The vision of Earth provided by NASA lunar missions is a powerful image; possibly the most potent archetypal image of our times. This image brings to mind the beauty of the biosphere, our world and life-as-we-know-it, surprisingly small against the vast starlit darkness of space.
NASA sees LENR energetics in concert with advanced computer and flight technologies as, “The key to supersonic transports and neighbor-friendly personal fly/drive air vehicles.”(NASA)
This technology could replace much earth bound transport; roads and their inherent environmental damage would become obsolete.
NASA realizes the fragility of our biosphere and seeks to limit atmospheric damage from aeronautics and transportation in amazing ways:
The SUGAR Program (SUGAR – Subsonic Ultra Green Aeronautics Research) was initiated in 2008 as a challenge to four that received contracts, Boeing, GE Aviation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Northrop Grumman. The goal is a deep reduction in harmful emissions from airplanes and to decrease their noisome irritation. “Hybrid electric engine technology is a clear winner because it can potentially improve performance relative to all of the NASA goals.”(Boeing)
NASA Green Flight Challenge – “NASA has awarded the largest prize in aviation history, created to inspire the development of more fuel-efficient aircraft and spark the start of a new electric airplane industry. The technologies demonstrated by the CAFE Green Flight Challenge, sponsored by Google, competitors may end up in general aviation aircraft, spawning new jobs and new industries for the 21st century.”(NASA)Green Flight Challenge Sponsored by Google – (Final Results 2011)
Txchnologist The Future of Transportation – “Mapping Out the Future of Flight”(GE)
ON A FALLEN TREE ACROSS THE ROAD (To hear us talk) by Robert Frost
The tree a tempest with a crash of wood
Throws down in front of us is not to bar
Our passage to our journey’s end for good,
But just to ask us who we think we are,
Insisting always on our own way so.
She likes to halt us in our runner tracks,
And make us get down in a foot of snow
Debating what to do with an ax.
And yet who knows obstruction is in vain:
We will not be put off the final goal
We have hidden in us to attain,
Not though we have to seize earth by the pole
And, tired of aimless circling in one place,
Steer straight off after something into space.
Rocket Toxicity
Over 4,000 (Wiki) recorded space launches and an unknown number of missile launches have burned hundreds of millions of tons of the following propellants, oxidants, and rocket elements.
Who knows how these recombine after combustion, with each other and with atmospheric elements?
The engines powering the Space Shuttle’s initial liftoff boosters may have been the most polluting engines ever operated by mankind. For each kilogram of payload, the shuttle’s main boosters burn 30 kilograms of fuels and oxidizers.
During 135 missions 122,472,000 kilograms (135,002 tons) of this highly toxic fuel was burned in the solid fuel boosters of the Space Shuttles.
Approximate Amount Burned (tons)
94,365 Ammonium Percholate
5,600 Powdered Aluminum
9,450 Iron Oxidizer Powder
16,204 Polybutadiene Acrylic Acid Acrylonitrile
2,646 Epoxy-curing Agent
21st Century Timeline of U.S. Rocket Fuel Pollution Scandal (read)
Perchlorate is a powerful oxidant that has been detected in public drinking water supplies of over 11 million people at concentrations of at least 4 parts per billion (ppb). High doses of perchlorate can decrease thyroid hormone production by inhibiting the uptake of iodide by the thyroid. Thyroid hormones are critical for normal growth and development of the central nervous system of fetuses and infants.
A Summary of NASA and USAF Hypergolic Propellant Related Spills and Fires (pdf)
The fuel is monomethyl hydrazine (MMH) and the oxidizer is nitrogen tetroxide (N2O4) which is similar to ammonia. Both fluids are highly toxic, and are handled under the most stringent safety conditions. Hypergolic propellants are used in the core liquid propellant stages of the Titan family of launch vehicles, and on the second stage of the Delta.
The Space Shuttle orbiter uses hypergols in its Orbital Maneuvering Subsystem (OMS) for orbital insertion, major orbital maneuvers and deorbit. The Reaction Control System (RCS) uses hypergols for attitude control.
NASA is hoping to reduce launch emissions for space flight with LENR.
Cold Fusion – NASA – LENR Part Three Earthbound and Spacebound Transportation
In my point of view, series of the experiments in Gran Sasso Laboratory under leadership of Dr. Claus Rolfs and similar experiments in Berlin by Dr. K. Czerski and colleagues during 2002-2009 show unusually high electron screening potential in metallic crystals. These experimental facts give a good mechanism how the Coulomb barrier overcame with low energy (thermal) deuterons.
[latexpage]
“The circumstances of hot fusion are not the circumstances of cold fusion”, wrote Julian Schwinger, co-Nobel-prize winner with Richard Feynmann and Shinichiro Tomonaga in 1965 for their work on quantum electro-dynamics (QED).
But there is no shortage of hot fusion analysis of cold fusion. Might some ideas be applicable?
Edward Tsyganov believes so.
Dr. Tsyganov is a professor at University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center who specializes in nuclear detectors, but in 1975, Tsyganov was part of an international group working on the Tevatron proton accelerator at Fermilab, just after successfully completing the first Russian-American scientific collaboration on the Serpukhov 70 GeV proton accelerator in Russia.
Muon catalysis had been discovered by Professor Luis Alvarez, whom he met at Lawrence Berkeley Lab in 1976. Although exciting, muon catalytic fusion did not look very promising to Tsyganov due to the short life time span of the muon.
Later, in December 1989, he was sitting in the audience of a seminar with Martin Fleischmann at CERN in Geneva, Switzerland, having participated in the DELPHI experiment at the Large Electron Positron collider. [visit] He was very excited with Fleischmann’s presentation but, at the time, he had just introduced bent crystals for beam deflection, now used in high-energy physics. The study of crystalline structures drew him away from cold fusion research, which he had heard was “a false observation” anyway.
Gran SassoInspired by experimental work performed with the Gran SassoLaboratory Underground Nuclear Physics (LUNA) facility in Italy, Tsyganov recently returned to the topic of cold fusion. [visit]
Scientists there have shown that when a deuterium atom is embedded in a metallic crystal, the cross section, which gives a measure of the probability that a fusion reaction will occur, increases in comparison with that of free atoms.
In the 2002-2008 series of international low-energy accelerator experiments, low-energy deuterium beams directed at embedded deuterium atoms showed that, in this environment, the screening potential for the orbital electrons of the embedded atoms is substantially increased. This means that in such conditions, any supplemental embedded nuclei in a single host crystal cell could sit much closer than they normally would due to the Coulomb repulsion.
Can this idea be applied to the low-energy nuclear reaction (LENR) in a solid?
The problem of overcoming the Coulomb barrier, the powerful force that keeps positively-charged protons away from each other, is the central issue for developing clean cold fusion energy. The force that holds nuclei together is called the strong nuclear force. Though it is an extremely powerful force, it only extends for a small distance. Unless nuclei can get close enough for the strong force to take effect, positively-charged nuclei remain too far away from each other to fuse. Elements other than hydrogen have an even bigger Coulomb barrier, since they have many more protons, and a stronger positive-charge. This is true for both free particles, and those housed in a solid metal.
JET Energy model of palladium metallic lattice infused with deuterium.But inside a metallic lattice, the negatively-charged conducting electrons are free to move about, creating a negatively-charged screen. As a result, a positively-charged proton (or deuteron) inside the lattice sees mostly negative charges. But at some point, the bare nucleus could find itself suddenly close to another of its kind, the other’s positive-charge being “hidden”, or screened, by all the surrounding negative charges.
In this environment, deuterons or other nuclei may sit closer together in one host crystalline cell than they normally would. In a paper Cold Nuclear Fusion [1], Tsyganov cites data obtained by Francesco Raiola et al, for the screening Assenbaum potential for deuterium embedded in platinum as 675 +/- 50 eV, which is around 25 times larger than for free atoms of deuterium.
“The so-called screening Assenbaum potential is usually considered as an additional energy of interaction in a fusion process, and this effective energy should be used for calculations,” writes Tsyganov.
“This means that atoms of deuterium embedded in a metallic crystal do not feel the Coulomb repulsion down to distances of 25 times smaller than the size of the free deuterium atoms, increasing the probability of barrier penetration.”
“It was evident that in such conditions two deuteron atoms could approach each other to the distance of 1/10 – 1/20 of the size of an undistorted atom, without feeling the Coulomb repulsion.”
“Normally at very low energies for the deuterium molecule, the Coulomb barrier permeability for deuterium atoms is of the order of $10^{-84}$, including the Assenbaum screening potential (27 eV). However, in an environment of a single metallic crystalline cell this value jumps by $10^{50}$ – $10^{60}$ times! At the same time the real kinetic energy of the interacting deuterium atoms is still very low, some tiny fraction of an eV. All the enhancement of Coulomb barrier permeability is due to much shorter distance between the interacting deuterium nuclei.”
At low energies, the Coulomb barrier permeability is lowered and nuclei can position closer together. “As one can see from the graph, in the region of low effective kinetic energies, as in the case of cold fusion, the dependence of the quantum mechanical probability of Coulomb barrier penetration vs energy is very sharp.”
For Tsyganov, this illustrates the difference between hot fusion and cold fusion.
“Hot fusion produces compound nuclei through multiple single encounters of the particles. In cold fusion, particles interact with the same partner through the quantum oscillations in a ‘closed box…'”, he writes. “This oscillation frequency is directly proportional to the screening potential, or box “size”, giving an additional boost to the process.”
Suppose that two deuterium atoms are trapped inside a single crystalline cell of palladium. The electrons associated with the deuterium will have an elongated shape in response to the cloud of conduction electrons, their orbits distorted by the catalytic effect. This is what allows the deuterium nuclei to situate themselves only a fraction of the distance they would normally tolerate.
Together, these two atoms make a “quasi-molecule” that oscillates at a particular frequency. While Tsyganov admits that calculating the particular oscillation frequency of a deuterium quasi-molecule in the midst of so many potential fields inside the crystal is difficult, he uses Planck’s relation as an approximation to give a frequency $\nu = E/h$, where $E$ is the experimentally measured screening potential and $h$ is Planck’s constant.
For deuterium embedded in a platinum metallic crystal, the screening potential was measured by Raiola as about 675 eV. This gives a vibrational frequency for the quasi-molecule as $1.67 \hspace{1 mm}\text{x}\hspace{1 mm} 10^{17}$ per second, and offers an estimate of the number of times the nuclei get close enough to fuse.
Multiplying this value for the oscillation frequency by the barrier permeability, a measure of the ability to overcome the Coulomb repulsion, of $2.52 \hspace{1 mm}\text{x}\hspace{1 mm} 10^{-17}$ yields a rate of 4.21 Deuterium-Dueterium fusion events per second.
Based on the calculation above, this table estimates DD fusion rates for crystals of palladium and platinum.
“I took this observation and applied these enlarged screening potential to the condition of McKubre experiments with deuterated palladium”, says Tsyganov.[1] “Heat release of Michael McKubre and the SRI team is well explained. In fact, this is the first confirmation of the cold fusion process using independent data from accelerators.”
Tsyganov believes experiments of Yoshiaki Arata and similar experiments of Mitchell Swartz could be also explained with this mechanism, if “quantitative data on deuterium contamination in palladium nano-crystals would be available.” He is convinced that the mechanism in McKubre’s experiments and that of Arata and Swartz’ are the same.
“Experiments of Francesco Piantelli and Andrea Rossi are well fitted in the above model. Higher heat release in the Rossi case is probably explainable by the use of platinum catalyst”, writes Tsyganov.
“Professor S.B. Dabagov, Professor M.D. Bavizhev and I have tried to analyze the nuclear processes occurring in the Ecat installation and provide a possible explanation for the observed results, says Tsyganov. “In addition to the slowing of the nuclear decay processes of the intermediate compound nucleus formed during the cold fusion of elements [2], some modification of the decay process of the intermediate nucleus of the compound (H+Ni)* must be assumed to provide a plausible explanation of the Rossi results. We discuss such possibilities in this paper.”
Tsyganov’s idea pertains to how nuclei might become situated close enough inside a metal to overcome the Coulomb barrier and fuse, an idea derived from hot-fusion experiments. Still, he believes this model can be applied to the cold fusion environment too, claiming predictions agree well with heat energy measured by SRI and extend to the nickel-hydrogen systems as well.
I asked Dr. Tsyganov how his model might explain some other experimental data in cold fusion.
Dr. Tsyganov attended the 2011 LANR/CF Colloquia at MIT.
Q&A with Edward Tsyganov
CFN Supposing two deuterium can fuse in this way, how would the heat be dissipated through the lattice?
Tsyganov There is the traditional belief among nuclear scientists that nothing in a nucleus could depend on the outside world. It is very true for the fast processes in a nucleus (and these processes usually are very fast due to the very small size of a nucleus) because it is necessary that some time pass to reach the outside world. This time is about $10^{-19}$ seconds and is defined by the size of atom and speed of light.
However, according to the only hypothesis of mine, the intermediate compound nucleus 4He* created in cold DD fusion, as also in other cold fusion cases, presents an absolutely unique situation. After the penetration of main Coulomb barrier (about 200 keV high), deuterons save their identities for some time, due to the residual Coulomb mini-barrier, already inside the strong potential well. This mini-barrier very much reduced and smothered by the strong interaction forces (quark-gluon mechanism) and the finite sizes of the deuterons, but still prevents immediate nucleonic exchange between the two deuterons.
This figure represents the bottom of the potential well of strong interactions of two deuterons.In my estimations, this mini-barrier is less than 2 keV high (~1% of the main Coulomb barrier), because at this kinetic energy usual nuclear decays of 4He* are still taking place. In fact, the Gran Sasso experiments, where this enhanced screening potential was discovered, used nuclear products to detect fusion processes. However, excitation (thermal) energy at cold fusion is still more than $10^{4}$ times less than 2 keV, or about 0.040 eV. Obviously, one can expect decreasing of nuclear decay rate of 4He* with decreasing of excitation energy.
I would highlight again that the decrease of nuclear decay rate at the very low excitation energy is the only hypothesis in all my consideration.
This situation could be treated as the experimental evidence. High electron screening potentials makes the cold fusion process the must. At the same time there are no neutrons and other nuclear products detected experimentally. An explanation must be provided. The only explanation (and the very reasonable one) that I could think of is the decrease of nuclear decay rate with decreasing of the energy of excitation.
If one adopts this hypothesis, further explanation does not presents real difficulties. Quantum electrodynamics provides the framework, through exchange by the virtual photons. Julian Swinger was very close to this solution but did not make the final step. Energy of discharge 4He* to the ground state 4He is released mostly by several hundreds of low energy electrons, with very short range in the crystal. About 400 60 keV electrons produce the heat.
CFN How might the production of tritium be explained with this process?
Tsyganov Production of tritium in McKubre’s experiments could be explained, if the nuclear decay rate of 4He* in cold fusion is reduced, but still non-negligible. This rate is at least two orders of magnitude less than expected for hot fusion. Perhaps, cracks and defects of the palladium sample could also contribute. I hope this question could soon be answered in future studies.
CFN Thank you Dr. Tsyganov.
Tsyganov My pleasure.
[1] Cold Nuclear Fusion by E.N. Tsyganov published Physics of Atomic Nuclei 2012, Vol. 75, No. 2, pp. 153–159 [.pdf]
[2] Cold Fusion Continues by E.N. Tsyganov, S.B. Dabagov, and M.D. Bavizhev, from the Proceedings of “Solid State Chemistry: Nano-materials and Nanotechnology” Conference, 22-27 April, 2012, Stavropol, Russia Report in Stavropol 4-24-2012 [.pdf]
[3] Cold Nuclear Fusion by E.N. Tsyganov on Journal of Nuclear Physics [visit]
We walk backwards into the future.
—Marshall McLuhan
Greater than the digital revolution, a new energy technology will change the mental imprint of humanity beyond a global village, beyond a global theater, with the opportunity for a new humanism that recognizes the invisible, and walks a path through the impossible.
We are at the start of the New Energy Age and the creativity has not even begun.
The intersection of art and science, from Nicolas Chauvin CEO of LENR Carshttp://ecatcar.org/ is but a transitory step.
“Nicolas Chauvin, innovator, entrepreneur, EPFL engineer and licensed in business school, co-founder of two other start-ups before LENR Cars, worked for NASA, Nestlé and Logitech.
Highly involved in new technologies across many different fields of engineering and strongly addicted to cars for style, performance, sensations and technology.
Kick-boxing elite athlete, musician and portrait artist.”
Eventually, we won’t have cars, that unique technology evolved from a service environment of fossil fuels; we’ll have something completely different.
But in the meantime, transition products will continue.
Unleash the powerful yearnings of a people hungry for change,
Cold Fusion Now!
Presentation slides by Nicolas Chauvin from the ILENRS 2012 conference. [.pdf]
July 4th here in the States came and went; the celebratory fireworks ringed the air, and the aftermath accounts included one big San Diego display attended by thousands, in which, due to an alleged computer glitch, the would be 20 plus minute sky theatrics, went off all at once. A 20 second burst of everything suddenly exploded simultaneously as people watched in awe and amazement, surprise and confusion. What an exciting start, but…where’s the follow up?
I had just finished reading this post here by Ruby on the Fleischmann/Pons story, and thought about that same sudden like explosion that occurred back in ’89 with their big announcement of Cold Fusion. A flurry of fireworks going off all at once. But eventually, as people waited in anticipation for more, they were told the show’s been cancelled. All just a glitch of sorts in Science, sorry…
I also wondered if the San Diego big bang blowout would be similar to future news of an E-CAT, or other, “suddenly” exploding onto the market. Most of the public remains unaware, the press, both mainstream and alternative, remain silent despite power outage and heat related illness/death on the East Coast of the U.S., (which in turn you would think a natural solution piece story specifically on the emergence of Cold Fusion technology related to home cooling would be a no-brainer).
Since there’s been no gradual mainstream buildup, an explosion of sorts seem likely, but this time with a steady stream of continual fireworks to follow.
As we are in the middle of the year, and working Cold Fusion based units seem to loom near, what are some of the recent updates?
Over a week ago, Defkalion released this update:
Following our absence from the public sphere, the following is a status update:
We are conducting analyses of our materials using XRF and ICP-MS. We are committed that this analysis be done with the highest standards. To ensure these high standards, we are using multiple laboratories in Europe. When those results are available, we shall present them in the appropriate forum.
We also have designed and are operating a fully instrumented flow calorimeter to measure the power production of our reactor. Outside scientists and engineers are measuring the input power as well as our flow calorimeter output performance. All these results will be presented when we are confident that they will withstand the scrutiny demanded by our own interests in product development, and the scrutiny of our customers.
We thank you for your continued interest in our challenging and important work load.
Meanwhile Andrea Rossi claims to have 20 units up and running, 600 degrees celcius, which is part of a 42 day test, with high temperature results to be reported in the coming weeks. EC3 speculates it would be just in time for the “17th International Conference on Cold Fusion (ICCF-17) scheduled for August 12-17 in Daejon, Korea”. A showdown of sorts could occur as EC3 also noted that Defkalion would report results there as well.
The two things noted as far as Rossi updates go is the report coming out mentioned above, which will seem to provide further promising news, and apparently will be validated by the customer with included photos (“Yes, we are working very strongly, in this very hot Summer. Important news are arriving.” A.R. – July 9th), and then also the certification issue, which seems to be the wick needed to be lit to ignite the potential fireworks, at least as far as the U.S. domestic E-Cat models are concerned.
You have said that your invention is undergoing a certification process in both USA and EU. If either one of this processes is delayed will that affect the product launch worldwide?
Like if the certification process is delayed in USA but successful in Europe will your European business go ahead (and not wait for the processes in USA to be completed)??
1- yes, for the domestic E-Cats, while for the industrial we are very close to be all set
2- If one certification goes through it eases the certification elsewhere, based on the existing conventions.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
July 9th, 2012.
Readers at ECat World recently participated in a poll on who they anticipated would be the first to set off the ‘works with a MASS MARKET working unit. The top 3 thus far:
1. Leonardo Corp (Rossi) (436 votes)
2. No one. (155 votes)
3. Defkalion (148 votes)
Followed by Brillouin, Blacklight, PlasmERG, Jet Energy, and Nichenergy, in that order.
On another front, it seems the potential fireworks are being taken seriously by the petroleum industry, at least a little more publicly, as a recent editorial emerged in The Journal of Petroleum Technology, outlining LENR as a threat. This was noted as a comment by a reader at E-Cat World prompting this entry, and the actual editorial can be read here.
So we continue to wait, monitor, and wade through the continuation of more tests/reports, uncertain certification processes, and unknown customers to verify; meanwhile it is announced today the U.S. breaks a new heat record for the first half of 2012, while also we have“Dr. Doom”, Nouriel Roubini reporting today that his prediction for likely global economic collapse earlier this year, is perfectly on track to occur.
As always it’s hard to fathom how the timing will play itself out as far as the various Collapse scenarios go, and the actual on the market emergence of Cold Fusion technology taking hold.
Alongside the ExtraOrdinary Technology Conference hosted by Tesla Tech, this year’s Natural Philosophy Alliance (NPA) Conference will have a variety of speakers on the philosophy of science as it broadens the boundaries of conventional thinking when they meet July 25-28 in Albuquerque, New Mexico, U.S. The scheduled list of speakers is here.
The 2012 John Chappell Memorial Paper is “What Is Cold Fusion and Why Should You Care?” to be presented Friday, July 27 by NPA-member Dr. Edmund Storms, a veteran cold fusion researcher based in Santa Fe, New Mexico who recently released the paper with co-author Brian Scanlan. [source] A text is posted on the NPA website here.
Storms has recently presented a new idea naming the nuclear active environment (NAE) as a crack or fissure between atoms near the surface of the metallic lattice hosting the cold fusion reaction, also called low-energy nuclear reaction (LENR). The idea is described in the paper “Explaining LENR“, soon-to-be published in the forthcoming Journal of Condensed Matter Nuclear Science Vol. 9. The unassuming title belies a heap of paradigm-changing notions as Storms narrows the possibilities for modeling the cold fusion reaction by using experimental results to exclude contemporary theories that do not uphold the twenty-three years of empirical data. [.pdf]
Formulated after a complete survey of the field, his recipe for the NAE derives from the commonalities of all observable data from over two decades of experiments. Unusual topologies are a feature of each cell design that successfully measured excess heat or nuclear products.
Storms' NAE supposes the regular atomic array of a metallic matrix is cracked and filled with hydrogen and electrons in this artist rendition.Storms believes it is these cracks, as well as the tiny spaces between thin-films, nano-particles, and co-deposition tendrils, where hydrogen nuclei and electrons can become trapped. When applied power in the form of heat, an electromagnetic field, or laser light, reaches just-the-right vibrational frequency for the stacked column of material, resonance, a characteristic of sympathetic vibration, instigates a “nuclear mechanism”, and the heat-generating reaction ensues.
In naming the NAE, Storms does not hypothesize on the nature of the nuclear mechanism, only that resonance turns it on. His goal is to give a recipe to start the reaction on-demand, so experiments and commercial products can be designed optimally, as opposed to the hit-or-miss successes so far.
When a definitive how-to for creating the cold fusion reaction is eventually published, the world will have the opportunity for a new age of green energy technology utilizing optimally designed generators that unlock the clean and safe power inherent in the fusion of hydrogen from water, causing a transformation of human culture far greater than even the digital revolution.
Artist's rendition of a crack stacked with hydrogen and electrons.
Peter Gluck, a long-time researcher in the field, asked Storms to respond to questions about his new idea and Cold Fusion Now posted their exchange here.
Currently, Storms is testing the recipe for creating the NAE at Kiva Labs in Santa Fe, with encouraging results. He will continue to test the hypothesis throughout the year, seeing if he can generate the effect on-demand, the determining factor in whether the idea has merit or not.
Cold Fusion Now’s Ruby Carat will attend the NPA conference to video Storms’ presentation and interview him afterwards about his research.
The NPA conference will be held at the Marriott Pyramid North in Albuquerque, NM alongside the ExtraOrdinary Technology Conference hosted by TeslaTech. More information about this particular event can be found at their site here.
What is Cold Fusion and Why Should You Care? by Edmund Storms and Brian Scanlan [.pdf] An earlier version of the paper was published by Cold Fusion Now in March here.
Explaining LENR by Edmund Storms soon-to-be published by Journal of Condensed Matter Nuclear Science Vol. 9 2012 pre-print [.pdf]
Journal of Condensed Matter Nuclear SciencePublications
Explaining LENR: Answering Peter Gluck posted by Ruby Carat June 11, 2012
2012 ExtraOrdinary Technology Conference sponsored by TeslaTech Home
“Almost limitless, clean power…” Yes, it is cold fusion!
The March 27, 2009 episode of Brink, a weekly show on the Science Channel, featured an update on the 2009 results of nuclear particle detection by the SPAWAR group at the American Chemical Society meeting that year. Read about the news on ScienceDaily.com.
Yes, it’s an OLD video, but for those of us new to the scene, it’s excavating the history.
Speaking from Washington, D.C., nuclear physicist Dwight Williams, Senior Science Advisor for the Department of Energy and a contributor to the show, gives the news cautiously, but open-mindedly.
He says of the broader mainstream science community, “All the jurors are still out.”
There is undeniable evidence that conclusively establishes the existence of the Fleischmann-Pons Effect (FPE), the production of excess heat when hydrogen reacts with a small piece of metal.
New designs for commercial hot-water boilers and steam heaters now in development use a powder made of nickel and hydrogen gas to create the same effect.
“If you think that the excess heat effect is not real, you’re being oblivious to data,” said Dr. Robert Duncan, Vice Chancellor for Research at University of Missouri in a recent talk at National Instruments.
This is the breakthrough for which the world’s been waiting.
