THE WAR ON COLD FUSION

  • It is the beginning of a propaganda war. First you try to kill it by saying it does not work at all. Now that that is about to be proven false, you say it is dangerous!
    But this should not be taken lightly. These guys specialize in messing up the minds of ordinary people.

  • Irradiation of deuterated metal surfaces by energetic photons (X-rays, etc) has indeed already been used and suggested in LENR experiments and patents.
    It's also true that uranium metal is capable of absorbing an large amount of hydrogen, by atomic percentage.
    I haven't searched in detail for references on possible cold fusion experiments in the '20s, but the author appears to have done basic fact checking at least. I'm not sure about Keshe, though.


    I don't see why this should be considered as propaganda.To me feels more like it the notion that LENR is 100% safe.

  • Alan Smith


    Sorry, but your "dilemma" is likely too narrow a set of choices. The physics is certainly interesting and appears to this educated amateur to be from someone who is quite widely read if not themselves an "expert".


    It is a fascinating reprise of an argument I was once presented that the fission trigger of fusion MUST operate through x-rays generated by a copper or other appropriate thin foil intermediate. The argument was that the resulting huge coherent pulse of intense x-rays accelerate all the fusion candidates in parallel and thus place them in such a near light-velocity (relativistic mass greatly increased) and huge time dilation that their cross section of interaction is greatly enhanced in our reference frame. I always imagined that was likely hard gammas, but this writer seems to be saying modest keV levels for their hohlraum compression argument.


    Certainly, the events following the early lithium deuteride blast a Enewetak, showed that at least then the American genii had not much understanding of what they were doing. Since we (the Allies) incorporated as many portions of the German scientific elites as possible after Victory in Europe. That includes rocketry, social and bio-medical sciences (see Professor Devra Davis' The Hidden War on Cancer) and of course physics-- we surely may well have gained understanding that led Teller to accelerate his efforts, and apparently somewhat prematurely.


    The micro-nuclear stuff likely re-appears here courtesy of persistent and diligent efforts at declassification and perhaps FOIA requests over the last 40 years. CF / LENR parties would be advised to grab that information before it disappears again!

  • What do you make of this? Is it just the work of some random nut-job or is it the beginning of a propaganda war?


    <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2016/05/31/the-problem-with-cold-fusion-and-how-small-can-a-nuclear-reaction-be/" class="externalURL" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">veteranstoday.com/2016/05/31/t…an-a-nuclear-reaction-be/</a>


    While there may be interesting facts there, I didn't read it all. I vote for "random nut job." However, if there is something truly worth reading there, anyone is free to point it out.

  • I have seen articles from VT before and my impression is they are quite sincere about LENR/CF:


    <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/09/15/vt-nuclear-education-lenr-neutron-distribution/" class="externalURL" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">veteranstoday.com/2014/09/15/v…enr-neutron-distribution/</a>

    Mats, you are disappointing me. The page you cite may be "sincere," but is riddled with factual errors and ignorance. Useless.

  • I am with Abd. This is from the article:


    The problem with cold fusion is that all metals will absorb hydrogen, some much better than others. Uranium and other fissile materials will absorb it uncontrollably and at some point it will explode with a force greater than what a molecular explosive of the same mass will produce.


    This is the problem with cold fusion; runaway explosive force that cannot be stopped. It is not a matter of if but when.


    At first you get a simple catalytic reaction but once it reaches a critical threshold it will explode; you cannot stop the reaction from occurring and it can happen with any metal not just fissile material.


    This is the fundamental principle that takes place in a hydrogen bomb but on a much grander scale. The hydrogen plasma attacks the fissile material in a very rapid nuclear reaction, producing fusion on a grand scale. Cold fusion just does it on a much smaller scale.


    This is why it will never be commercially viable. You can never predict when it will go bang.


    It may be days, weeks, months or years but eventually it will go bang. Cold fusion is a ticking time bomb just waiting to go off and in some labs it has already.


    This is why DOE shut down all unauthorized research into it. Home-made Mini nukes.

  • Re: "Mini-nukes"


    Emilio del Giudice (1940-2014) used to think that certain types of depleted uranium bullets could have been used as cold fusion-based mini-nukes by the military since the early '90s. He wrote a book on this subject with an Italian journalist several years ago.


    On a related note, Here's an interesting excerpt from Google Books. Martin Fleischmann seemed to think that uranium could be interesting to use instead of palladium.

  • Nanoplasmonics can be a path to U235 enrichment. Nanoplasmonics, one of the components of the LENR reaction can be used in a stand alone process to fission even Z metal isotopes more than odd Z metal isotopes. This will increase the percent of U235 in a U238 mixture. This is called enrichment. Because of this monopole magnetic based mechanism where the non zero nuclear spin interferes with the reaction, LENR will always react on even Z isotopes more than odd Z isotopes. The non zero nuclear spin isotopes will convert the externally generated magnetic screening potential of the nuclear force into RF radiation where the nuclear spin vector rotates in a Nuclear Magnetic Resonance active manner. The zero spin isotopes will pass all monopole magnetic screening into the nucleus providing the full strong force screening effect at maximum power potential.


    See:
    Low-energy nuclear reactions and the leptonic monopole
    Georges Lochak*, Leonid Urutskoev**


    http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LochakGlowenergyn.pdf


    Quote

    It was found that the activity of both U isotopes decreased with respect to that of Cs. However, the activity of the 238U isotope decreases to a greater extent. Thus, the ratio of 235U to 238U becomes bigger than unity. Prior to these experiments, we made sure that the specific activity of 137Cs does not change noticeably. The real situation is more complicated [3] but this is a topic of a separate report. For us, it is important that the transformation can also take place outside the plasma channel. This is a rather “unpleasant surprise,” because, probably, within several years, when the low-temperature transmutation will be studied in more detail, it would be rather easy to devise a facile and inexpensive process to enrich uranium. In view of the growth of terrorism all over the world, this outcome seems deplorable.

  • Chernobyl catastrophe should not have happened. Some factor outside of known nuclear engineering principles increased the reactivity of the core of the reactor. Electric discharge doing a test could have push the reactor into supercriticality.


    https://arxiv.org/ftp/nucl-ex/papers/0304/0304024.pdf


    Quote

    The official conclusion about the origin and mechanism of the Chernobyl catastrophe is shown to essentially contradict experimental facts available from the accident. In the frame of existing physical models of nuclear fission reactor, it is shown analytically that under conditions of the accident the period of runaway of reactor at the fourth power generating unit of the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant (CNPP) should be either 10 times slower or 100 times faster than that observed. A self-consistent hypothesis is suggested for the probable birth of magnetic charges, during the turbine generator test under it’s own momentum test, at the fourth power generating unit of CNPP, and for the impact of these charges on the reactivity coefficient.


    Quote

    EXPERIMENTS ON STUDYING THE MAGNETIC MONOPOLE


    Apart from the neutron mechanism, other mechanisms of uranium fission are also known to exist, for example, fission induced by slow muons [24]. . The mechanism of uranium fission under the action of magnetic monopoles has been considered theoretically [25]. It was suggested [25] that the monopole-nuclear interaction is so strong that a monopole that comes close to a nucleus can induce 238U fission. To explain the experimentally observed facts, the formation of magnetic monopoles during a current interruption caused by electric discharge on a metallic foil in a fluid has been proposed as a working hypothesis [9]. In the authors’ opinion, this hypothesis provides an explanation for the abnormal tracks recorded using nuclear emulsions, for the observed nuclear transformation, and for the shift of 57Fe Mossbauer spectra. In order to confirm the hypothesized formation of monopoles, experiments on detection of the 238U fission induced by magnetic monopoles were carried out [26]. These experiments established that the original isotopic composition of uranium has changed towards 235U under the action of a “strange” radiation. The decrease in the specific activity of uranium upon the electric discharge on a metallic foil noted in [26] is, most likely, related to the transformation of uranium nuclei. However, the fact that the monopoles predicted previously [6, 7] are leptons suggests that they should influence markedly the β- decay. Substantial distortions of the β-decay periods for the isomeric 234mTh nuclei, which are daughter products of 238U, were detected in experiments [26]. Thus, the experiments provided crucial arguments in favor of the existence of magnetic monopoles and substantial support for the hypotheses stated previously [9]. Let us assume that magnetic monopoles have entered the RBMK reactor and find out what would be the consequences, relying on the results of [9, 26].