The recent article 5 Reasons Cold Fusion is Bunk published on Discovery.com News continues the misinformation and serious inaccuracies that make clear mainstream media’s ignorance of a new discovery that offers a solution to our energy problems.
The article does not clearly discern the five distinct reasons that cold fusion cannot occur, but objections appear to be the same criticisms heard for two-and-a-half decades: cold fusion does not fit the conventional nuclear theory of hot fusion developed one hundred years ago, and therefore it cannot occur.
Sources for the article are astrophysisist Ethan Siegel, who does not accept the two-and-a-half-decades research documenting anomalous effects from deuterated systems, and known Rossi-detractor Steven Krivit, Editor of New Energy Times, who actively campaigns against E-Cat HT technology.
Taken one at a time, the “reasons” given that cold fusion cannot occur are:
Inaccuracy 1 Fusion of two elements requires high-temperatures and pressure, like the conditions inside the Sun, to overcome the Coulomb barrier, the force that keeps like-charged nucleons apart.
This statement is true for hot fusion, which has spent untold billions on attempting to re-create the conditions of the Sun here on Earth, without successfully generating any usable power.
The statement is not true of cold fusion.
“The circumstances of cold fusion are not the circumstances of hot fusion”, said Nobel laureate Julian Schwinger.
Cold fusion has no definitive theory – as yet, but the experimental evidence is overwhelming: anomalous heat and transmutations can occur within metallic-hydrides systems contained in small cells that sit on a table-top.
In experiments were palladium is infused with deuterium (Pd-D), the resulting reaction produces heat and helium. This has been documented by scientists from California Polytechnic Institute, the Navy’s China Lake research lab, and SRI International in Menlo Park, California.
This is not a likely reaction pathway that occurs in hot fusion, and yet, it occurs almost exclusively in Pd-D. Whether your vocabulary is low-energy nuclear reactions (LENR), lattice-assisted nuclear reactions (LANR), quantum fusion, or the Anomalous Heat Effect (AHE), the result does not change; put in deuterium and you can generate helium.
While the nuclear mechanism is still unknown, resonance appears to be a key component of initiating the reaction. Irving Dardik‘s Superwaves describe the fractal electromagnetic pulses that brought Energetics Technologies energy output to 25x energy input. Robert Godes‘ Q-waves give Brillouin Energy control over its Hot Tube reaction.
Increasing the temperature, as in Andrea Rossi‘s E-Cat HT and Defkalion’s Hyperion, also create movement in the system.
There are many discoveries and hypotheses today that are absurd on the face of it, yet people accept them without second thought. The idea that two particles can join together in a solid material through resonance by a nuclear mechanism we have yet to understand should not be a difficult concept, that is unless you have a vested interest in not seeing this technology come to light.
Inaccuracy 2 Fusion is always accompanied by dangerous radiation.
This statement is true of hot fusion as modeled by the Standard Model of nuclear reactions from one-hundred years ago.
It is not true of cold fusion.
Cold fusion cells sometimes emit radiation, depending on the type of design.
Radiation from cold fusion cells is 11 million times less than hot fusion. Some systems emit no radiation at all.
The Pd-D systems cited above emit only helium. In all cases, the radiation is so little, scientists must work hard to even detect it.
Indeed, the lack of radiation is what makes cold fusion the ultra-clean energy-dense solution for a green technological future on Earth.
The sources for this article compare cold fusion with the theory of hot fusion, a mistake the conventionally-minded make when they do not review the literature and refuse to accept the experimental data. It is a perplexing scientific question, and needs the full community to solve it.
Inaccuracy 3 Transmutation of nickel to copper cannot occur at room-temperature, in condensed matter.
Researchers at the University of Chicago Urbana-Champagne, University of LaVerne, at Mitsubishi in Japan, at labs in France, among others around the world, have all have detected a host of elements generated by their LENR cells.
In the Ukraine, Vladimir Vysotskii has reported biological transmutations, whereby a bacteria absorbs radioactive cesium and transmutes it into other benign materials, research which may lead to a process that can rid the planet of the thousands of tons of radioactive waste.
Reports of copper in both Pd-D and Nickel-Hydrogen Ni-H systems, as well as other elements not present before the experiment, have been reported by numerous scientists in the field causing some to use a new name for this particular research avenue: low-energy nuclear transmutations (LENT).
Inaccuracy 4 The intimation that there was a secret, hidden power source during the E-Cat testing of which the scientists were unaware, or if aware, in collusion with each other, to create the observed power output.
It stretches the boundaries of logic to suggest that the half-a-dozen scientists who conducted the third-party E-Cat test are so incompetent as to miss a secret power source, or, that they were colluding with Rossi for some global fraud.
Such accusations should address what these scientists would have to gain from this association, in either case.
The scientists who tested the unit were:
Giuseppe Levi, Bologna University, Bologna, Italy
Evelyn Foschi, Bologna, Italy
Torbjorn Hartman, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden
Bo Hoistad, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden
Roland Pettersson, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden
Lars Tegner, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden
Hanno Essen, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden
Continuing to attack the capability or veracity of this group is reprehensible.
Inaccuracy 5 Rossi has not divulged his secret catalyst that makes the E-Cat produce such big heat because he is hiding a fraudulent claim.
It is true that the scientists who conducted the tests were unable to inspect the proprietary fuel mixture inside the inner-cartridge.
However, as a black box, where all other inputs and outputs were known and measured, it was clear to the authors of the test report that the reactor made a lot of excess heat.
Whatever the 0.3 grams nickel-powder mixture inside, the E-Cat HT energy density was off-the-chart.
Rossi’s proprietary mixture of fuel is his secret alone, which he will likely have to share for a U.S. patent. If he chooses to produce marketable devices without a patent, then he will be attempting to stay ahead of the competition by driving innovation and price.
Nevertheless, the fact that there is secrecy involved in a revolutionary new energy technology is not surprising. Each of the independent labs and small companies working on a commercial device have their own proprietary element, though none have yet achieved (as far as we know) the kind of big heat, and/or or the stability and control demanded for a usable product.
What you can do
Discovery.com is part of Discovery Communications which appears to operate websites for the Discovery Channel, the Science Channel, Discovery Magazine, and surprisingly, the Oprah Winfrey Network!
Their magazine has published material on the Widom-Larsen Theory of cold fusion, which has not been confirmed (no definitive theory of cold fusion exists yet). Their source continues to be only those who have negative views of the field, and I haven’t seen any positive LENR pieces on the Science channel. (Let me know if you do!) The battle with misinformation will continue until a commercial product is available for purchase, or, a theory of cold fusion is confirmed.
Until then, let’s ask Oprah to turn her empire towards a green energy solution.
Post your request on Do You Have an Idea for Lisa Ling?
Our family is in trouble, and we could use some help.
Cold Fusion Now!
16 Replies to “Discovery News misinforms on cold fusion again”
“Fusion of two elements requires high-temperatures and pressure, like the conditions inside the Sun,” What about muon catalyzed fusion? I thought Discovery was a science magazine.
They are not well-versed in fusion, let alone nuclear science as a whole.
It seems to boil down to the difference in personalities. Some people have a natural curiosity, and openness to new things, others are comfortable with what they believe to be true, and want nothing more to disturb that.
It’s very sad when that type of personality is a science journalist though.
What bothers me the most about this article is that it appears in a publication which is widely circulated. The uninformed will continue to disbelieve the technology because they think the publication is well informed. I wouldn’t really care if others would try out the technology but articles like this cause potential customers to shy away.
Remember the quote James Martinez brought to our attention in his broadcast the other day:
“We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.”
What I find unforgivable in the article, is the cheap “straw man” technique wherein they quote Krivit as saying LENR could work because it doesn’t require “new physics”. Cold fusion can’t work because it requires “new physics”, then go on to claim that Rossi says he has achieved cold fusion, and therefore is a fraud. Rossi’s blog on JONP starts by saying he is discussing a LENR device.
Regarding the arguments that are based on “what it is called”, please remember this other noteworthy Italian’s quote… sayeth Juliet, “What’s in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet.”
Please spend 1 minute here complaining about this (the discovery article) article as it is obviously full of bias.
Here is their contact info in blue below.. click on it….
An excellent rebuttal to the Discovery article!
This is Bagdad revisited, Remember Comical Ali? The critics are like chicken, running around to escape the boiling pot of LENRgy, thinking that if they cackle loud enough it will go away. Eventually they will lose their heads, and end up like Kentucky Fried. Just have a little patience
From the first time Fleischmann and Pons presented their observations – please note the word observations – people with closed minds have said “impossible”. They have said the observations do not follow the “Laws of Physics”. How do they know that they have to! I would like to know when the final chapter of the theoretical physics textbook was written. Was it after Newton, Einstein or when some other physicist finally understood everything that nature has to offer? When I read “fusion is always accompanied by dangerous radiation”, I wonder how anyone can be that sure. When I read “transmutation cannot occur at room temperature”, I wonder again how anyone can be that sure. Have these people been endowed with knowledge that the rest of us do not possess? Or are they simply revealing their inability to embrace new concepts, as yet not understood?
An observation of excess heat generation, outside the realms of anything possible from a chemical reaction, was reported in 1989. Many more have been reported since (reported with difficulty because “cold fusion” is a no-go area for the so-called “scientific” journals). How can an observation, however unlikely, not be worthy of publication? How can an observation result in the defamation and ruin of eminent scientists’ careers?
The main-stream-media-herd approach, with the help of many vested interests, managed to bury Fleischmann, Pons and their discovery for a very long time. Fortunately, despite the criminal waste of time in getting this phenomenon developed into a practical device for the benefit of all, Rossi has now produced his “E-cat”, and had it independently verified. The bone-headed contention that someone, who has financial backers who will want to see a return, will disclose to all the secret of their invention, is staggering.
The closed-mind brigade will never be convinced, but may reluctantly have to accept the existence of cold fusion / LENR in due course. I have no illusions that the vested interests will still summon up a concerted campaign – the article in the rather ironically-named “Discovery News” (what a true discovery this is!) – being a good example. However, somewhere there will be a brave main-stream journalist (on a par with Robert Duncan at Missouri or Brian Josephson at Cambridge in the academic world) who will not follow the herd and will let people know that cold fusion is alive and well and may be able to produce clean cheap energy to the benefit of all.
Technobabble Postings on Rossi and LENR
Forbes writer MARK Gibbs has provided the pubic with quality journalistic coverage of LENR. The most recent article is: “Finally! Independent Testing Of Rossi’s E-Cat Cold Fusion Device: Maybe The World Will Change After All” The article has been viewed over 97,000 times and shared / liked on facebook over 6,700 times. The Discovery article has only been liked 67 times.
Here is a list of his articles on cold fusion LENR
10/17/2011: Hello Cheap Energy, Hello Brave New World
10/30/2011: Believing in Cold Fusion and the E-Cat
11/06/2011: Waiting for Cold Fusion
11/11/2011: National Instruments and Cold Fusion? (
11/28/2011: How to Make Cold Fusion Work: Use Unobtainium
12/31/2011: 2012: The Year of Cold Fusion?
1/08/2012: The E-Cat: Real or Surreal?
1/16/2012: Cold Fusion: NASA Says Nothing Useful
2/14/2012: E-Cat Proof Challenge: $1,000,000 is a “Clownerie”? (Updated)
2/15/2012: Rossi Responds to Smith’s Challenge to Prove E-Cat Works
2/24/2012: Dick Smith: “Rossi E-CAT … too fantastic to be true”
4/14/2012: Astroturfing Cold Fusion: Making the Promise Seem Real
8/04/2012: The State of the Cold Fusion Market
Also this article in a leading oil industry magazine…
“Third Party Tests Prove Rossi’s E-Cat HT2 Works”
By Brian Westenhaus Wed, 22 May 2013 21:55
“Rossi has enough prescience to grasp that commercial use has to lead the science research needed to gain understanding. Surely the established science community is watching, but established science works on well, established science, where expertise and depth of understanding can delve further into the particular fields.
Cold Fusion got blown as soon as labels were applied from familiar fields, which threatened the established knowledge. It’s a sorry situation when human nature needs to associate the new with the old fails and drag the wholly new into science oblivion.
Cold Fusion, LENR or other labels are all addressing a basic truth – it’s a new field, fantastically exciting, packed with potential, and the most compellingly interesting thing since germs and radiation.”
This Discovery Channel article is not worth the bytes it’s written on. I’ve put comments about this up at http://revolution-green.com/rossis-third-party-report-on-the-ecat-ht/ since I know Ken LeBrun, but overall it looks to me that Ethan Siegel is fighting a desperate rearguard action to say that the likes of Piantelli, Focardi and Brillouin can’t have measured their results accurately either. Rossi has just been able to raise the COP somewhat and be more certain of the reaction starting than other experimenters. With a lot of work and maybe some luck he’s found a way to make it function even though the theory has not yet caught up.
With hot fusion, we’re only ever dealing really with two-body interactions – there are limitations on the results we can get because of conservation of energy and momentum. With multi-body interactions, those limitations are removed and it looks like gammas do not need to be produced since there are other ways to relax an excited system.
Now to get on to the problems of those people who insist that the Earth is flat….
Theory of cold fusion derived from “electrostatic wetting ” is disclosed in Belgian patent BE1002780 the translation in English can be found on the former E-Cat Site in the article “Belgian LANR Patents”.
See also on that Site “LANR by Coulomb Explosion” and “Cold Fusion Catalyst”.
So is this just the usual bias and incompetence of science or are we seeing an orchestrated conspiracy.
From the News in Sweden… a YEAR AGO
Thanks greenwin… We love you
GreenWin on December 23, 2012 at 9:30 pm
The SVT Public Broadcast of Dr. Rossi’s e-cat adventure played to an audience share of 34% = about 3.3 million Swedes. Commercialization marches forward in spite of the army of pathsqeptiques who now are losing the adhom battle as well as the “third party verification” skirmish.
With millions of people being enlightened by new knowledge, consciousness rises…
And old fears die. The science experts have failed us, allowing the curious and inquisitive to triumph. It is a wonderful new world. Happy Christmas all!
Comments are closed.