Quote from Alan Smith

Member rubycarat has put up a new article- a little piece of (important history about the time Seaborg briefed President Bush (Snr) on cold fusion.

https://coldfusionnow.org/president-bush-briefed/

Eugene F. Mallove wrote in Intimations of Disaster: Glenn Seaborg, the Scientific Process, and the Origin of the “Cold Fusion War” [.pdf]:

Even though the jury was certainly still out on the evidence for
or against “cold fusion,” Seaborg, through some as-yet-to-be-revealed process (though he certainly had conducted no experiments), had determined that cold fusion was not what it was claimed to be. On April 14, 1989 Seaborg told President Bush that “it is not due to nuclear fusion.”

Display More

Quote

Glenn Seaborg: "One morning in 1989, I had just ordered my eggs in a coffee shop when the waitress said I had a phone call from the White House. The news had just broken about cold fusion, the astounding technology being touted as an inexhaustible source of pollution-free energy. Could I fly to Washington that day to brief President Bush? At the meeting I expressed my doubt that the phenomenon was real--scientists are as skeptical as economists of getting something for nothing--and no confirmation of cold fusion has surfaced to change that opinion."

Quote

Even skeptics might read and be tempted to rethink their stance.

It's a fine piece of work but why it would do that? It's the "usual suspects" [for those who don't know, that's a reference to the classic movie, Casablanca]. What the field needs is a robust demonstration of sufficient power and duration, verified by a renown and truly independent testing agency (for the n'th time, Shane D.) . And that does not include Dr. Tanzella at SRI. Many of the claims in Ruby's report have been seen here and poopoo'd by skeptics before. Skeptics are probably not influenced by a long laundry list and don't have the time to go through it. Show us the best, most powerful and most credible evidence please.

Quote from Shane D.

How do you know "it's a fine piece of work", but the "usual suspects", if you did not read it?

ESP. It is always ESP with Seven_of_twenty. He knows without seeing, and sees without knowing. He senses the truth from the vibrations emanating through the 12th dimension of time and space. To him, the future and the past are as one. He is a mystic at heart.

Quote from seven_of_twenty

What the field needs is a robust demonstration of sufficient power and duration,

Where "sufficient" is defined as "larger than whatever has been done." You demonstrate 1 W, and only 5 W are sufficient. Demonstrate 10 W and suddenly only 100 W will do. It is like trying to find the pot of gold at the end of a rainbow.

By the standards of normal, sane science, cold fusion excess heat, tritium and helium results were "sufficient" by 1990. They were far larger than the Curies' first heat results from 1896, or the Pile 1 Reactor that demonstrated a fission chain reaction. They were replicated hundreds of times in dozens of laboratories. In many cases, the heat could have been measured with confidence by Lavoisier in 1780. Tritium in some cases was 10E16 times background. But 10E30 would not convince Seven_of_twenty. He would only move the goalposts another 10 orders of magnitude. Weeks of nonstop heat is not "robust" enough. Months are not enough. He has no ordinary standards based on signal to noise ratios. His only demand is the impossible: you must demonstrate more than you have already demonstrated. Whatever you demonstrate, it is not enough by definition.

Quote

How do you know "it's a fine piece of work", but the "usual suspects", if you did not read it?

Skimmed it to appreciate the scope and read some parts, ie. the Anthropocene Institute (pretty iffy on LENR, large laundry list of other possible future techs). Most of the article looks like it will be rehash. Like I said, provide a single best example of LENR in action. Most skeptics have no time to re-read the usual suspects.

Quote

They were far larger than the Curies' first heat results from 1896, or the Pile 1 Reactor that demonstrated a fission chain reaction

The huge differences are that those experiments ended up somewhere fairly quickly whereas LENR hasn't. They were properly verified by credible independent sources. Those experiments were also congruent with theory which LENR isn't. As always, Jed's comparisons are apples with onions. Or maybe turnips and rutabagas.

Quote from seven_of_twenty

The huge differences are that those experiments ended up somewhere fairly quickly whereas LENR hasn't.

That is not true. You made that up. LENR was replicated by 92 groups within a year of the announcement:

https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/WillFGgroupsrepo.pdf

Normally, for a claim of this nature, 5 replications would convince any scientist.

Before you say it: All of the people who replicated were mainstream scientists. Many were distinguished scientists, such as the later Chairman of the Indian AEC. You will say they were marginal people, but you are wrong about that, just as you are wrong about the timing.

Also:

Given the difficulty of doing this experiment, 92 replications in such a short time was fast work.

A smaller number of replications failed. The reasons they failed are now quite clear.

JedRothwell

But Jed, none of that changes the fact that thirty years later, we're not any further along.

Quote from seven_of_twenty

But Jed, none of that changes the fact that thirty years later, we're not any further along.

Again, that is not true. You made that up. If you would take the time to read the cold fusion literature, or even take 6 minutes to view my video, you would see that tremendous progress has been made.

But I do agree with SOT, we need to construct a whacking great reactor with all the necessary ingredients and correct protocols for gassing/degassing with deuterium (and include any other likely catalysts like FeK which may produce ultra dense deuterium), use all the most recent research knowledge and demonstrate that cold fusion works - at the Mega-Watt excess heat scale. I mean what is the point in messing about with nano-scale quantities of reactants as in Japan and recent MIT studies when the power of cold fusion needs to be demonstrated.

Quote from Dr Richard

But I do agree with SOT, we need to construct a whacking great reactor with all the necessary ingredients and correct protocols for gassing/degassing with deuterium . . .

Along the same lines, let me speak for the rest of the mice. I think we should tie a bell to the cat so we can tell she is coming to eat us.

Yes, indeed, we should do as you say. So, if you happen to know how to do this, and you have several million dollars burning a hole in your pocket, please send the instructions and the money to me, in Chamblee, GA. I will get right on to it.

I thank you in advance for your unique knowledge and your generous contribution to this field! Where would we be without people like you and Seven_of_twenty, with your valuable advice and imaginary contributions? You should give one of these Onion TED talks such as "Compost-Fueled Cars, Wouldn't That Be Great?"

Let's just call it ICFER after ITER - I understand your scepticism but we are very close to putting all the pieces of the jigsaw together here in the UK - any contributions to such an international project would be gratefully received.

Quote from JedRothwell

Again, that is not true. You made that up. If you would take the time to read the cold fusion literature, or even take 6 minutes to view my video, you would see that tremendous progress has been made.

Here's the thing. Seven_of_twenty makes stuff up. Again and again, he says whatever pops into his head, and he writes it here. He never bothers to read anything or learn anything. He says he "skimmed" the latest report, which I suppose means he looked at the text in a mirror, because he does not know shit from shinola about it.

I don't understand why he does this, or what he hopes to accomplish. As I said, anyone who bothers to read the literature, or even spends six minutes watching my video will see that Seven_of_twenty knows nothing and his assertions are contrary to matters of fact. Not technical details, but matters of fact. Such as the fact that the world's leading experts in tritium at Los Alamos and BARC confirmed the tritium. They published papers showing progress, so that is indisputable, but Seven_of_twenty says (or at least implies out of ignorance) it never happened.

We can argue about whether the tritium detection is right or wrong. It is at least conceivable that Seven_of_twenty, who is an anonymous person on the internet, knows more about tritium detection than the experts at Los Alamos. We can't tell, because he has not revealed any knowledge of this or any other technical subject. However, the fact that these experts published papers is not debatable.

I sometimes think Seven_of_twenty and the other irrational opponents are actually people who support cold fusion. They are trying to make the opposition look bad. They are doing us a favor. They remind me of what Hamlet said before the duel:

I'll be your foil, Laertes: in mine ignorance
Your skill shall, like a star i' the darkest night,
Stick fiery off indeed.