TAKE ACTION NOW!!!
1. The following link is where I discovered fax numbers for 490 members of the Congress of the United States. http://www.contactingthecongress.org/cgi-bin/newseek.cgi
A fax broadcast company www.JBlast.com will send all the faxes you want to Congress for six cents each. For less than 30 bucks you can educate and implore a lot of movers and shakers.
If you will email me and request the file I will send you a properly formatted file that you will then be able to use in conjunction with a file entitled 5 Talking Points that is currently being updated and readied for this venture. Please give this a go.
emailing info to all of these folks would be tough. Many of them will only accept emails from people in their own districts.
If you would rather make phone calls, all of the DC phone numbers are available at several websites like those hiding under the Nickels. Write an original script and call as man folks as you can. If talking to a live person makes you a little nervous call after hours and leave voice mail. I did this for a couple of dozen Representatives that are participating in relevant subcommittees. It goes very quickly and is incredibly cathartic. I left messages for about a dozen members on the Energy Subcommittee.
2. Al Gore sings a very concerned song about the fate of the world. Let us bug the living daylights out of him at every turn to take a serious look at our cause.
3. CLICK ON ANY OF THE NICKELS BELOW AND YOU WILL BE TAKEN TO A WEB PAGE CHOCKED FULL OF GOVERNMENTAL OFFICES AND CONTACTS IN USA, CANADA, FRANCE AND HOLLAND THAT YOU CAN INFORM CONCERNING THE LATEST DEVELOPMENTS IN THE WORLD OF CONDENSED MATTER PHYSICS.
Send us a link to your reps along with coin image to me Cold Fusion Now for posting.
4. Go to www.oilprice.com and participate in an open forum that concerns LENR and other Condensed Matter Physics issues. This is a real inroad into the petrochemical industry, and an attempt on their part to get the low down on these technologies. Please put your 2 Nickels in.
5. Send emails to as many physics based associations, automobile manufacturers, oil, gas, and natural gas forums and companies imploring them to look at the new technologies coming down the road.
6. Here’s one more thing you can do.. There is a list of Physics and technology based associations a little farther down this page. Inquire at as many as you care to and ask them to rethink their stance if they have not gotten on board.
Survey of Institutional Support
Please take a look at the results. The test was what would be found by a simple search on LENR and/or cold fusion.
Results were negative, positive, limited discussion, and no mention at all.
An interesting look at varying attitudes.
* AAAS – American Association for the Advancement of Science neg
* American Center for Physics many orgs at site
* American Institute of Physics (AIP) pos
* American Mathematical Society didn’t query
* American Physical Society (APS) pos
* Board on Physics and Astronomy neg
* Canadian Association of Physicists neg
* FAS – Federation of American Scientists: pos I think, DIA report
* Max-Planck-Society (Fritz-Haber-Institut in Berlin-Dahlem) neg
* NAS – National Academy of Sciences : some limited discussion
* National Research Council some limited discussion
* National Society of Black Physicists (NSBP) neg
* Overseas Chinese Physics Association neg
* Ukrainian Physical Society Nongoverment Kyiv, Ukraine unclear
Applied Physics and Engineering
* ASEE American Society for Engineering Education no mention
* American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) no mention
* ASM International: The Materials Information Society (ASM) seems to be set against
* IEEE – Institute of Electrical and ELectronics Engineers
* IEEE – Computer Society
* IEE — Institution of Electrical Engineers (UK)
* International Union of Crystallograpy (IUCr)
* (The) Minerals, Metals & Materials Society (TMS) very positive
* National Academy of Engineering many pos
* Society for the Advancement of Material and Process Engineering no mention
From Physical and Life Sciences Directorate at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Discovery of Elements 113 and 115 [visit]:
This is just a funny little piece on “cold fusion”. A little different definition.
How are new elements discovered?
Several experimental techniques have been used to make new chemical elements. Some of these include heavy ion transfer reactions, cold or hot fusion evaporation reactions, neutron capture reactions, light-ion charged particle induced reactions, and even nuclear explosions. These techniques each have advantages and disadvantages making them suitable for studying nuclei in certain regions.
The types of nuclear reactions that have been successfully used to produce new elements in the last decade are cold fusion reactions and hot fusion reactions. Cold fusion reactions use beam and target nuclei that are closer to each other in mass in order to produce a compound nucleus (the complete fusion of one target nucleus with one beam nucleus) with generally lower excitation energy that typically requires evaporation of one or no neutrons. This generates fewer neutron-rich isotopes of an element that have higher survival probabilities with respect to fission, but have lower fusion probabilities. An example of this type of reaction is 70Zn + 208Pb → 277112 + 1n with a cross-section of ~1 picobarn.
Because the 112 isotope ultimately decays by a emission to known nuclei [namely isotopes of elements 102 (No) and 104 (Rf)], identification of this element is straightforward. Hot fusion reactions use more asymmetric beam and target nuclei, produce a compound nucleus with generally higher excitation energy that typically requires evaporation of three to five neutrons, generate more neutron-rich isotopes of an element, have lower survival probabilities with respect to fission, but have higher fusion probabilities. An example of this type of reaction is 48Ca + 244Pu → 288114 + 4n with a cross-section of ~1 pb. Because of the neutron-richness of this isotope of element 114, it never subsequently decays to any known isotope, and thus its identification is more problematic. Cold fusion reactions have been successful in producing elements 104—112 and hot fusion reactions have recently provided evidence for elements 113—116 and 118.