Robert Duncan discusses experiments at Sidney Kimmel Institute for Nuclear Renaissance

From National Instruments page here:

“Since 1926 there have been over 200 observations of intense heat release in palladium when it is loaded well beyond its equilibrium limit with deuterium. Very careful work at two national laboratories, namely the Naval Research Laboratory in the United States, and at ENEA, the National Energy Laboratory of Italy, and at many other laboratories around the world, clearly indicate that these extreme ‘excess’ heat releases are in fact real, despite earlier claims to the contrary, and I will discuss why these experiments have proven to be so difficult to repeat. These heat releases are anomalous, since we do not yet have a clear understanding of the physical process that is responsible for these often extreme levels of heat release. These effects have been referred to as ‘cold fusion’ and ‘low-energy nuclear reactions’ in the past, but these names imply an understanding of the physical origin of these anomalous effects that in fact does not yet exist. Hence the term ‘Anomalous Heat Effect (AHE).

View this video to see Dr. Robert Duncan discussing a series of experiments that we are conducting within the Sidney Kimmel Institute for Nuclear Renaissance at the University of Missouri that are designed to elucidate the physical mechanism that is responsible for the AHE.

Looks like alot of young people in the audience, too!


Video link: http://bcove.me/w99vuaht

Quotes from Robert Duncan in The Mystery of Cold Fusion:

“I like to call it AHE Anomalous Heat Effect.”

From a typical 0.3 gram palladium cathode, there was regularly “heat release of about 50,000 Joules, and occasionally heat releases of over one megajoule. This clearly cannot be described by conventional chemical origins.”

“If you think that the excess heat effect is not real, you’re being oblivious to data.”

“But, I have no idea, conclusively, what’s causing it. Some propose it’s fusion. Some propose it’s a low energy nuclear reaction involving electron-weak electron capture, or something like that. There’ve been other proposals that are even broader.”

“I know it’s real. I know I don’t understand it. And that fascinates me.”

“When you see something that defies everything you think you know, that should be very motivating.”

“You don’t say, ‘I can’t study it because I don’t understand it’, you study it because you want to understand it.”

“You have to be sensitive to empirical surprise. That’s the only thing that’s improved science through history. That’s the only thing that continues to improve science today.”

The Sidney Kimmel Institute for Nuclear Renaissance is planning neutron scattering experiments for the hydrogen and deuterium system, and x-ray scattering experiments in the palladium lattice; doing both simultaneously.

“Are these anomalous effects happening in the lattice itself, or is this an effect occurring say, in the voids, that may have concentrated packets of material?”

They are trying anything that will help them understand the anomalous heat effect and understand what’s going on.

“I love the saying here: National Instruments doesn’t judge, they measure.”

“A nanogram of conclusive data is worth a ton of conjecture.”

“Superconductivity above room-temperature should be considered as empirical evidence that our understanding of physics remains incomplete. It is simply too convenient and scientifically counter-productive to dismiss all claims that don’t agree with what we currently think.”

“The scientific method is the only thing we have, and the only thing we need; that’s what got us from the Wright flyer to Apollo 11 in just sixty-six years.”

“Julian Schwinger shared the Nobel prize with Richard Feynman and Sin-Itiro Tomonaga for Quantum Electrodynamics (QED), and he had a theory that this was proton-deuterium fusion, not DD fusion, but since he was pursuing something that had been pronounced a pariah science – watch out when all the scientists in the world agree on something – but since his ideas were being forwarded after they had been so thoroughly discredited at the end of 1989, the American Institute of Physics (AIP) refused to review his [Julian Schwinger] papers for publication.”

“Now it’s certainly fair to accept his paper, review it, and if you find tragic flaws or real problems in the paper, in logic or in data analysis, to reject it. Journalists do that all the time. That’s what journalists should do. I referee for Physical Review Letters, that’s the way it should be. But the fact that the AIP said this is in an area that we are so thoroughly convinced that this is wrong, we won’t even review it, was in my opinion, wrong.”

“That infuriated Julian Schwinger, and he resigned from the American Physical Society because of that.”

“These empirical results that don’t fit our current picture of the way we think things should be, are an opportunity to challenge the way we think, not a reason to object it as bad, junk science.”

“There exists a huge gap exists between a new scientific discovery and useful engineered systems.”

“We should not speculate wildly, in my opinion, we should manage expectations.”

“Science is the tool to understand.”

“I don’t know if this will have any impact on energy production, I think it has the potential to. In fact, maybe within a year or two, these other engineered systems that are being promoted in Greece and Italy may show that there is a viable energy opportunity, maybe not.”

“When people ask me about Rossi’s work from Italy, or this company in Greece, that are saying that they’re going to put out HVAC units based on low-energy nuclear reactions, they ask me my opinion, I say, the beauty of it is, my opinion in insignificant.”

“They are saying they are going to put this on the market. There is even talk of selling them through major retailers. If they provide products to the market, and it doesn’t work as advertised, it’s all going to be damaged goods and returned stock.”

“The point is, my opinion doesn’t matter. If they hit the market within the next year or so, let’s see whether they work. If they work as advertised, that’s significant, and if they don’t, well that’s significant too.”

“I don’t really need to take a scientific position in something that’s at the endgame of market delivery, as they claim to be.”

“Research funding needs to become much less dependent on common assumptions and common wisdom.”

“…become much more courageous in general I am certainly delighted to see really visionary places, like many universities, many national labs, many industries like National Instruments taking that objective view …”

“If we ever get to the point where we’re told it’s a pariah science and we can’t go there, that’s very detrimental to the future of science.”

Speaking about cold fusion, he said “It’s one of the most interesting things I’ve ever seen.”

Q&A follows, with many more GREAT quotes, though the audio goes in and out. The video ends abruptly, in mid-sentence.

Related Links

Robert Duncan interview on Ca$h Flow: “Public investment means public ownership” by Ruby Carat February 6, 2011

Political Support for Cold Fusion in an Election Year by Ruby Carat May 6, 2012

Hot, clean water from cold fusion means worldwide health revolution

In Potential Advantages and Impacts of LENR Generators of Thermal and Electrical Power and Energy published in May/June 2012 Infinite Energy #103 [.pdf version], Professor David J. Nagel describes the impact that clean drinking water produced by cold fusion, also called low-energy nuclear reactions (LENR) would have on human health:

Production of Clean Water
Humans need water on a frequent basis to sustain life. Roughly one billion people on earth do not have good drinking water now. The possibility of being able to produce drinkable water from dirty rivers and the seas by using the heat from LENR would be momentous.” –David J. Nagel

Cleaning dirty water and de-salinization of ocean water on small and large scales both become possible with cold fusion technology, and hot, clean water produced from small, portable generators could affect the health of a billion people world-wide.

Nagel is a Professor at George Washington University in Washington, D.C. and a founder of NuCat, a company that holds workshops and seminars on cold fusion for scientists, researchers, and potential investors. [visit] Making the case to businesses that they can profit with affordable LENR-based hot-water boilers, he goes on to say:

Favorable pricing of LENR generators for such countries could conceivably contribute significantly to world peace. The situation might be similar to the current sales of medicines for AIDS to poor countries at reduced prices. Rich countries will not soon give poor countries a large fraction of their wealth. However, they could provide some of the energy needed for development and local wealth production at discounted prices, while still making money from manufacturing LENR energy generators. This is an historic opportunity. –David J. Nagel

But the real winners are those suffering with conditions caused by dirty water:

Global Medical Impacts
The availability of water free of pathogens and parasites to a very large number of people should lead to dramatic reductions of the incidence of many diseases. The savings of lives, human suffering and costs of medical assistance, where it is available, might greatly outweigh the costs of buying and using LENR generators. The better availability of electricity would improve both the diagnostic and therapeutic sides of clinical medicine.” –David J. Nagel

Coal-mining company Massey Energy leaves behind dirty legacy for people and wildlife in the U.S.
That may be a policy of enlightened self-interest on the part of “rich countries”, but just who needs clean water? Just about everybody.

In the U.S., there are people whose water is combustible because of pollutants from nearby hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, for gas. Suzy Williams wrote a song about it in response to Gasland which documents this atrocity.

But what kind of difference can clean water make in the lives of poor people around the world? The hardship that lack of access to clean water brings to one in seven around the globe forfeits a tremendous human capital. According to Water.org [visit],

Women around the world spend 200 million hours every day collecting water and every 20 seconds a child dies from a water-born pathogen.

Cold fusion commercial products for domestic use now in research and development phase are small and portable. A 10 kilowatt steam-heat generator has a core the size of a tin of mints, requiring only a few grams of nickel powder and pico-grams of hydrogen gas to operate. These relatively simple devices can be made affordably for communities in need.

The benefits of clean water from cold fusion was highlighted in another article published in the December 1996/January 1997 Infinite Energy magazine issue #11 [visit], this one written by researcher and author Jed Rothwell. In it, he commented on Everyday Killers, a series of articles in the New York Times about the myriad of problems created by lack of access to clean water and mosquito nets. [download .pdf]

Here are some excerpts from that article showing cold fusion researchers have been thinking about the revolutionary benefits of this newly emerging technology for a long time:

It is good to be reminded why cold fusion is so important. The New York Times recently published a two-part series on third world health problems titled “Everyday Killers,” by Nicholas D. Kristof:

Malaria Makes a Comeback. And is More Deadly Than Ever, January 8, 1997
For Third World, Water Is Still Deadly Drink, January 9, 1997

… Almost all of water borne diseases could be eliminated by boiling the water used for cooking and drinking and by cooking foods more thoroughly. Better hygiene would also eliminate them, but boiling will work. Unfortunately for a family of four in India, the kerosene required to boil the water costs about $4 per month. Many poor families earn less than $20 per month, so this is much more than they can afford.

The waters of the Niger River Delta are used for defecating, bathing, fishing and garbage. Oil companies have removed more than $400 billion of wealth out of the wetland, but local residents have little to show for it.
Oil companies have removed more than $400 billion of wealth out of the Niger River Delta, and the waters are still used for defecating, bathing, fishing and garbage.
Cold fusion might ameliorate this problem by giving people cheap energy to boil drinking water and cook food. If a high-temperature cold fusion device could be made as cheaply as a kerosene burner or electric stove, it could save millions of lives every year. Boiling water is a workaround. It is not as effective as proper sanitation. As the article explains, “billions of people in the third world don’t have access even to a decent pit latrine.” In other words, in many parts of the world shovels would do more good than either kerosene or cold fusion. Latrines or septic systems would be a great benefit on land with good drainage and percolation. Concrete lined cesspools can be effective. The next step — to water pipes, sewers, and waste treatment plants — costs far more than poor communities can afford.

The Times listed some statistics for the most common water borne diseases in the 1997 article:

Deaths per Year
Diarrhea 3,100,000
Schistosmiasis 200,000
Trypanosomiasis 130,000
Intestinal Helminth Infection 1001000
TOTAL 3,530.000

Sources: World Health Organization. American Medical Association, and the Encyclopedia of Medicine.

Whether you use kerosene or cold fusion, boiling drinking water is a stopgap solution to the problem. It depends on the initiative of individuals. A mother might conscientiously boil drinking water, but when she is not around the children may not bother. It is far better and more efficient to secure a source of pure water for the whole neighborhood or village, and to drain off sewage.

On the other hand, the ad-hoc one-at-a-time method of boiling water is good because it allows individuals to solve the problem on their own, immediately, without depending on community action. It fits in well with the “micro-loan” model third world assistance programs, which were pioneered by organizations like Oxfam.

Ignorance Is Often the Real Problem
Ignorance causes much of the suffering. Children have no idea that filth causes disease. The Times article opens with a scene familiar to anyone who has traveled in the third world, although it is unthinkable to Americans and Europeans
:

Children like the Bhagwani boys scamper about barefoot on the
narrow muddy paths that wind through the labyrinth of a slum here,
squatting and relieving themselves as the need arises, as casual about
the filth as the bedraggled rats that nose about in the raw sewage
trickling beside the paths.

Adults realize that this causes disease, but they are not convinced of the fact enough to discipline their children, or to dig proper latrines. In some urban slums there is not enough room, but that is not a problem in rural villages, yet in many of them water-born diseases are endemic. Many crowded Japanese towns and villages today have no running water or sewer systems. (At least, they still do not in rural Yamaguchi, where I often spend my summer vacation.) Houses are equipped with concrete cesspools only, which were emptied by hand until the 1950s. Yet there has been no water-born disease in these villages in modern times.

Cold Fusion No Panacea, but Better than Alternatives
…Technology does not help people automatically, just by existing.

..The biggest advantage would be that individual people will decide for themselves to buy the reactor. People will not have to wait for corrupt governments or power companies to serve their needs. They will be able to solve their own problems, just as they do today with micro-loans. –Jed Rothwell excerpts from Everyday Killers

Recently, I met with veteran cold fusion researcher Dr. Melvin Miles [visit] and his colleague Dr. Iraj Parchamazad, Chairman of the Chemistry Department at University of LaVerne in LaVerne, California [visit].

An electrochemist who worked for the Navy, as well as a professor of chemistry at University of LaVerne, the now “retired” Dr. Miles continues to work on palladium-deuterium (Pd-D) electrolytic cells as he has for twenty-three years. He was the first to correlate excess heat with the production of helium, confirming the nuclear origin of the reaction. He is an expert in measuring heat, called calorimetry, as well as measuring the tiny amounts of helium produced by these cells.

I wanted to ask Dr. Miles about what he’s learned about calorimetry over the past two decades and I was lucky enough to interview Dr. Parchamazad about his latest work using palladium nano-particles baked into zeolites and exposed to deuterium gas D2O, with which he’s had a 10 out of 10 success rate in generating excess heat.

And a slide from Miles’ presentation at the American Chemical Society Meeting in 2007, a calculation showing that if we took all the deuterium atoms in the ocean and fused them into helium, creating energy according to Albert Einstein’s E= mc2, the fuel would burn 13 billion years:

Slide from Miles' presentation at National Meeting American Chemical Society 2010

Remove institutional blocks at MIT and CalTech; fund cold fusion programs now

First published by Infinite Energy IE24 in 1999, the MIT and Cold Fusion Special Report [.pdf] by Eugene Mallove featured a detailed history of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s (MIT) investigation into the claims made of cold fusion technology. The brief episode of research was undertaken by the MIT Plasma Fusion Center (PFC) in 1989 while Mallove was the school’s News Office Chief Science Writer. Mallove’s report on the hot-fusion scientist’s findings is fully documented with an analysis that shows a discrepancy between the original lab data and the data published in their final evaluation.

Drs. Pons and Fleischmann with cold fusion energy cells in 1989.
In that year 1989, two scientists Drs. Fleischmann and Pons working out of the University of Utah Salt Lake City Chemistry department announced the discovery of what was called cold fusion, a clean and powerful form of energy generated in a small test-tube of heavy water. The cell made excess heat, which means more heat comes out of the cell than goes in. And it was alot of heat, the kind of heat that could be developed into an energy-dense technology to provide clean, abundant power for the entire world. It was an astounding declaration.

Upon learning of this breakthrough discovery, scientists around the world dropped what they were doing and attempted to reproduce the Fleischmann-Pons Effect (FPE). Brilliant individuals and talented researchers from a variety of disciplines, including hot fusion and plasma scientists, threw electro-chemical cells together using materials on hand, and attached a battery.

Unfortunately, for all the groups that attempted the experiment, there was only about a 15% success rate.

Most of the attempts to reproduce the effect failed, and many of the researchers saw nothing out of the ordinary happen.

Within months after the announcement, two of the top science institutes in the United States, with the power to shape policy at the highest levels, had declared cold fusion a ridiculous hoax.

More than any other factor, it was the negative reports by MIT on the east coast, and CalTech on the west, that influenced the U.S. federal policy of excluding cold fusion from the energy portfolio.

Federal agencies cited the recommendations from MIT and CalTech as a basis for their policy.

PFC Director Ronald Parker and professor Dr. Richard Petrasso wrote the MIT final report, making the claim that the Utah scientists had “misinterpreted” their results.

Quoting Mallove’s account, scientists at MIT claimed that “tritium detection in cold fusion experiments at Los Alamos National Laboratory should be ignored because it had been done by ‘third-rate scientists'”. They were of course talking about Dr. Edmund Storms and Dr. Carol Talcott, specialists on tritium and metal-hydrides who were measuring “significant amounts of tritium” along with others teams at the national lab.

MIT and CalTech expert opinions were broadcast through the TV/satellite peak of power, just as the Internet was first emerging in the civilian sphere. The message was total. In a story to the press, Parker characterized the work of Fleischmann and Pons as “scientific schlock” and “possible fraud”.

Though he first denied saying anything of the kind, an audio tape made by the reporter confirmed his particular language. The same vocabulary was unleashed on May 1, 1989 at the Baltimore meeting of the American Physical Society with an emotional vehemence uncharacteristic of scientific objectivity.

While Director Parker was meeting with Boston Herald reporter Nick Tate, he took a phone call from NBC-TV news Science Reporter Robert Bazell during the interview. The press eventually ran the message that cold fusion was a big mistake. Since then, virtually no coverage of cold fusion breakthroughs have been broadcast, with the exception the 2009 CBS 60mins report Cold Fusion More Than Junk Science.

During the Herald interview, Parker also took a phone call from Richard Garwin, Chief Science Researcher at IBM Corporation and a member of the Energy Research Advisory Board tasked by then-Secretary of Energy James Watkins with determining the federal response to cold fusion. The ERAB ultimately decided there was no need to investigate the phenomenon further.

In the years that followed, then-President of MIT Charles M. Vest was also on a federal panel that advised President Bill Clinton’s administration to increase funding for hot fusion. The U.S. Department of Energy (DoE) has refused to even acknowledge the existence of cold fusion, resulting in no research funding for over twenty-years, including their $29 billion 2012 budget.

These reports were cited by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) to justify diverting cold fusion patents out of the normal processing stream. Mallove stated that the MIT report effectively “killed the Pons and Fleischmann patent, which happened in the Fall of 1997”.

The meme created by MIT and CalTech in 1989 remains in scientific and political circles to this day: that cold fusion is a phenomenon imagined in the minds of lesser scientists.

Dr. Vesco Noninski was first to be curious about the MIT cold fusion experimental data. A subsequent analysis performed by MIT alumnus Dr. Mitchell Swartz, now of JET Energy, confirmed discrepancies between the original lab data and the reported data. The MIT reported data appears to be shifted downward, indicating that excess heat may have been measured, as represented by the higher-temperature lab data.

Swartz detailed his findings in three papers which can be found in the Proceedings of ICCF-4 prepared by the Electric Power Research Institute in 1993: “Re-Examination of a Key Cold Fusion Experiment: ‘Phase-II’ Calorimetry by the MIT Plasma Fusion Center“, “A Method to Improve Algorithms Used to Detect Steady State Excess Enthalpy” and “Some Lessons from Optical Examination of the PFC Phase-II Calorimetric Curves“. [download .pdf]

But the damage had been done. Administrators were not interested in re-visiting an already dismissed claim.

If it were not for that lucky 15%, we would not have known anything different, and prospects for a clean energy future would indeed be gloomy.

It is now known that for the types of palladium-deuterium electrolytic cells that they were experimenting with, significantly long times are needed to “load” the deuterium into the palladium. Weeks, or even months, could go by before excess heat would be produced. Turning on the cell in the morning, and expecting the effect to occur by dinner, was unreasonable.

In addition, scientists who were experts in their own field were not necessarily skilled in the complex art of electro-chemical cells. Measuring heat, a science in itself called calorimetry, is difficult for an experienced electro-chemist, let alone a novice. Experiments done by both MIT and CalTech were plagued with poor calorimetry.

Swartz’ examinations of MIT data twenty-years ago were recently appended when Melvin Miles and Peter Hagelstein re-visited the PFC’s experimental procedures of calorimetry. Miles and Hagelstein published their analysis in the Journal of Condensed Matter Nuclear Science Volume 8 2012 pages 132-138 [download .pdf]

Miles is a retired Professor and Navy researcher who is an expert in measuring heat. Hagelstein is MIT Professor of Electrical Engineering who has theorized on the nature of the cold fusion reaction. Hagelstein has collaborated with Mitchell Swartz over the years on several IAP short courses and public demonstrations of active cells on the MIT campus without the official support of MIT. The most recent cold fusion cell continues to produce excess heat for six months now.

The summary of the Miles and Hagelstein calorimetry analysis is reproduced here:

 
The 1989 report from MIT remains flawed with unjustified shifts of temperature plots and poor calorimetry procedures. Yet this report, along with the CalTech conclusions, established the baseline for all academic and federal policy over two decades.

Twenty-years ago, Dr. Charles McCutchen of the National Institute of Health (NIH) responding to Eugene Mallove’s request to examine the MIT PFC data, asked MIT President Vest:

For its own good, and to restore some civility to a contentious field, MIT should look into (1) how its scientists came to perform and publish such a poor experiment, (2) why they either misdescribed their results, making them seem more meaningful than they were or used a subtle correcting procedure without describing exactly what it was, (3) how it came about that data from calorimeters with a claimed sensitivity of 40 mw converged, between drafts, after completion of the experiments, to within perhaps 5 mw of the result that hot fusion people would prefer to see. It might have been chance, but it might not.” –Charles McCutchen NIH 1992

In light of the problems that characterized the Plasma Fusion Center’s experiments over those few months in 1989, and in light of the twenty-three years of research confirming without a doubt the existence of a form of energy that is dense, safe and ultra-clean, both MIT and CalTech have two choices: implement Dr. McCutchen’s recommendations, or, remove any long-standing institutional blocks that have kept research on cold fusion out of the most prestigious science schools in the U.S., and begin again by instituting a serious program to understand and develop what is now called condensed matter nuclear science (CMNS).

Both MIT and CalTech have refused donor money for cold fusion research. Most recently, an “MIT physicist” denied a group’s ability to fund Hagelstein’s research by actually returning the dollars. Meanwhile, the University of Missouri increases its support for new-energy company Energetics Technologies with private donations over $5 million. For elite science schools like MIT and CalTech to ignore the reality of cold fusion is not only a threat to the integrity of our institutions of science, but a threat to our planet.

There is alot of catching up to do in order to develop the myriad of technologies that will allow humankind a second chance at living a technological future, in peace, on a green planet Earth, and we need our most talented and creative minds to do it.

New-Energy Program begins tomorrow!

Opening party starts at 4PM.

Related Links

How Nature refused to re-examine the 1989 CalTech experiment by Jed Rothwell [.pdf]

JET Energy NANOR device at MIT continues to operate months later by Ruby Carat May 22, 2012

1994 BBC doc profiles early history of cold fusion underground by Ruby Carat June 7, 2012

International Society of Condensed Matter Nuclear Science Publications

Frank Znidarsic on fossil fuels and next-generation energy: “As one door closes, another opens”

Photo: Frank Znidarsic at George Miley’s lab.

His grandfather was a farmer who immigrated to America claiming to be a coal miner, but grandpa knew nothing about coal. He did know that the growing nation needed miners to extract the newly discovered cache of carbonaceous fuel, so he did what he had to, and settled in Pennsylvania coal country. His grandson Frank Znidarsic still lives there, working in the Pennsylvania energy industry, a third-generation coal miner whose own father left this world with a bad case of black lung.

When Znidarsic writes about coal mining, and the environmental damage it causes, he does so authoritatively. Now an engineer and author, Znidarsic was the first in his family to go to college, but he labored deep underground in the mines before landing a series of jobs above-ground in the power plants that burn fossil-fuels. The second edition of his book Elementary Anti-Gravity II is almost mistitled, for the first half of the book is a condensed survey of the major sources of energy in use today from the perspective of a miner and engineer who has worked directly in the field.

The world’s current power source is met just about wholly by burning fossil-fuels like coal, natural gas, and oil. Describing each of these fuels by its method of extraction and the processing needed for commercialization, he also shows how these techniques are leaving an ecological disaster for generations to come, though he seems willing to lose the battle in order to win the war. In weighing the consequences of extracting natural gas with the ecological damage it causes, Znidarsic supports the use of natural gas over coal.

Frank Znidarsic monitors smokestack emissions in 2011.
If you are interested in what kinds of pollution are emitted by coal-fired power plants, and the complex solutions attempting to make the emissions cleaner, this book gives a concise summary of the current methods applied to this problem. He describes how costly clean coal technologies are not quite the bargain they are advertised as.

Not limited to fossil-fuels, Znidarsic also describes a brief history of nuclear accidents, including the Fukushima-Daichi Reactor #4 explosion. Referencing M. King Hubbert‘s landmark June 1956 thesis of Peak Oil in which he predicted that nuclear power would provide Earth with a technological future, Znidarsic states that cold fusion will supplant any near-future hot-fusion technology, quoting as support Jed Rothwell‘s observation that “the introduction of a new technology often follows major advances within an existing technology”.

Frank Znidarsic and Yuri Potapov at Los Alamos
Marshall McLuhan describes this as technological reversal, when one technology “flips” into another through speed-up, the way a series of photographs, brought together in rapid succession form a movie.

William Draper Harkins gives personification to this idea. Born in Titusville, Pennsylvania where the American Oil Age began, he suggested that we might get our energy by the fusion of four hydrogen atoms to make a helium atom, using Albert Einstein‘s mass-to-energy equivalence.

The second half of Elementary Anti-Gravity II is a modern science lesson, including the associated math to derive the quantum condition for cold fusion to occur. Students of physics will enjoy his algebraic derivations and the unique perspective on quantum mechanics and relativity, as well as the answer to how anti-gravity fits in.

Frank Znidarsic graduated from the University of Pittsburgh with a B.S. in Electrical Engineering in 1975. He is currently a Registered Professional Engineer in the state of Pennsylvania. In the 1980’s, he went on to obtain an A.S in Business Administration at St. Francis College. He studied physics at the University of Indiana in the 1990’s. Frank has been employed as an Engineer in the steel, mining, and utility industries. Frank has been investigating new sources of energy for twenty years. His papers have been published in numerous places including Infinite Energy Magazine and the Journal of New Energy. His work was documented in a series of videos by Seattle4Truth which you can view here.

Q&A with Frank Znidarsic

CFN You have been working in the fossil-fuel industry for years. What is your current position and what kinds of things do you do in your job today?

FZ Today I am retired, however, I am looking for commissioning contracts at power plants.

CFN Can you describe how energy returns from fossil fuels have decreased over the last century?

FZ Yes, the returns on energy were larger when the environmental costs were not considered. We use so much energy today that the environmental costs are paramount. We cannot go back to the old way of doing things, and clean energy is expensive.

CFN Talk a little about the environmental damages caused by mining practices. Is it possible to clean up the damage, and restore habitat to wildlife?

FZ Yes, strip mines can be reclaimed and water can be treated. However, I don’t believe that it is possible to restore lost streams and wells, or to stop the flow of acid water from abandoned mines. And no one really knows what all of the carbon that was released into the atmosphere will eventually do.

CFN Fracking pollutes water tables to the degree that some water supplies are combustible, and can be lit on fire right out of the tap. Wildlife has died as a result of poisonous chemicals that the industry has been allowed to keep secret. Yet it’s true that natural gas burns cleaner than coal or oil. Do you really think the benefits of natural gas outweigh the damages?

FZ Yes. Gas produces half the amount of carbon dioxide per kilowatt and the majority of the deep gas wells have caused no problems at all. I am hoping that the new wells remain in production for a long time.

CFN You’ve stated that carbon-capturing systems for coal-fired power plants can use as much as 25% of the power generated by that coal. What do you see is the future of clean coal?

FZ The price of natural gas has been unstable. Unstable prices upset the investment markets. The price of coal has been stable. On this basis, the use of coal must be continued. I don’t know if our economy can sustain the costs associated with carbon capture. I am not sure that the Earth can sustain its environment without it.

CFN Can you describe your idea of cold fusion in layman’s terms? How does this relate to anti-gravity?

FZ Yes, just as soft iron increases the strength of the electromagnetic field, the active areas in a cold fusion cell appear to increase the magnetic component of the strong nuclear force. This force is known as the nuclear spin orbit force. This increased spin orbit component tends to flip nucleons and induce Beta decays. Remarkably the same condition seems to increase the intensity of the gravitomagnetic field. I have found that this condition is fundamental to the quantum jump. I am anxiously awaiting comments on my Amazon book page.

CFN How sure are you that cold fusion will be able to provide power to the planet for a technological human future? What time-frame are we looking at, years or decades?

FZ It hard to say when could fusion technology may emerge. I have been waiting since 1989. In comparison, the production of deep natural gas arrived quickly and surprised many in the energy industry.

As with any revolutionary technology, the result rides on the shoulders of the prior work of others. The technology has now reached a point were experiment, theory, and finance are coming together. I am hoping that Dr. George Miley or Andrea Rossi will surprise us soon with commercial units. I expect commercial cold fusion products within five years.

CFN Thank-you!

FZ My pleasure.

Related Links

Youth keeping the new energy movement alive with constant creations investigating non-conventional science by Ruby Carat October 29, 2010

1994 Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons interviewed on Good Morning America – from France!

The May 31, 1994 “Good Morning America” program included an exclusive interview with Dr. Martin Fleischmann and Dr. Stanley Pons, from their lab in France. The pair left the United States due to a targeted assault from the American science community that left them unable to continue their work on a revolutionary new fusion-sized energy generated tiny test-tube.

“The whole system is guided against innovative science. It is only guided to making a better product, not to look at new things, and you are damned for looking at new things”, says Stanley Pons.

“The public in America, in the system, has to devise a more effective way to do innovative science and technology”, added Martin Fleischmann. “If it doesn’t do that, then America will really slide down the scale.”

Science editor Michael Guillen presented a positive spin on the status of cold fusion, including interviews with Dr. Eugene Mallove and Dr. Eichii Yamaguchi.

Guillen did repeat the oft-quoted failure of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s (MIT) cold fusion experiment designed to reproduce the Fleischmann-Pons Effect of excess heat. A subsequent analysis by Mitchell Swartz showed that the published data was “shifted down” from the original, casting doubt on the lab’s negative conclusion and revealing the strong possibility that MIT did in fact measure excess heat.

How will mainstream science, which holds a powerful sway in academia and government, respond when the first products are available to the public? How will we transition when we’re twenty years behind? Two heroes for tomorrow’s children convey a message from the past, about innovation and the future, that we can act upon today.

“It has the potential of really revolutionizing things”, says Guillen. “I think these folks just need a fair hearing and the two or three years they were given in this country is not hearing enough.”

Cold Fusion Now!

Thanks to the New Energy Foundation for posting this historic video.

1992 COLD FUSION IMPACT IN THE ENHANCED ENERGY AGE

By Hal Fox, Editor of Fusion Facts published July 1989 – December 1996
Published 1992 by the Fusion Information Center Salt Lake City, Utah
Complete with “Over 90 pages of Bibliography of Cold Fusion”
on a 3 1/2″ floppy disk stamped April 13, 1993.

DEDICATED TO

The Seekers of TRUTH
and
Improvers of LIFE:

The Honest Scientists and Engineers of the World.


 
 


 
 


 
 


 
 


 
 


 
 

Cold Fusion Now!
 
 

Cold Fusion Impact in the Enhanced Energy Age/Book and Disk

Top