On the 30th Anniversary of the Discovery of the Cold Fusion Phenomenon by Hideo Kozima

On the 30th Anniversary of the Discovery of the Cold Fusion Phenomenon by Hideo Kozima [.pdf] was first published in the Cold Fusion Research Laboratory CFRL News No. 107 (2019. 3. 1)

March 23 is the birthday of the cold fusion phenomenon (CFP). On this day 30 years ago, the existence of the nuclear reactions in a solid at near room temperature was declared by Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons at the press conference held in the University of Utah, USA. This event, right or wrong, is the start of the open research on the CFP lasting 30 years since, and has given a specific destiny to the research field we have been involved in. The investigation on the physics of the CFP has lasted without interruption and is developing day by day now.

Martin Fleischmann (March 29, 1927 – August 3, 2012) on April 7, 1995 at his office in IMRA S.A. Science Center, Sophia Antipolis, Valbonne, France. (Photo by Hideo Kozima)

I would like to recollect the history of the cold fusion research from my point of view focusing at my research activity kept about 30 years from the beginning of this science.

First of all, it is necessary to recollect the great pioneering works accomplished by Martin Fleischmann. We give a brief survey of Fleischmann’s work in Section II focusing on his mental phase of the cold fusion research. It is interesting to notice the motivation of the scientist who discovered the new phenomenon – nuclear reactions in transition metal deuterides and hydrides at around room temperature – with an inappropriate premise on the nuclear reaction between two deuterons. In Appendix A, we cite several sentences on this point from writings by Martin Fleischmann.

Here, we give a short comment on the words “Cold Fusion Phenomenon” we used to call the events observed in CF materials, i.e. materials where the CFP has been observed.

We notice the words “Cold Fusion” and “Cold Fusion Phenomena” are used in the titles of several Fleischmann’s papers (c.f. Appendix A). In the words “Cold Fusion” he had given a special meaning as we see in Section II where we survey his mental process resulted in the discovery of the CFP

“Cold Fusion Phenomena” used by Fleischmann means whole events resulting from nuclear reactions occurring in materials composed of host elements (Pd, Ti) and deuterium. In the progress of research in this field, we know now that nuclear reactions occur not only in deuterium systems but also in protium systems. Furthermore, we know the observables related to the nuclear reactions in this field ranges not only to excess energy but also to transmuted nuclei including tritium, 4He, and neutron. We can guess that the events producing these products in such various materials had been called as “phenomena” by Fleischmann. He would has used “Cold Fusion Phenomena” to express whole research field he explored and developed since 1989 combining the “cold fusion” in his mind from the beginning and “phenomena” containing various events observed. Borrowing his terminology partially, we would like to use the “Cold Fusion Phenomenon” to call the whole events thus occurring in the CF materials where occur nuclear reactions at around room temperature without acceleration mechanisms for participating particles

I. My Research on the Science of the Cold Fusion Phenomenon

Hideo Kozima (left) and John Dash (right) in February 2001 (courtesy of Hideo Kozima for Infinite Energy Magazine.)

I have published two books and many papers on the CFP. The books are:

H. Kozima, Discovery of the Cold Fusion Phenomenon – Development of Solid State-Nuclear Physics and the Energy Crisis in the 21st Century –, Ohtake Shuppan Inc., 1998, ISBN 4-87186-044-2. [Kozima 1998]

H. Kozima, The Science of the Cold Fusion Phenomenon, – In Search of the Physics and Chemistry behind Complex Experimental Data Sets –, 1st Edition, Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2006, ISBN-13: 978-0-08045-110-7. [Kozima 2006]

These books give record to the progress of my research; Book 1 had shown effectiveness of the phenomenological approach with the TNCF model (trapped neutron catalyzed model). This is also understood as evidence of the participation of neutrons on the nuclear reactions in materials composed of host elements and hydrogen isotopes (CF materials) where occurs the CFP.

Book 2 had shown that the premises assumed in the TNCF model have been explained using quantum mechanics where a new feature of nuclear interactions between nuclei of host elements at lattice sites (lattice nuclei) and hydrogen isotopes at interstitial sites (interstitial protons/deuterons) works effectively to realize a new interaction between lattice nuclei not noticed before.

In addition to the possible new interaction between lattice nuclei, the effect of complexity on the CFP has been investigated in relation to various experimental data.

It should be mentioned here about an elaborate work by Edmund Storms who compiled and published an extensive list of papers until 2007 [Storms 2007]. This work is very useful to contemplate the total image of the CFP

I-1 The Subtitle of “The Discovery of the Cold Fusion Phenomenon”

The subtitle of the Book 1 is suggestive to the history of the cold fusion research: Development of Solid State-Nuclear Physics and the Energy Crisis in the 21st Century.

The first half of this subtitle is reflected in the papers I have presented at JCF 19 held on October 2018:

H. Kozima, “Development of the Solid State-Nuclear Physics,” Proc. JCF19, 19-15 (2019) (to be published), ISSN 2187-2260. [Kozima 2019c]

In this paper, the essential contents of the solid state-nuclear physics have been systematically surveyed. The complexity in the process of formation of the CF materials and the novel features of the interactions between host elements and occluded hydrogen isotopes have been extensively investigated.

Key concepts developed in our theory are;
(1) Complexity in formation of the metal-hydrogen superlattice
(2) Super-nuclear interaction between neutrons in different lattice nuclei
(3) Neutron energy bands and neutron drops in them
(4) Nuclear interactions between neutrons in the neutron bands and nuclei at disordered sites.

The second half of that subtitle “the Energy Crisis in the 21st Century” has shed various light on the cold fusion research. This problem is discussed below in Sections II and III.

I-2. The Subtitle of the book “The Science of the Cold Fusion Phenomenon”

We now take up the subtitle of the Second Book – In Search of the Physics and Chemistry behind Complex Experimental Data Sets –.

We have noticed many characteristics of the CFP observed in metal-hydrogen systems and carbon-hydrogen systems as pointed out in our papers [Kozima 2006, 2016a]. It should be noted here that the chemistry of the CFP seems to be a key factor to form the CF materials in the electrolytic systems [Kozima 2000b (Sec. 4)]. It was noticed a characteristic of the CF materials in the electrolytic systems is the preference of a cathode metal and an electrolyte: “It should be emphasized here that there are preference for combination of a cathode metal (Pd, Ni. Ti. Pt, Au, etc.), an electrolyte (Li, N, K, or Rb) and a solvent (D2O or H2O) to induce CFP.” [Kozima 2000b (p. 45)].

The physics of the CFP seems to be the fundamental factor for the occurrence of the nuclear reactions in the CF materials. Main efforts to explain the nuclear reactions in CF materials at near room temperature without any acceleration mechanisms have been endeavored as follows [Kozima 2004, 2006, 2013, 2016b, 2019c]. To give a unified explanation of these complex experimental data containing such characteristics, we have struggled with successive trials (shown below) arrived at our final image summarized in the paper published in 2019 [Kozima 2019c].

We follow the history of our research chronologically:

Observation of neutron emission from Pd/LiOH+H2D/Pt electrolytic system [Kozima 1990].

Proposal of the TNCF model (trapped neutron catalyzed model) assuming quasi-stable neutrons in CF materials [Kozima 1994].

Publication of Book I compiling experimental data analyzed by the TNCF model [Kozima 1998].

Proposal of the ND model (neutron drop model) assuming formation of the cf-matter containing neutron drops AZΔ composed of Z protons and (A – Z) neutrons [Kozima 2000a].

Publication of Book II compiling experimental data analyzed by the TNCF and ND models [Kozima 2006]

Explanation of the neutron energy band (one of central premises of the ND model) by a quantum mechanical verification of the super-nuclear interaction between neutrons in different lattice nuclei [Kozima 2009].

Compilation of three laws in the CFP induced from experimental data sets [Kozima 2012].

Explanation of the formation of the metal-hydrogen superlattice and the nature of the three laws in the CFP by complexity inherited in the CF materials [Kozima 2013].

Justification of the phenomenological approach using the TNCF and the ND models to the CFP by inductive logic and the meta-analysis [Kozima 2019c].

II. Martin Fleischmann – A Great Scientist who co-discovered the Cold Fusion Phenomenon

In this section, we follow Fleischmann’s idea which lead to the discovery of the cold fusion phenomenon (CFP) through his papers. We know that anyone can’t be omnipotent. Even Martin Fleischmann is, regrettably, not its exception. He had been uncomfortable in the d – d fusion reactions at several points* but remained there without stepping over its conceptual barrier to a mechanism applicable not only to deuterium systems but also to protium systems.

*There are several sentences showing his insight into new mechanisms for the CFP. Followings are some of them cited from his papers referred in this paper.

“The most surprising feature of our results however, is that reactions (v) and (vi) are only a small part of the overall reaction scheme and that the bulk of the energy release is due to an hitherto unknown nuclear process or processes ) presumably again due to deuterons).” [Fleischmann 1989 (p. 308)]

“In the development of any new area of research (and especially in one likely to arouse controversy!) it is desirable to achieve first of all a qualitative demonstration of the phenomena invoked in the explanation of the observations. It is the qualitative demonstrations which are unambiguous: the quantitative analyses of the experimental results can be the subject of debate but, if these quantitative analyses stand in opposition to the qualitative demonstration, then these methods of analysis must be judged to be incorrect.” [Fleischmann 1991 (p. 2)]“An important key to the understanding of the system is given by the strange properties of D and H and T in such lattices. We must ask: how can it be that D can exist at a ∼ 100 molar concentration and high supersaturations without forming D2 in the lattice?”

“How can it be that D diffuses so rapidly thorough the lattice (diffusion coefficient > 10–7 cm2s–1 greater than that of either h or T!) whereas He is practically immobile?”

The answer to the last questions, of course, that deuterium is present as the deuteron whereas 4He does not form α-particles.” [Fleischmann 1991 (p. 9)]

In Appendix A, we have collected several sentences showing Fleischmann’s ideas on the CFP; there are his interesting ideas from the original simple one resulted in the paper published in 1989 to later ones speculating possible mechanisms for various experimental data obtained in the progress of the science in this field. Short explanations are given for each sentences from my point of view at present by an afterthought.

III. Problems related to the “the Energy Crisis in the 21st Century”

In this section, we focus on the financial phase of the scientific research in modern society which has given enormous effects on the cold fusion research.

The financial support to scientific researches has been a fundamentally important problem to promote the research programs in the modern society. We have given a short investigation on this problem [Kozima 2017].
In the discovery and development of the CFP, there are shadows of this problem from the first up to present. The financial faces of the CF research until 1990 had been written in the DOE Report I published in 1989 [DOE 1989] and also written by Taubes [Taubes 1993] and by Huizenga [Huizenga 1992]. The same problem after 1989 until 2004 appeared in the DOE Report II published in 2004 [DOE 2004].

III-1. DOE Report I [DOE 1989]

The shortcomings of the DOE Report I were discussed in my book published in 1998 [Kozima 1998 (Sec. 1.2 DOE Report), 2016a (Sec. 2 DOE Reports 1989 and 2004)] as follows:

“The Committees in the Department of Energy had been composed of experts in relevant fields to the CFP and their technical opinions should be esteemed. It should, however, be pointed out limitations imposed on them by their duty different from the researchers in this field. Their duty binds them to confine their sight and also their expertise limits their investigation of the data of the CFP inside their field preventing extension of their sight.” [Kozima 2016a (p. 163)

Let us point out mistakes in the DOE report

Conclusion (1) is based on Conclusions (2) ~ (5), and it has no basis if Conclusions (2) ~ (5) are incorrect. The issue of excess heat and fusion products discussed in Conclusion (2) has significance only when D + D reaction is assumed as the main process. This assumption was adopted by the majority of the scientists at that time, including those who discovered cold fusion.

If there is some other mechanism governing the process, this argument is no longer valid. If you are searching for truth, whether one assumption made by a scientist is correct or not has no importance. You should search for the truth based on the fact that the phenomenon did occur. From this point of view, we will show, in Chapters 11 and 12, that it is possible to explain the results of cold fusion experiments without any inconsistency.

Conclusion (3) was based on the fact that the cold fusion phenomenon presented poor reproducibility. However, the reproducibility of a phenomenon is determined by the condition of the entire system, in which the process takes place. Simple analogy from other physical phenomena should not have been used to draw a conclusion. We will also show the reasons for the poor reproducibility and the way to improve it in Chapters 11 and 12.

Conclusion (4) only shows that the interpretations of the discoverers of cold fusion were not appropriate, and it has nothing to do with the truth. It is hard to believe that board members have made such an elementary mistake. It was found later that inside solid, such as Pd or Ti, with a combination of various factors, complex phenomena can occur. There is always such possibility in science. Today, it is quite obvious to everybody. The board members might have forgotten for some reason that natural science is built upon the fact.

Conclusion (5) is similar to Conclusion (4). If any new findings had been denied only because they were contradiction with the existing knowledge, there would have been no progress in science and there will not be any progress in the future.

The discussions expressed in the DOE Report remind us Procrustes’ bed. As Procrustes used his bed as an absolute standard to measure heights of his captives, the critiques against cold fusion used d – d reaction as an inevitable standard to judge anomalous events.” [Kozima 1998 (pp. 3 – 7)]
It is difficult to evaluate scientific works without a right point of view, even if he/she has enough knowledge about the theme of the works.

III-2. DOE Report II [DOE 2004

Almost 15 years since the DOE Report I, several scientists in the U.S.A. asked their Department of Energy to reconsider the evaluation issued in 1989.

The DOE Report 2004 [DOE 2004] has a different character from that of 1989. The new Report was issued according to the request presented by several CF researchers as a document [Hagelstein 2004].

“’The Department of Energy’s (DOE) Office of Science (SC) was approached in late 2003 by a group of scientists who requested that the Department revisit the question of scientific evidence for low energy nuclear reactions. In 1989 Pons and Fleischman first reported the production of “excess” heat in a Pd electrochemical cell, and postulated that this was due to D-D fusion (D=deuterium), sometimes referred to as ‘cold fusion.’ The work was reviewed in 1989 by the Energy Research Advisory Board (ERAB) of the DOE. ERAB did not recommend the establishment of special programs within DOE devoted to the science of low energy fusion, but supported funding of peer-reviewed experiments for further investigations. Since 1989, research programs in cold fusion have been supported by various universities, private industry, and government agencies in several countries.”[DOE 2004]

According to the limited evidences given to the DOE as clearly written in the above Abstract, the material is confined to the “The experimental evidence for anomalies in metal deuterides” and does not include the data obtained in the protium systems. Therefore, the material given to the DOE is necessarily an incomplete one to show the cold fusion phenomenon as a whole. However, the Report [DOE 2004] had merit to evaluate positive phases of the CF researches after the DOE Report 1989 [DOE 1989].

“Conclusion of DOE is cited as follows: “While significant progress has been made in the sophistication of calorimeters since the review of this subject in 1989, the conclusions reached by the reviewers today are similar to those found in the 1989 review.”

“The current reviewers identified a number of basic science research areas that could be helpful in resolving some of the controversies in the field, two of which were: 1) material science aspects of deuterated metals using modern characterization techniques, and 2) the study of particles reportedly emitted from deuterated foils using state-of-the-art apparatus and methods. The reviewers believed that this field would benefit from the peer-review processes associated with proposal submission to agencies and paper submission to archival journals.” [DOE 2004]

It should be cited one of the positive comments in the Report as follows:

“It is now clear that loading level and current density thresholds are required in order to observe excess heat in these experiments. The values are consistent regardless of the approach used and the laboratory where the experiment was conducted. Early failures to reproduce the heat effect were, in part, due to not meeting these requirements. It has also been found that thermal and current density transients, which are thought to effect the chemical environment such as deuterium flux, can trigger heat ‘events’. “

“SRI has published an expression for the correlation between excess power and current density, loading, and deuterium flux. These discoveries have led to a better understanding of the phenomena and more reproducibility.” (Reviewer #9) [Kozima 2016a (pp. 164 – 165)]

Even if the nuclear transmutation in the CFP was excluded from the investigation by experts in the review team of DOE, the partial positive evaluation given in their Report was encouraging to the cold fusion society.

III-3. Two Books by Huizenga [Huizenga 1992] and Taubes [Taubes 1993]

The unpleasant episodes about the financial support around researchers described by Taubes in detail in his book [Taubes 1993] and the movement in the State of Utah to establish the National Cold Fusion Institute described by Huizenga [Huizenga 1992 (Chap. X)] had made the atmosphere around the cold fusion research dark or even black. These episodes had given very strong negative influence about the CFP on scientists all over the world.

Some examples of the negative influence are seen in book reviews for these books. The scientists wrote these reviews by only reading the books by Huizenga [Huizenga 1992] and Taubes [Taubes 1993] without reading original papers and contemplating experimental data written there. Even if a scientist is trained in one of established branches of modern science, it is not easy to understand the pioneering work in a truly novel field of researches if he/she don’t use his/her scientific spirit for the field which is alien to him/her.

It should be remembered that there is a scientist in the Cold Fusion Panel in the U.S. Department of Energy who insisted to add several words on reservation to deny the existence of the cold fusion events making the preamble as follows:

“A. Preamble Ordinarily, new scientific discoveries are claimed to be consistent and reproducible; as a result, if the experiments are not complicated, the discovery can usually be confirmed or disproved in a few months. The claims of cold fusion, however, are unusual in that even the strongest proponents of cold fusion assert that the experiments, for unknown reasons, are not consistent and reproducible at the present time.”

“However, even a single short but valid cold fusion period would be revolutionary. As as a result, it is difficult convincingly to resolve all cold fusion claims since, for example, any good experiment that fails to find cold fusion can be discounted as merely not working for unknown reasons.”

“Likewise the failure of a theory to account for cold fusion can be discounted on the grounds that the correct explanation and theory has not been provided. Consequently, with the many contradictory existing claims it is not possible at this time to state categorically that all the claims for cold fusion have been convincingly either proved or disproved. Nonetheless, on balance, the Panel has reached the following conclusions and recommendations:” [DOE 1989 (V. Conclusions and Recommendations, A. Preamble, p. 36), Kozima 1989 (Sec. 1.2 DOE Report), 2016a (Sec. 2)]

IV Conclusion

The history of the CF research in these 30 years since the observation of a part of the CFP induced by nuclear reactions in a CF material is a typical story of discovery of a new science. There had been no framework to put the events in it and we had to treat them by trial-and-error. In the processes of trial-and-error, there were many unintentional errors which might be, regrettably, supposed intentional. The social condition for scientific activity in modern times has been severe asking shortsighted success for investment which is not fit with science.

I have endeavored to give a unified scientific explanation for the complicated variety of experimental data obtained in various CF materials. Fortunately, the phenomenological approach using a model with the trapped neutrons in CF materials could explain experimental data qualitatively and sometimes quasi-quantitatively. As summarized in Section I, our trial on this line developed to enclose whole phases of the CFP. I hope that my system of explanation for the CFP thus established may be, at least, a tiny step to establish the solid state-nuclear physics even if I remember in my mind a sentence I wrote above anyone can’t be omnipotent. However, I would be behind the words “to err is human; to forgive, divine.”

Appendices

Appendix A. Martin Fleischmann on the Cold Fusion Phenomenon

[Fleischmann 1989] M, Fleischmann, S. Pons and M. Hawkins, “Electrochemically induced Nuclear Fusion of Deuterium,” J. Electroanal. Chem., 261, 301 – 308 (1989), ISSN: 1572-6657

[Fleischmann 1990] M. Fleischmann, “An Overview of Cold Fusion Phenomena,” ICCF1 lecture (March 31. 1990, Saturday), Proc. ICCF1, pp. 344 – 350 (1990)

[Fleischmann 1991] M. Fleischmann, “Present Status of Research in Cold Fusion,” Proc. ICCF2, Addition to the Conference Proceedings, pp. 1 – 10 (1991), ISBN 88-7794-045-X

[Fleischmann 1998a] M. Fleischmann, “Abstract” to “Cold Fusion: Past, Present and Future,” Proc. ICCF7.

[Fleischmann 1998b] M. Fleischmann, “Cold Fusion: Past, Present and Future,” Proc. ICCF7, pp. 119 – 127 (1998). ENECO Inc., Salt Lake City, Utah, USA

[Fleischmann 1989] Martin Fleischmann had considered the realization of the dream F. Paneth dreamed 70 years ago that deuterons will fuse in a palladium metal where they are occluded with a very high concentration.

“A feature which is of special interest and which prompted the present investigation, is the very high H/D separation factor for absorbed hydrogen and deuterium. This can be explained only fi the H+ and D+ in the lattice behave as classical oscillators (possibly as delocalised species) i.e. they must be in very shallow potential wells. In view of the very high compression and mobility of the dissolved species there must therefore be a significant number of close collisions and one can pose the question: would nuclear fusion of D+ such as
2D + 2D → 3T (1.01 MeV) + 1H (3.02 MeV) (v)
2D + 2D → 3Te (0.82 MeV) + n (2.45 MeV) (vi)
be feasible under these conditions?” ([Fleischmann 1989 (p. 302)]

However, it is interesting to notice following sentences in the same paper:
“The most surprising feature of our results however, is that reactions (v) and (vi) are only a small part of the overall reaction scheme and that the bulk of the energy release is due to an hitherto unknown nuclear process or processes ) presumably again due to deuterons).” [ibid. (p. 308)]

His motivation to this experiment published as a preliminary note in the Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry was printed in his later article [Fleischmann 1993a]

The controversial contents of this paper in addition to other data obtained following few years had been consistently analyzed by the TNCF model [Kozima 1997].

“- – – We, for our part, would not have started this investigation if we had accepted the view that nuclear reactions in host lattices could not be affected by coherent processes. The background to this research has been presented from the point of view of the behavior of D+ in palladium cathodes since this has been our exclusive concern. A somewhat different account would be relevant to the behavior of deuterium in titanium, the other system which has been the subject of intensive research following the description of the generation of low levels of neutrons during cathodic polarization.” [Fleischmann 1990 (p. 347)]

“It is now also essential to broaden the base of the research to include both the quantitative evaluation of the effects of the many variables leading to the control and optimization of particular outputs (compare(46) ) and the extension of the range of systems showing the various effects. For the Pd-D system the central conundrum, the disparity of the excess enthalpy generation and of the expected nuclear products according to reactions (i) and (ii) however remains unsolved. It is clear that there must be other nuclear reaction paths of high cross-section and that these will only be discovered by a careful search for products on the surface and in the bulk of the electrodes (as well as in the solution and gas spaces).” [ibid. (p. 348)] [Fleischmann 1991]

He seems to have had realized the nature of the CFP and necessity of qualitative approach which had been elucidated in our recent paper [Kozima 2019b].

“In the development of any new area of research (and especially in one likely to arouse controversy!) it is desirable to achieve first of all a qualitative demonstration of the phenomena invoked in the explanation of the observations. It is the qualitative demonstrations which are unambiguous: the quantitative analyses of the experimental results can be the subject of debate but, if these quantitative analyses stand in opposition to the qualitative demonstration, then these methods of analysis must be judged to be incorrect.” [Fleischmann 1991 (p. 2)]

He was persisting in the d – d fusion reactions: “The most rudimentary measurements of the generation of tritium and of the neutron flux (or rather the lack of it!) show that the nuclear reaction paths
2D + 2D → 3T (1.01 MeV) + 1H (3.02 MeV) (i)
2D + 2D → 3Te (0.82 MeV) + n (2.45 MeV) (ii)
which are dominant in high energy fusion (and which have roughly equal cross-sections under those conditions) contribute to only a very small extent to the observed phenomena.

We reach the conclusions:
i. The lattice has an important influence on the nuclear processes;
ii. The observed processes are substantially aneutronic;
iii. The generation of excess enthalpy is the main signature of these new nuclear processes.” [Fleischmann 1991 (p. 4)]

He was aware of the correlation between the super-diffusivity of D in Pd and the CFP in it.

“An important key to the understanding of the system is given by the strange properties of D and H and T in such lattices. We must ask: how can it be that D can exist at a ∼ 100 molar concentration and high supersaturations without forming D2 in the lattice?”

“How can it be that D diffuses so rapidly thorough the lattice (diffusion coefficient > 10–7 cm2s–1 greater than that of either h or T!) whereas He is practically immobile?”

“The answer to the last questions, of course, that deuterium is present as the deuteron whereas 4He does not form α-particles.” [Fleischmann 1991 (p. 9)]

This point has been explained in our recent paper [Kozima 2019c]

[Fleischmann 1998a, 1998b] He explained his basic concept of his experiment on the CFP done before 1989.

“In 1983, Stanley Pons and I posed ourselves the following two question:
i) Would the nuclear reactions of deuterons confined in a lattice be faster (and different) from the fusion of deuterons in a plasma?
ii) Could such nuclear reactions be detected?” [Fleischmann 1998a]

He was adhered to the d – d fusion reactions and looking for a mechanism to realize them in solids. He considered the Q.F.T (quantum field theory) is the savior for his expectation:

“- – – The scientific importance lies in the fact that whereas the Bohm-Aharanov Effect is a clear demonstration of the need to replace the C.M. (classical mechanics) by the Q.M. (quantum mechanics) paradigm, the Coehn-Aharanov Effect (indeed, “Cold Fusion” in general) is a demonstration of the need to go one step further to the Q.F.T. (quantum field theory) paradigm.” [Fleischmann 1998b (p. 123)]

References

[DOE 1989] DOE, “Cold Fusion Research,” November 1989, A Report of the Energy Research Advisory Board to the United States Department of Energy, Washington, DC 20585. DOE/S – – 0073, DE90 005611

[DOE 2004] “Report of the Review of Low Energy Nuclear Reactions.”
http://www.science.doe.gov/Sub/Newsroom/News_Releases/DOE-SC/2004/low_energy/CF_Final_120104.pdf. This report is posted at the New Energy Times website:
http://newenergytimes.com/v2/government/DOE2004/7Papers.shtm

[Fleischmann 1989] M, Fleischmann, S. Pons and M. Hawkins, “Electrochemically induced Nuclear Fusion of Deuterium,” J. Electroanal. Chem., 261, 301 – 308 (1989), ISSN: 1572-6657

[Fleischmann 1990] M. Fleischmann, “An Overview of Cold Fusion Phenomena,” ICCF1 lecture (March 31. 1990, Saturday), Proc. ICCF1, pp. 344 – 350 (1990)

[Fleischmann 1991] M. Fleischmann, “Present Status of Research in Cold Fusion,” Proc. ICCF2, Addition to the Conference Proceedings, pp. 1 – 10 (1991), ISBN 88-7794-045-X

[Fleischmann 1998a] M. Fleischmann, “Abstract” to “Cold Fusion: Past, Present and Future,” Proc. ICCF7

[Fleischmann 1998b] M. Fleischmann, “Cold Fusion: Past, Present and Future,” Proc. ICCF7, pp. 119 – 127 (1998). ENECO Inc., Salt Lake City, Utah, USA

[Hagelstein 2004] P.L. Hagelstein, M.C. H. McKubre, D.J. Nagel, T.A. Chubb, and R.J. Hekman, “New Physical Effects in Metal Deuterides,” (paper presented to DOE) posted at DOE website:
http://www.science.doe.gov/Sub/Newsroom/News_Releases/DOE-SC/2004/low_energy/CF_Final_120104.pdf

[Huizenga 1992] J.R. Huizenga, Cold Fusion―The Scientific Fiasco of the Century, University of Rochester Press, Rochester, NY, USA, 1992. ISBN 1-87882-207-1

[Kozima 1990] H. Kozima, S. Oe, K. Hasegawa, H. Suganuma, M. Fujii, T. Onojima, K. Sekido and M. Yasuda, “Experimental Investigation of the Electrochemically Induced Nuclear Fusion,” Report of Faculty of Science, Shizuoka University, 24, pp. 29 -34 (1990), ISSN 0583-0923

[Kozima 1994] H. Kozima, “Trapped Neutron Catalyzed Fusion of Deuterons and Protons in Inhomogeneous Solids,” Transact. Fusion Technol., 26, 508 – 515 (1994), ISSN: 0748-1896.

[Kozima 1997] H. Kozima, S. Watanabe, K. Hiroe, M. Nomura, M. Ohta and K. Kaki, “Analysis of Cold Fusion Experiments generating Excess Heat, Tritium and Helium,” J. Electroanal. Chem., 425, pp. 173 – 178 (1997), ISSN 1572-6657.

[Kozima 1998] H. Kozima, Discovery of the Cold Fusion Phenomenon – Development of Solid State-Nuclear Physics and the Energy Crisis in the 21st Century –, Ohtake Shuppan Inc., 1998, ISBN 4-87186-044-2.

[Kozima 2000a] H. Kozima. “Neutron Drop: Condensation of Neutrons in Metal Hydrides and Deuterides”, Fusion, Technol. 37, 253 – 258 (2000), ISSN 0748-1896.

[Kozima 2000b] H. Kozima, “Electroanalytical Chemistry in Cold Fusion Phenomenon,” Recent Research Development in Electroanalytical Chemistry, Vol. 2 – 2000, pp. 35 – 46, Ed. S.G. Pandalai, Transworld Research Network, (2000), ISBN 81-86846-94-8.

[Kozima 2004] H. Kozima, “Quantum Physics of Cold Fusion Phenomenon,” in Developments in Quantum Physics, Ed. V. Krasnoholovets and F. Columbus, Nova Science Pub. Inc., pp. 167 – 196 (2004), ISBN 1-59454-003-9.

[Kozima 2006] H. Kozima, The Science of the Cold Fusion Phenomenon, – In Search of the Physics and Chemistry behind Complex Experimental Data Sets –, 1st Edition, Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2006, ISBN-13: 978-0-08045-110-7.

[Kozima 2009] H. Kozima, “Non-localized Proton/Deuteron Wavefunctions and Neutron Bands in Transition-metal Hydrides/Deuterides,” Proc. JCF9, pp. 84 – 93 (2009), ISSN 2187-2260. http://jcfrs.org/proc_jcf.html

[Kozima 2012] H. Kozima, “Three Laws in the Cold Fusion Phenomenon and Their Physical Meaning,” Proc. JCF12 (Kobe, Japan, December 17 – 18, 2011), pp. 101 – 114 (2012), ISSN 2187-2260. http://jcfrs.org/proc_jcf.htm

[Kozima 2013] H. Kozima, “Cold Fusion Phenomenon in Open, Nonequilibrium, Multi-component Systems – Self-organization of Optimum Structure,” Proc. JCF13 13-19, pp. 134 – 157 (2013), ISSN 2187-2260

[Kozima 2016a] H. Kozima, “From the History of CF Research – A Review of the Typical Papers on the Cold Fusion Phenomenon –,” Proc. JCF16, 16-13, pp. 116‐157 (2016), ISSN 2187-2260 and posted at the JCF website; http://www.jcfrs.org/proc_jcf. html

[Kozima 2016b] H. Kozima and K. Kaki, “The Cold Fusion Phenomenon and Neutrons in Solids,” Proc. JCF16, 16-14, 158 – 198 (2016), ISSN 2187-2260 at the JCF website: http://jcfrs.org/file/jcf16-proceedings.pdf

[Kozima 2017] H. Kozima, “The Sociology of the Cold Fusion Phenomenon – An Essay –,” Proc. JCF17, 17-13, pp. 148‐219 (2017), ISSN 2187-2260 and posted at the JCF website: http://www.jcfrs.org/proc_jcf. html

[Kozima 2019a] H. Kozima and H. Yamada, “Characteristics of the Cold Fusion Phenomenon,” Reports of CFRL, 19-1, pp. 1 – 31 (2019) posted at CFRL website:
http://www.kozima-cfrl.com/Papers/paperf/paperf.html


[Kozima 2019b] H. Kozima, “Inductive Logic and Meta-analysis in the Cold Fusion Phenomenon,” Reports of CFRL, 19-2, pp. 1 – 26 (2019) posted at CFRL website:
http://www.kozima-cfrl.com/Papers/paperf/paperf.html

[Kozima 2019c] H. Kozima, “Development of the Solid State-Nuclear Physics,” Proc. JCF19, 19-3 , pp. 1 – 36 (2019) posted at CFRL website:
http://www.kozima-cfrl.com/Papers/paperf/paperf.html

[Storms 2007] E. Storms, The Science of Low Energy Nuclear Reaction – A Comprehensive Compilation of Evidence and Explanations about Cold Fusion –, World Scientific, Singapore, 2007, ISBN-10 981-270-620-8

[Taubes 1993] G. Taubes, Bad Science―The Short Life and Weird Times of Cold Fusion, Random House Inc., New York, USA, 1993, ISBN 0-394-58456-2

List of papers published by the Cold Fusion Research Laboratory [html][.pdf]

(On March 23, 2019 at the 30th Anniversary of the Discovery of the CFP) —Hideo Kozima

On the 30th Anniversary of the Discovery of the Cold Fusion Phenomenon by Hideo Kozima [.pdf] was first published in the Cold Fusion Research Laboratory CFRL English News No. 107 (2019. 3. 1)

Tadahiko Mizuno rewards CMNS community with test reactor

Nuclear chemist and veteran LENR researcher Dr. Tadahiko Mizuno is now in the recovery phase after an earthquake damaged sensitive equipment in his laboratory in Hokkaido, and the CMNS community is assisting in the repair and replacement of lab apparatus that will allow him to continue his successful excess heat research.

“I have experienced earthquakes many times before. Each one was terrible, but this time it was a bit different,” said Dr. Mizuno of the shaking.

“The fact that the laboratory was hurt by the unexpected, the fact that the building was broken – and the biggest thing is that electricity and water stopped for a few days. Earthquakes up to that point did not have that kind of thing, rather it was very localized. This time, the lab would clearly be effected.”

Like many scientists in Japan, Dr. Mizuno had prepared for a disaster like this. He says,

“Naturally, this kind of situation was contemplated. A few years ago Sapporo produced a scenario of a devastating earthquake, with almost all the buildings collapsed. There was no electricity, no water, no food- it was a cold winter game-plan. It was so realistic, it was a revelation to seriously prepare for disaster prevention.”

“We fixed everything that we could install, such as fixing shelves, setting fire extinguishers, emergency food, water, power generation radio. Of course I persuaded others to proceed with preparation. I was warning everyone!”

“A few days before, a metallic ringing continued in my ears, and an earthquake came in the middle of the night when it stopped. No matter how much preparation it was, the damage was something I could not escape.”

The quake on 3/11/11 which caused the ensuing tsunami and Fukushima disaster was foremost in his mind.

“I also had the same experience on March 11, 2011. At that time I took a day off and was vegetating in front of the TV. A loud audible alarm sounded from the TV and mobile phone, and soon a big earthquake swing came. I think everyone is aware of the situation of the subsequent disasters.”

“At that time, I was preparing CF experiments to control the heat. It seems that it was telling me to hurry again this time. I feel such a presence of God.”

Glow discharge makes significant excess power

Dr. Mizuno has been investigating both LENR excess heat and transmutations since 1989. He has written and edited several books, among them, Nuclear Transmutation: The Reality of Cold Fusion published in 1998, detailing the massive excess heat he witnessed in his earliest experiments, and the slow realization over years that there were also transmutations occurring, too.

Working as Hydrogen Engineering Application & Development HEAD, Dr. Mizuno has been part of the extraordinary collaboration between industry and academia in Japan, recently working with Clean Planet, Inc and the Condensed Matter Nuclear Science CMNS division at the Research Center for Electron Photon Science ELPH at Tohoku University.

Hideki Yoshino, the founder and CEO of Clean Planet and an organizer of collaborative LENR research, reported on Mizuno’s work at the CF/LANR Colloquium at MIT in 2014.

In that presentation, Yoshino described results from 73 tests of Mizuno’s gas discharge system where a treated nickel mesh cathode reacted with D2 gas at temperatures above 200 degrees C and pressures of 100-300 pascals using a palladium rod wrapped in palladium wire as an anode.

ICCF-21 Slide showing glow discharge reactor schematics.

In one test run, a total input power of 80 Watts produced 78 Watts excess thermal power out. Continuing for 35 days before it was turned off, the total excess energy produced was 108 MegaJoules.

The only problem? Reactions would not start sometimes until one, two, even three years later! A new method of preparing the electrodes would have to be found in order to create a reaction more quickly, and explore the parameter space of the system.

From Observation of Excess Heat by Activated Metal and Deuterium Gas by T. Mizuno JCMNS V25
Previously, the nickel mesh and palladium were carefully cleaned and then put to glow discharge, which Mizuno says creates the required nano-particles in the process. In 2017, understanding that the nickel mesh is where the reaction is located, he decided to try applying palladium directly to the nickel beforehand.

In the paper Observation of Excess Heat by Activated Metal and Deuterium Gas published in JCMNS V25 [.pdf], Mizuno writes,

“With unprocessed nickel, it is impossible to generate excess heat at all. However, if the surface is covered with particles and further Pd is present on the surface, excess heat is easily generated. The smaller the particles are, and the more Pd is uniformly present, the more the excess heat is generated.”

A new method treats the nickel by physically rubbing the palladium rod on the mesh before glow discharge begins. A second new method used electroless plating to plate palladium on the nickel mesh.

Mizuno excess power experiment is reproduced

At the 21st International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science ICCF-21 held June 2018, Jed Rothwell presented some of the results of experiments using the new methods of electrode preparation.

See the ICCF-21 video presentation on Tadahiko Mizuno’s work here. Download the presentation .pdf file here.

Jed Rothwell runs the LENR science paper archive http://lenr-canr.org/ and is the author of Cold Fusion and the Future [.pdf]. He has translated many of Dr. Mizuno’s papers and books from Japanese into English. Mizuno writes:

“Jed has been involved in our research of CF work for 25 years, from 1993 to 2018. He analyzed our testing methods, our adiabatic thermal measurement method, and our air cooling method test results. He found problems and contributed to many improvements of the test method. Jed himself wrote the manuscript paper and based on these many contributions, Jed is the co-author of that paper.”

He added,

“He has also struggled to collect research funds for us. Without this funding, our CF work may have been impossible.”

The air-flow calorimetry system used by Tadahiko Mizuno from the ICCF-21 presentation (2018).

In the ICCF-21 presentation, Rothwell revealed that the new methods of electrode preparation have successfully decreased the time to reaction to about a week or two, but sadly, the change in materials preparation has reduced power output to only 5-20% of previous values, now measuring about 20-40 Watts excess thermal.

For 38 active tests, 19 using each of the two new methods, all tests but five produced about 5% excess power, with five of those 38 tests producing 15% or more excess thermal power.

There have been valid concerns with his data, and Dr. Mizuno has been responsive. For instance, he showed that the resistance heater is not part of the excess by performing glow discharge with an ordinary nickel mesh (without treatment) and producing only the amount of heat as resistance heating.

It seems addressing the objections has only strengthened the conclusions, as they should.

In fact, a team of scientists Takehiko Itoh, Yasuhiro Iwamura, Jirohta Kasagi from ELPH at Tohoku University and Hiroki Shishido from the Quantum Science and Energy Engineering Department also at Tohoku University, were able to successfully reproduce excess heat using a system almost identical to Mizuno’s, though with less heat output, only generating about 7 Watts thermal. [See Anomalous Excess Heat Generated by the Interaction between Nano-structured Pd/Ni Surface and D2 Gas in JCMNS V24 [.pdf].]

Extrapolating to 700 degrees C should produce 1 kiloWatt. From ICCF-21 presentation file.

Mizuno believes that extrapolating data relating temperature and excess power (here showing the earlier high-output data) to 700 degrees C could produce 1 kiloWatt of excess thermal power, a number Jed Rothwell notes is “much better energy density and Carnot efficiency than a fission reactor core.”

Community generosity is rewarded with test reactor

When the 6.7 earthquake hit Hokkaido on September 6, 2018, damage to the sensitive lab equipment was enough to spell an end to research. At 73 years young, it’s not easy to start over again. Describing the damage to the lab, Dr. Mizuno was optimistic about repairs saying,

“Although the shelf did not collapse, inside the lab was knocked-about. The SEM, the fluorescent X-ray equipment, and the experimental equipment which had just been installed, moved around as much as 10 cm, and the connections and vacuum were destroyed.”

“Fortunately, there is a lot of experience around able to repair the equipment, and we can fix some too, if we can make the time.

The CMNS community came together to help. Physicist and LENR scientist Dr. Dennis Cravens started a gofundme fundraiser to help with costs:

“Do unto others. If Tadahiko is correct, it is a promising path that he should continue to follow. He had been working alone without encouragement for years – and there were many years early on with no results. I know how that must feel- being alone and unappreciated. I have had many years like that.”

“We raised about $8,500 dollars. The amount sent was lightly adjusted by Go Fund Me fees and currency exchange costs getting it here to there. I should also say a few people wired money directly.”

That generosity will stretch a long way to fix the equipment, and spirits. Upon hearing of the campaign, Mizuno was overcome:

“I am very thankful to everyone for helping me. I thought for a long time that I was studying CF work all alone. I thought it was checkmate due to the earthquake damage on 6th September. I was pessimistic that I could not repair the equipment, and all was over. However, that was not so. Many friends have stepped up and supported my CF research. I was so happy, tears came to my eyes. This was the first time I have felt this way during the more than 70 years I have been alive. I am very happy that people were so kind, and am happy thinking about it. I am very grateful to everyone. I will never forget the efforts of my friends.”

Dr. Mizuno wanted to do something special and so he offered up one of his reactors to a researcher in the community to test.

Small thank-you reactor by Mizuno from Lenr-forum.

“The money you raised will be used to repair my equipment, especially the scanning electron microscope, and, part of the money will be used for the production cost of a small reactor that I am sending to another lab that has agreed to test it. I think it will produce excess heat. And I think that other researchers in the world will confirm and announce excess heat generation by these methods. Thank you again.”

Sindre Zeiner-Gundersen is Director of Operations of Norrønt AS, a company providing engineering project management and patent development. He is also a PhD candidate in Physics who has been researching ultra-dense hydrogen and Rydberg matter with PhD supervisor Svein Olafsson in Iceland and Norway’s Professor Svein Holmlid.

Zeiner-Gundersen, based in the Oslo-area of Norway, has just received the reactor from Mizuno.

“I’m guessing I was one of the first to contact Mizuno after his lab went down in the earthquake, to continue and verify his important work, and I’m also working in a well equipped lab as well. Opening the shipping box was like Christmas. All the excitement in the world.”

“I believe its not the glow discharge reactor but filled with ZrPd powder that will activate when the temperature reaches a critical point after being loaded with deuterium. I think this is the same design that yielded 12% excess heat that Jed presented at ICCF21.”

“I’m still waiting for further operating instructions before testing and I’m setting up flow calorimetry, and programming Labview data acquisition to measure everything from: voltage, current, 8 temp sensors, pressure, charged particles, alfa, beta, gamma and neutrons.”

The CMNS community, long isolated from mainstream support, knows that working together is the path to success. Sindre Zeiner-Gundersen maintains

“… the most valuable work we as researchers can do is to collaborate, share data, replicate and verify the work preformed by the best researchers in this field.”

After 30-years of breakthrough research, Tadahiko Mizuno is just getting started. He’s organizing the lab again for a new round of experiments and consulting on a reproduction half-way around the world. When asked if he will be able to build upon such spectacular results he says:

“It is all about making an excess-heat generation CF device. There is no reason not to be able to do it. This is my job.”

Akito Takahashi reports on the MHE: bigger composite samples and bigger heat

In the global field of LENR, few groups match the productivity of Japanese researchers. With a longtime history of collaboration between academia and industry, the rich and wide-ranging scientific results have enabled groups on the island to develop long-term data on systems, successfully reproduce key experiments, and grow a diverse and comprehensive team of researchers training young scientists.

Now, a collection of stunning results is reported from a two-year collaborative project focused on generating excess heat with the Metal Hydrogen Energy MHE reactor within a budget of 1 million dollars.

The six institutions of Kyushu University, Tohoku University, Nagoya University, Kobe University, the Nissan Motors Co. and Technova Inc, a division of Toyota, worked together from design to analysis, each contributing their specialty. The goal was to verify the existence of the Anomalous Heat Effect AHE in nano-metal and hydrogen gas interactions, and seek to control the effect.

The first MHE arose in 2012 at Kobe University, and now, there’s an additional reactor at Tohoku University, one with a new calorimetry design for comparative results.

A total of 16 collaborative tests have generated an average of 7-8 Watts excess thermal power, but that bumps up to 20 Watts excess on some sample runs, with no appreciable radiation from gammas or neutrons above background levels detected.

The MHE reactor at Tohoku University

According to the team, the regular success in generating heat is due to the composite materials specially developed to host the reaction, which researchers there say is required to initiate a reaction in their system. Nano-powder mixes 2-10 nanometers wide of palladium, nickel, and zirconium, and copper, nickel and zirconium, have provided excess heat greater than single palladium or nickel metal reactors.

The MHE group is also using larger amounts of host material. 200-gram samples are divided into two 100-gram samples, and sent to different labs. When tested under the same conditions, similar heat profiles are observed, producing 2-8 Watts for a week. That wouldn’t be news in any other field, but in LENR/cold fusion, this is a huge step towards nailing down this reaction.

It’s expensive, but more host material makes more heat

One Cu-Ni-Zir sample produced an anomalous heat burst peaking at 110 Watts thermal, then, dropping down to 2 Watts sustained for a day. The total energy produced by the burst: 300 kiloJoules.

The largest excess heat data was generated in the 14th collaborative experiment when a 124-gram palladium-nickel-zirconium sample generated 10-20 Watts thermal power for a month.

Dr. Akito Takahashi is one of the members on this team that has been working on the problem of cold fusion reproducibility since the early days. A nuclear engineer and senior advisor in the Thermal Energy and Technology group with Technova, he is one of the stars of a crowded Japanese field teeming with talent, and whose range of research have helped transform investigations into the Anomalous Heat Effect into a fast evolving field of Condensed Matter Nuclear Science, where the parade of nuclear effects keep on surprising scientists.

He spoke at the recent ICCF-21 conference and gave an update on results from the 2-year collaborative project that he led, and what’s next for the perrenial MHE heat machine. You can watch his presentation on Youtube here and download the ICCF-21 presentation file here.

Cold Fusion Now! asked Dr. Akito Takahashi about his career in cold fusion, the MHE project, and the theoretical model he developed to try to explain and give direction to research.


RUBY Dr. Takahashi, you are an original cold fusion scientist. Can you tell us what prompted you to first start researching cold fusion, and how long did it take for you to get results?

AT In March-May 1989 after the F-P big claim of cold fusion, I was skeptical. However, the Tienanmen Crisis in Beijing China gave me a chance to get involved in cold fusion research. At that time I was busily involved in the DT fusion blanket neutronics project the US, Japan and China were collaborating on. Suddenly, the project was suspended due to the Tienanmen Crisis and I had some free time.

My expertise was in neutron physics experiment since 1965. If cold fusion is real, the F-P heavy water electrolysis should emit 2.45 MeV neutrons by d-d fusion as Steve Jones of BYU claimed. This was the common sense effect that mainstream nuclear physics people (I was one of them) would look for.

Curiosity moved me to try neutron detection with spectroscopy, which I was very familiar with, by heavy water electrolysis with palladium cathode. After several weeks in trial, I could see weak component of 2.45 MeV d-d fusion neutrons. However, the observed neutron level was very weak. If the F-P claim of anomalous thermal power (heat) in a few watts level was by cold d-d fusion reactions, ca. ten-to-the 12th order 10^12 neutrons per watt were lethal, but my observed neutron level was very very weak at ten-to-the MINUS 13th order 10^-13 level of required d-d fusion reactions. It was so curious to me. Something new and nuclear-like should have happened.

In a few weeks, I proposed a model and send a short note to journal (JNST: Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology). The proposed model is the multi-body deuteron fusion theory in deuterium-absorbed metal. After about 25 years elaboration, the theory has been established as CCF (condensed cluster fusion) theory. The TSC (tetrahedral symmetric condensation) theory is the key term of theory.

Along with theoretical works, I have done many experiments on anomalous heat effect and nuclear products detection by using designed CF experimental devices for the last 30 years, under the view of CCF model guide line. Curiosity is what drives me.

Recently, I have become aware of repeated observations with convincing experimental results by the deuterium or light-hydrogen gas charging method using new concept nano-composite metal powders, which are consistent with theoretical mechanisms of CCF theory in combination of dynamic interactions of nuclear, molecular, surface-catalytic and metal solid state physics. By doing so, it has past the 30-years-mark of continued work.

RUBY You and the team of collaborators working with you, are continuing to reach for bigger results with the Metal Hydrogen Energy system, and you are getting it! What is so special about the materials you are now using?

AT Our knowledge now is: Pure palladium and nickel (even nano-powders) do not work to produce sustaining large (namely, several tens watts, currently) excess heat at practically useable elevated temperatures as 300-400 degree C. We need bi-metallic nano-composite (or nano-islands) structures in ceramics supporter flakes. Pd1Ni7/zirconia and Cu1Ni7/zirconia are typical hopeful powder samples.

We have started with 50-100g powder samples in MHE reaction chamber, and observed several-weeks sustaining anomalous heat of ca. 10 watts thermal power level, by deuterium or H-charging. Integrated excess heat in a month run reached typically 300 MJ per mol-D. So, produced energy density is more than 1000 times of gasoline-burning and is very difficult to explain by chemical reaction mechanisms and we are considering the CCF-like nuclear origin.

However, about 10 watts thermal power is still considerably low power density to be applied for industrial energy devices; we need scaling-up. To increase amount of sample is a first simple approach, which we are now attempting. To manufacture nano-composite powders with controlled nano-islands (in 2-10 nm size) is an essential approach.

In the latest result that we reported at JCF19 Meeting, November 9, 2018 in Morioka Japan, we observed anomalously large heat burst. The burst happened in about 100 seconds with approximately 3 kW thermal power, impulsively. If we will be able to control and elongate this level power generation for much longer time, we will be approaching the goal.

RUBY This project is a an excellent example of the longtime cooperation between scientists in your country, and given the results, appears to be a successful model. How would you characterize the relationship between academia and industry in Japan?

AT We have done only minimum effort to organize available 6 groups (4 university groups and two company groups) to implement the NEDO-MHE 2015-2017 project. I was the leader and directed the experimental plans for collaboration works. Researchers have joined and moved from north (Sendai Tohoku University) to west (Kobe University, and Kyushu University) for experiments, and some-times gathered in Tokyo for steering/discussion meetings.

I hope this will be a seed for next step to set-up a bigger consortium of industrial groups and university academic groups. Our latest results on anomalous heat effect can be explained only by nuclear origin and we are struggling with NEDO’s negative stance to funding Nuclear Origin Research & Development.

MEXT (ministry of education, science and culture) is promoting nuclear R&D in a monopoly-like way by sending big funds to ITER and others, and are not brave enough to provide some portion of funding to MHE R&D. So, the situation is somehow similar to US and EU.

RUBY You’ve been struggling to model this elusive reaction since the very beginning. Can you describe in layman’s terms some of the main features of the TSC model, and how is this model tied to your experimental work?

AT Theoretically, in my view, there are no molecular physics processes available in nature for two deuterons or protons to approach close enough to make visible nuclear reactions. Only transient clusters like 4, 6 and 8 deuterons (or protons) with quantum-mechanically orthogonally coupled 4, 8 and 6 electron-clouds can dynamically condense one-way and make collapse in very closed inter-nuclear distances to induce multi-body strong-force (for D) or weak-strong-force (for H) fusion reactions.

These CCF reactions do not produce primary neutrons and gamma rays. The geometrical coupling of 4 deuterons (or protons) and 4 electron-clouds under tetrahedron-tetrahedron orthogonal arrangement makes TSC, tetrahedral symmetric condensate, that is a transient cluster state and not stable.

You may imagine two D2 or H2 molecules coupling with 90 degree crossing configuration. This configuration is not stable in free space (namely in gas) and is also difficult to form in D2 or H2 gas due to bouncing by mutual collision. However, once the rotation freedom of D2 or H2 is frozen by trapping at a surface catalytic site (a sub-nano hole) of binary metal nano-particle, another incident (or out-going) D2 or H2 molecule on the surface catalytic site can make transient TSC formation with very enhanced rate.

Once TSC forms, it very rapidly (in 1-2 femto seconds) condenses in one-through way to get to a collapsing state in a nuclear-force-exchanging close distance for 4 deuterons or protons+electrons. The resultant multi-body fusion happens to produce low energy charged particles (helium, deuterium and proton).

Secondary reactions may generate neutrons and gamma-rays with very weak levels as less than 10^-13 order of primary charged particles. So radiation will be actually neglected in industrial devices generating several kW power.

RUBY The 19th Meeting of CF Research Society just wrapped up. What can you say about some of the other results presented there?

AT Other interesting reports besides ours were two instances of AHE (anomalous heat effect) observed by the DSC (differential scanning calorimetry ) apparatus at Kyushu University. That unit is particularly for nano-metals and H-gas interactions with PNZ-type and Ni-Al and Ti-Al samples at 300-800 degree C.

Tohoku group reported AHE with many temperature and gas pressure spikes, which looked very similar in effect, though with smaller scale, to a very large burst/spike of AHE by a Cu-Ni/zirconia powder sample as observed at Kobe-U/Technova.

Iwate University group are reporting basic studies on H-gas and multi-layer nano-composite metal samples. Kyoto University group is extending/improving Yamaguchi-type metal-D-gas induced AHE by electric pulse trigger.

RUBY I’m sure you have heard about Dr. Tadahiko Mizuno’s laboratory damaged by the earthquake. The community reached out to him with donations to help re-build. Were you effected by the earthquake at all?

AT In June we had big quake at Osaka to damage houses, but MHE apparatus at Kobe was OK.

RUBY Dr. Takahashi, we are approaching the 30-year mark since the announcement of cold fusion, and every experimental fact has been hard fought for. Now, you are finally realizing some of the fruits of that labor and getting more heat than ever.

What is it about cold fusion that compelled you to spend a career struggling in this most difficult field?

AT Of course, we want to solve the global warming effect created by the consumption of fossil fuels like oil and we are planning to develop eco-friendly, radiation-free, compact, novel energy generators, hopefully in 30-50 years. The so-called cold fusion reaction, and in my view, the CCF, has great potential to provide an eternal solution, helping us to escape the oil-age.

However, as a scientist, it has been curiosity that has pushed me to find the real mechanisms of the claimed mystery and miracles of the AHE and radiation-less nuclear processes. My answer now is that CCF governs it. I will continue to work on what I can do until it becomes impossible.

Slide from ICCF-21 presentation shows what’s next for the MHE project.

Hear Dr. Akito Takahashi speak about the MHE project at the 21st International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science https://www.iccf21.com/.

The ICCF-21 presentation slides are here.

Earthquake damage puts Mizuno research at risk

The 6.8 earthquake that struck Hokkaido Japan has killed nine and injured hundreds as multiple landslides shook communities.

It has also battered the laboratory of veteran LENR researcher Tadahiko Mizuno, who has lost valuable research equipment, and building damage will require the lab to move.

Pictures show items knocked off shelves, and bounced around. Damaged equipment includes an Scanning Electron Microscope and a neutron detector.

Dr. Mizuno is looking at tens of thousands of dollars of replacement costs, a number that threatens his continued LENR research.

A GoFundMe page has been set up by Dennis Cravens, and you can lend a helping hand there.

https://www.gofundme.com/replace-mizuno039s-lab

From LENR-forum Recovery thread: Some of the damage to the building. This is a beam holding up the emergency stairwell. The entire building is leaning over, around 5 cm at the 7th floor. It appears Dr. Mizuno will have to move to another building, and it will cost a lot of money to move this delicate equipment.

Objects fell on this SEM, damaging it, and the vacuum pump in it. It can not be repaired.

Tadahiko Mizuno has been researching LENR for 30-years. He was successful in generating large excess heat and was aware of transmutations early on. His book Nuclear Transmutation: The Reality of Cold Fusion was published in 1998.

It’s the simplest principle of community that if each gives a little, you can generate a lot, and that’s what the GoFundMe page is all about.

https://www.gofundme.com/replace-mizuno039s-lab

You can make something beautiful happen in the world with your act of goodness and generosity. Tadahiko Mizuno is a LENR researcher who shares his work in order to accelerate the understanding of this science.

Please share what you can with him.

And may the kindness you show today be revealed to you tomorrow.

JCF-15 pairs Experiment and Theory

Photo: Participants of the 15th meeting of Japan CF-Research Society courtesy Clean Planet, Inc.

Hideki Yoshino of Clean Planet, Inc co-hosted the event.
Hideki Yoshino of Clean Planet, Inc co-hosted the event.
The 15th Meeting of the Japan CF-Research Society was held November 1-2, 2014 at the Hokkaido Citizens Activities Promotion Center in Sapporo, Japan.

This year’s event was co-hosted by Hideki Yoshino, Founder of Clean Planet, Inc, a company providing resources to the LENR research community there, and Dr. Tadahiko Mizuno, scientist with Hydrogen Engineering Application & Developing Company and author, Nuclear Transmutation: The Reality of Cold Fusion. [buy].

Members from academia, business, government policy makers and industry in Japan were present. Dr. Akira Kitamura, an experimentalist associated with Technova, Inc and Kobe University, listed about ten active cold fusion research projects active in the country during his presentation in 2013 at ICCF-18 in The Way Forward panel [watch]. It was representatives from these groups who reported at the JCF-15 conference.

ActiveResearchGroups-Kitamura-ICCF-18ActiveResearchGroups2-Kitamura-ICCF-18

 

Slides from Akira Kitamura in The Way Forward Panel presented at ICCF-18.

JCF15 Program
JCF15 Abstracts

The program alternated between sessions on experiment and sessions on theory.

Co-organizer Hideki Yoshino said, “Emeritus Professor Takahashi from Osaka Univerisity presented his theories based on the results of Professor Kitamura and Dr. Iwamura from Mitsubishi Heavy Industries. These parities demonstrated the spirit of cooperation needed and the importance of collaboration by delivering tangible results.”

Yoshino described the “passionate” atmosphere of collaboration, and hints at a possible set of benchmarks to be delivered:

“Due to the relatively remoteness of Saporo, the conference attracted passionate and committed individuals from their respective fields to contribute in a manner which at times became very intense. This passion and intensity translated to the exchanges, which raised the bar for all those who attended to deliver on goals which otherwise wouldn’t have been set. These exchanges not only raised the bar on measurable and deliverable targets but also made each individual accountable to the collective group.”

“The attendance of Emeritus Professor Kasagi from Tohoku University further demonstrated the quality of the the attendees. He aggressively challenged each one of the presenters on their respective theories and the results of their experiments. His strong demeanor insured the validity and accountability of factual information of theories and processes.”

Proceedings from the meeting have not yet been released, however previously published papers describe some of the research tracks.

Experimentalist Tadahiko Mizuno of Hydrogen Engineering A&D Co. gave the Opening Address and presented Analysis of Heat Generation using Pd and Ni Fine Wires. Recently, archivist Jed Rothwell of lenr.og spent time with Dr. Mizuno and produced Report on Mizuno’s adiabatic calorimetry [.pdf].

Theorist Akito Takahashi of Technova Inc. presented Background for Condensed Cluster Fusion. Dr. Takahashi’s Physics of Cold Fusion by TSC Theory was also published in JSCMNS Vol 13. [DOWNLOAD and go to Acrobat page 575]

Yasuhiro Iwamura et al. of Mitsubishi Heavy Industries presented Increase of Transmutation Products by Electrochemical Deuterium Permeation through Nano-Structured Pd Multilayer Thin Film. A paper on this research program Increase of Reaction Products in Deuterium Permeation-induced Transmutation by Iwamura, Y., T. Itoh, and S. Tsuruga, can be found in the Journal of Condensed Matter Nuclear Science Vol. 13 published May 2014. [DOWNLOAD and go to Acrobat page 252]

Theorist Ken-ichi Tsuchiya of the National Institute of Technology, Tokyo College spoke on Convergence Aspect of the Self-consistent Calculations for Quantum States of Charged Bose Particles in Solids. Quantum States of Charged Bose Particles in Solids from JCF-5 describes the groundwork.[.pdf] See also, JCMNS Vol. 13 published A Self-Consistent Iterative Calculation for the Two Species of Charged Bosons Related to the Nuclear Reactions in Solids [DOWNLOAD and go to Acrobat page 604]

Akira Kitamura et al. of both Technova Inc. and Kobe University presented Comparison of some Ni-based nano-composite samples with respect to excess heat evolution under exposure to hydrogen isotope gas at the meeting. JSCMNS Vol 13 published Recent Progress in Gas-phase Hydrogen Isotope Absorption/Adsorption Experiments by A. Kitamura, Y. Miyoshi, H. Sakoh, A. Taniike, Y. Furuyama, A. Takahashi, R. Seto, Y. Fujita, T. Murota and T. Tahara. [DOWNLOAD and go to Acrobat page 287]

Says Yoshino, “This ongoing cooperation and collaboration among the members of JCF towards a single vision of creating clean, abundant and safe energy for all mankind, is essential for the realization of our collective goal.”

Find more photos of JCF-15 on the Clean Planet Gallery.

Related Links

Japan CF-Research Society

Clean Planet, Inc.

Technova, Inc.

Nuclear Transmutation: The Reality of Cold Fusion by Dr. Tadahiko Mizuno

Japanese Cold Fusion Research Society meeting papers released

The Japanese Cold Fusion Research Society (JCF) held its 14th meeting last December at the Tokyo Institute of Technology, where Dr. X.F. Wang of Arata R&D Center and Hydrogen Eng. A&D Co. and Hideki Yoshino of Clean Planet, Inc. both reported on academic and industry researchers presenting their most recent results.

The JCF-14 Proceedings edited by Akira Kitamura of Technova, Inc. and Kobe University consists of papers of presenters at the event.

“… cold fusion has a potential ability to establish a small-scale, radiationless nuclear reactor, and hopefully to shorten half-lives of radioactive wastes by nuclear transmutation,” writes Kitamura in the Preface.

He believes that this approach has the potential …

“not only to realize an environmentally-sound nuclear power system with zero emission of the greenhouse gases and other harmful oxides, but also to develop a novel technique for disposal of the nuclear wastes produced by fission reactors.”

Transmutation data was presented by several speakers including Yasuhiro Iwamura and S. Tsuruga of Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and Hideo Kozima of Cold Fusion Research Lab. Several theoretical papers are published as well.

Of particular interest to general readers is Hideo Kozima‘s paper What is cold fusion?

In the essay, he defines: The CFP (Cold Fusion Phenomenon) stands for “nuclear reactions and accompanying events occurring in open (with external particle and energy supplies), non-equilibrium system composed of solids with high densities of hydrogen isotopes (H and/or D) in ambient radiation” belonging to Solid-State Nuclear Physics (SSNP) or Condensed Matter Nuclear Science (CMNS). (CFRL News No.81, http://www.geocities.jp/hjrfq930/).

Kozima goes on to say, “The most important fields of the CFP developed after the initial discovery in 1989 are various kinds of events in protium systems and the nuclear transmutations both in deuterium and protium systems which have not been in their targets of the evaluation of the two DOE Reports [DOE Reports 1989, 2004].”

His survey of CF data has caused him to write the “irreproducibility of events in the CFP [cold fusion phenomenon] discussed in Sec. 3 is closely related to the complexity in this phenomenon.” Solutions to data sets are “using the Feigenbaum’s theorem describing a nature of an equation of nonlinear dynamics [Kozima 2012, 2013]”. In response, Kozima presents a “TNCF model [Kozima 1998, 2006] with a single adjustable parameter nn is based on the whole experimental facts obtained in materials composed of various host solids and hydrogen isotopes not only deuterium but also protium.”

Find the essay What is Cold Fusion? by Hideo Kozima in the JCF-14 Proceedings. [.pdf]

See also:

Industry and academic partnerships report from JCF-14 meeting

Top