct all the way up to room temperature and indeed up past the boiling point of water. Its critical temperature is said to be 127C (!) The phrase “boiling-water superconductor” is not one that I had ever used until yesterday, trust me on that.

The authors believe that the modified/strained structure of their material creates a large number of “quantum wells” between particular lead atoms and the adjacent oxygens of the phosphate groups bound to them, in effect making a two-dimensional “electron gas”. They propose that electron tunneling between these quantum wells, which are between 3.7 and 6.5 Ångstroms apart, is the superconducting mechanism. I am not enough of a solid-state physicist to judge this proposal, but the authors are making a detailed mechanistic claim that is subject to experimental proof, which is very good to see, and and they adduce a good deal of data to back it up (x-ray diffraction, EPR, and more). And they demonstrate the behaviors that a superconductor should have, such as the Meissner effect (expulsion of a magnetic field), sudden resistivity changes at a critical temperature (bizarrely high though that is in this case), current-voltage (I-V) plots at different temperatures and under different magnetic field strengths, etc. If these data reproduce, the superconductivity of this material seems beyond doubt. (Added note: others have pointed out that they'd like to see heat capacity measurements as well, which the paper doesn't show).

Another welcome feature is that their procedure for preparing LK-99 seems quite straightforward. You can bet that furnaces in solid-state materials labs around the world have been cooking yesterday and today to try to reproduce its synthesis and the properties, and we should be hearing about the results of these experiments very soon. The first samples should be coming out of the quartz vessels. . .sometime tomorrow, perhaps? Depends on what was available around the lab! Now, as the world knows, all such claims to date have fallen apart on closer inspection - indeed, the superconductivity research group at Rochester that I wrote about earlier this month is now about to have another paper retracted on suspicions of data fabrication. But those reports were on materials that take very specialized equipment to make and evaluate - this new report looks like it’s either going to fall apart very quickly or be quickly vindicated (as were the 1987 superconductor discoveries). I absolutely cannot wait to find out.

I really, really, hope it’s as claimed - that should go without saying. And I’m going to be in a rather jumpy mood until we hear one way or another! That’s because this truly would be a world-changing discovery (as well as an obvious instant Nobel prize). Whether LK-99 itself becomes a big industrial material is open to question - one of the things you get from the characterization data is that LK-99 is not able to carry much current in its superconducting state at these high temperatures, and that’s a key property for many applications. That might not be surprising, either, because other superconductors generally carry less current density the higher the temperature gets (i.e., the closer to the critical temperature). But it has to be noted (see my earlier post linked above) that this is indeed a polycrystalline material as synthesized, and that junctions between the different crystal domains can affect this profoundly.

We also don't have a feeling for how such a quantum-well superconductor behaves in general, if that's how it works. If this is real, vast amounts of work will go into seeing if that current density can be increased by more careful synthesis and fabrication.

But as usual, it's a gigantic step to just show that such things can exist. That’s what will shake everyone up well before any applications come along, and if this reproduces, labs around the world will frantically start looking for quantum-well superconducting materials of their own. Who knows what could come out of that? Robust high-current-density room-temperature superconductors are right out of science fiction (SF readers will recall that one such material was a big plot point in Larry Niven’s Ringworld). Electrical generation and transmission, antennas, power storage, magnet applications (including things like fusion power plants), electric motors and basically everything that runs on electricity would be affected. We could stop throwing away so much generated power on heating up the wires that deliver it, for starters.

LK-99 isn’t that material, or at least not yet. It may not be anything - we’ll know soon. But it could also signal a transition point in human history. Place your bets, folks, place your bets.

Not so fast, LK-99 has been in the news a long time.

Plenty of time to either confirm or deny it's properties.

Post from Jones Beene over at Vortex-1

This story turns out to have been around the net for a long time
It appeared in the record as a compound named LK-99 = Lee-Kim (1999): 
IOW - they discovered it nearly a quarter of a century ago.. makes one wonder if this post is not an odd troll 

Not to mention, an unreasonable time to isolate, confirm and cook up; patents filed in 2021, and granted in 2023—hence only now the public articles and trademark applications ... which likely means it is not robust or usable.and they are grasping at straws

Here is another article from energyportal.eu:

The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Advancing Cold Fusion Research

The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Advancing Cold Fusion Research - EnergyPortal.eu

www.energyportal.eu

The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Advancing Cold Fusion Research

Again, no byline. Some quotes:

Exploring the Potential of Artificial Intelligence in Accelerating Cold Fusion Breakthroughs

The quest for a clean, abundant, and sustainable energy source has been a long-standing pursuit for scientists and researchers worldwide. Cold fusion, a theoretical nuclear reaction that occurs at or near room temperature, has been at the center of this pursuit since its inception in the late 1980s. If achieved, cold fusion could provide a virtually limitless supply of energy with minimal environmental impact. However, despite decades of research and experimentation, the realization of cold fusion has remained elusive. Enter artificial intelligence (AI), a rapidly evolving technology that has the potential to accelerate breakthroughs in cold fusion research and bring us closer to a sustainable energy future. . . .

Another significant challenge in cold fusion research is the development of materials that can facilitate the reaction. Cold fusion is thought to occur within metal lattices, such as palladium or nickel, when they are loaded with hydrogen or deuterium. However, the specific properties of these materials that enable cold fusion are not well understood, and the process of loading the lattice with hydrogen can be difficult and time-consuming. AI can help accelerate the discovery of new materials and optimize existing ones by analyzing vast amounts of data on material properties and performance. . . .

Nope, nope, nope. I do not think so. First, because the LLM ChatGPT model has no ability to do these things. All it can do is find information and summarize it. It cannot find or discover anything new. Other AI models can, but they are not publicly available yet.

Second, there is no vast database of information on metal lattices or the conditions of cold fusion. There is fragmented information in a handful of studies, mostly from the ENEA. The data is not in an organized format that would allow an AI to categorize it, graph, or summarize it. Even a person could not do that. Every study is different and many are incomprehensible. In short, the material science aspects of cold fusion have barely been explored, because the research has not been funded. This is not plasma fusion. There may be plasma fusion data on line in a format that an AI could use to synthesize information, but no such resources exist for cold fusion.

LLM AI can be useful in cold fusion. I think probably the best example is the ChatBot I installed at LENR-CANR.org (https://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/?page_id=2988). Which, by the way, very few people are using. This is useful for a variety of purposes. It will improve in the coming years. But it cannot begin to do the kinds of things discussed in this article.