Petition: Cold Fusion Renewable Energy Development

A renewed Cold Fusion Renewable Energy Petition is still alive at Change.org.   Sign this petition now.

Cold Fusion atomic energy has been ignored and pushed aside in discussions/ presentations about alternative energy for too long. Advantages include little/no radioactive decay matter, and extremely high energy output. As an example, 1 or 2 future-generation generators themselves could power a metropolis city the size of Los Angeles, California for a month on one small supply of common inexpensive elements. Current energy generation comes from more than 5-sources. World leaders in nations/unions such as Japan, The United States of America, Russia, South Africa, The European Union, and so on have the ability and power to fully engage in the building mass energy production plants now.  “Nuclear fission power plants and weapons are dangerous.”

As of 07/02/2012 this is now an international petition.

This is among the safest, cleanest, and most powerful energy resources that has been proven to be as or more productive than coal, and nuclear fission; which is more commonly known. Other technologies based on science fiction stories like the various Star Trek television series from the 1960’s through recent series, offer multiple ideas that need to be officially explored further. Use of this energy source has the potential of replacing oil, coal, and natural gas use worldwide. The nation that does this first would likely reduce foreign dependence by 100%, erase it’s own and most other nations trade debts and retain all funds used towards purchasing foreign energy resources. The conservative powers that currently exist and the energy corporations that want to hold onto their dominance are fighting this in every way possible.

An accommodating resource of energy using a smaller cold fusion engine can also power vehicles of all sizes.  World leaders need to endorse this safer alternative too. Job losses may initially be massive but 3x to 10x more jobs would be created. Worldwide unemployment would drop dramatically due to increased lower cost energy availability.

We are in a new and more open time to succeed. Let’s make them listen and act for the people, our planet, not the corporate billionaires and subservient politicians!

Please sign this worlwide petition and forward this article: (Click Here)

NASA Information (Link)  …More proof!

Patenting Cold Fusion technology – Navigating Patent Office Classification – Part 2 –

The following is a further posting in a series  of articles by David French, a patent attorney with 35 years experience, which will review issues of interest touching on the field of Cold Fusion.

As a preliminary matter, I have been asked why I am doing these postings.  I have a message.  That message is: 

“Patents are a vast resource for learning about what is going on.  Read them.  Understand them.  And you will make better inventions yourself.”

The present posting continues with that objective.

In Part 1 of this posting we examined how Cold Fusion applications and patents are classified under the traditional United States patent office classification system.  Patents are also classified by another system, extensively in use in Europe and elsewhere and also used as a secondary classification system within the US patent office.  This is the system of the International Patent Classification – IPC sponsored by the World Intellectual Property Organization – WIPO in Geneva. WIPO is the same organization that operates the Patent Cooperation Treaty – PCT.

Currently, US patents are simultaneously classified both under the US classification system and under the IPC.  This has not been true in the past, but it is true today.  And through back-classification, US patents from about 1902 onwards are now also classified under the IPC. 

The IPC is an intuitively designed method for classifying inventions. The first number of the class is always a letter of the alphabet that corresponds to one of the following:

International Patent Classification 

Section A — Human Necessities

Section B — Performing Operations; Transporting

Section C — Chemistry; Metallurgy

Section D — Textiles; Paper

Section E — Fixed Constructions

Section F — Mechanical Engineering; Lighting; Heating; Weapons; Blasting

Section G — Physics

Section H — Electricity 

The section that concerns us is: G-Physics. Subsection and further subsections that concern us are: 

G21

NUCLEAR PHYSICS; NUCLEAR ENGINEERING

G21B

FUSION REACTORS (uncontrolled fusion, applications thereof G21J

 G21B 3/00

Low-temperature nuclear fusion reactors, e.g. alleged Cold Fusion reactors [8]

(enter the subclass on the IPC Home page in the left-side box under “Current symbol” to view subclass)

In the case of the IPC there is an actual category for a “low-temperature nuclear fusion reactor”.  The full classification code is: G21B 3/00.  With this code, searches for patents can be carried out in various patent offices around the world.  Here are some results for searches at the European Patent Office – EPO.

 EPO Search 

In the EPO there is a single database that includes both applications and patents.  A document that contains the letter “A” in its reference number relates to an application.  A document that contains the letter “B” in its reference number refers to an issued patent.

Searching in the EPO patent and patent application database using the IPC classification G21B3/00 (on the date of this search, May 15, 2012) as the search term produces 93 results.   Here  is the resulting list of viewable documents identified in the search.

We can carry out this search a second time combining the specific class with additional terms.  Here are the results when searching for the combination of:  “Cold Fusion” in the full text of a document and G21B3/00 as the IPC classification – 12 results found.  Here are the results of that search.

It is pretty clear from these search results that the European Patent Office is at least receiving applications that are directed to Cold Fusion related inventions.  Due to the delays in examination that can amount to 4, 5 and 6 and more years, few of these applications have issued patent.  (An issued patent has a number with B-in-a-bracket following.)  But it is often advantageous for an applicant to have the actual grant of a patent delayed.

IPC searching at the US PTO

Returning to the US patent office, searches can be done amongst pending applications and issued US patents using the IPC classification system.  Here are some of the results on the patent side, done around May 15, 2012:

USPTO Search

Results of Search in US Patent Collection db for:
ICL/G21B3/00: 31 patents.

Results of Search in US Patent Collection db for:
(ICL/G21B3/00 AND fusion): 23 patents.

Results of Search in US Patent Collection db for:
(ICL/G21B3/00 AND “Cold Fusion”): 19 patents.

Results of Search in US Patent Collection db for:
(ICL/G21B3/00 AND “excess heat”): 15 patents.

 Results of Search in US Patent Collection db for:
((ICL/G21B3/00 AND “Cold Fusion”) AND “excess heat”): 12 patents.

 The above searches were done amongst issued US patents using the IPC classification system.  Here are some of the results on the application side:

Results of Search in AppFT Database for:
ICL/G21B3/00 and “Cold Fusion” and “excess heat”:   7 applications.

And here is an actual list of pending applications that meet the above search criteria:

PUBLISHED APP. NO.                                             Title

1.  20120069945 INTERACTIONS OF CHARGED PARTICLES ON SURFACES FOR FUSION AND OTHER APPLICATIONS 

2.  20110142183 Multiring apparatus and method to measure heat released by a sample loaded with hydrogen 

3.  20100303188 Interactions of Charged Particles on Surfaces for Fusion and Other Applications 

4.  20100195780 Apparatus and process for thermal gradient-driven metal catalyzed fusion reactor 

5.  20100008461 Cold Fusion apparatus 

6.  20090122940 LOW TEMPERATURE FUSION 

7.  20080205572 Apparatus and process for generating nuclear heat 

(Hyperlink access to these applications is available here.)

While the titles provide some indication of the content of the documents, the above results do not necessarily mean that these patent applications actually address Cold Fusion.  It only means that this term or phrase was used somewhere in the document, along with “excess heat”. They have, however, been classified by a classification examiner in International Class G21B3/00.

Furthermore, even if a patent issues on any of these applications, this does not mean that a useful process for delivering unexplained excess heat has been described.  Many times examiners choose not to challenge an applicant to prove utility.  It is possible to file a patent application that is totally erroneous, and sometimes it will slip through, surprisingly, more often than not.

Additionally, if a patent application describes a process that could possibly be useful to provide excess heat through Cold Fusion, but only claims a collateral arrangement which is apparently operative, then the patent will issue.  This is because the patent is not directed to controlling the generation of heat through Cold Fusion.  Patents are classified according to what they claim.

 Where is the breakthrough patent?

 Almost certainly many other patent offices around the world have been receiving applications relating to Cold Fusion. Most of these applications will eventually be paralleled at the US Patent Office. These applications may describe a valid process, or not.  Anyone can search and review such documents once they are laid open to the public.  If anyone has filed an absolute winner patent application that describes how to make it happen, we would almost certainly know about it once 18 months have passed from the original filing date.

 Most countries in the world allow private research to be carried out notwithstanding the existence of an issued patent.  Furthermore, applications cannot be used to disrupt even full-out commercialization up to the point when a patent is granted.  Once a patent issues, compensation can be required for pre-grant use, and an injunction may issue.  But with some 150 countries around the world, it is unlikely that any person obtaining a controlling patent in the field of Cold Fusion will be able to shut-down everywhere the exploitation of the knowledge provided in a patent application that describes a working process.  This is just as true concerning Cold Fusion as it is true concerning the alleged 100 mile per gallon carburetor.

 Accordingly, there is good reason to believe that the breakthrough knowledge to solve the Cold Fusion riddle and provide the world with its stream source of energy has not been addressed in a patent filing, unless it is amongst those applications still pending in their 18 month secrecy period..

 

The Evidence for LENR

“Over 2 decades with over 100 experiments worldwide indicate LENR is real, much greater than chemical…” —Dennis M. Bushnell, Chief Scientist, NASA Langley Research Center

Low Energy Nuclear Reaction (LENR) using nickel and hydrogen is a clean, very very cheap, and super abundant new energy technology. It would be fair to say that it is the silver bullet for our current continual energy crisis – and as a consequence sounds too good to be true.

In November of 2009 the US Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) published Defense Analysis Report DIA 8-0911-003 titled “Technological Forecast: Worldwide Research on Low-Energy Nuclear Reactions Increasing and Gaining Acceptance” ( http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/BarnhartBtechnology.pdf ).

The paper gives a rundown of Low Energy Nuclear Reaction work being done around the world. Among other things it notes: “DIA assesses with high confidence that if LENR can produce nuclear-origin energy at room temperatures, this disruptive technology could revolutionize energy production and storage, since nuclear reactions release millions of times more energy per unit mass than do any known chemical fuel.”

“Energy density many orders of magnitude over chemical.” —Michael A. Nelson, NASA

Here is a detailed description of a LENR generator and formula that was producing energy over unity. In the March of 1994 US government contract F33615-93-C-2326 titled “NASCENT HYDROGEN: AN ENERGY SOURCE” ( www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/GernertNnascenthyd.pdf ), “Anomalous heat was measured from a reaction of atomic hydrogen in contact with potassium carbonate on a nickel surface.”

This phenomenon (LENR) has been confirmed in hundreds of published scientific papers as is shown by this document titled “Tally of Cold Fusion Papers” ( http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJtallyofcol.pdf ). It gives readers a sense of the scale, variety, and sources of the material available about this subject. It also gives some indication of how much has been published on cold fusion, and where they were published.

Of special note is a PowerPoint presentation by George Miley of the University of Illinois ( https://netfiles.uiuc.edu/mragheb/www/NPRE%20498ES%20Energy%20Storage%20Systems/Nuclear%20Battery%20using%20Clusters%20in%20Nanomaterials.pptx ), who has successfully replicated the LENR “cold fusion” reaction.

In the ebook “Secrets of E-Cat,” (Consulente Energia Publisher, 145 pages, 68 illustrations, Pdf format, 7 €, http://www.consulente-energia.com/cold-fusion-book-secrets-e-cat-by-mario-menichella-secret-ecat-andrea-rossi-focardi-energy-catalyzer.html ) author Mario Menichella says:

“The modern history of cold fusion begins with the premature announcement made in the United States by the two electrochemical Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons, who in 1989 convened a press conference…there were numerous attempts to replicate (their) result, but for some years had little success, so that soon the question of cold fusion was labeled by the media and mainstream science as a “hoax.”

Menichella continues, “The probably better experimental work…carried out in Siena since the early Nineties, by a group of physicists composed by Sergio Focardi (University of Bologna), Francesco Piantelli (University of Siena), Roberto Habel (University of Cagliari), but it did not lead to a system capable of generating useful amount of excess energy for normal industrial or domestic applications. In Siena, in fact, the three scientists – using hydrogen and nickel as the two only “ingredients” of the reaction, plus an appropriate amount of heat supplied to the system – managed to get out a double thermal energy than the electrical energy provided in input.”

You may be wondering why the ebook is called “Secrets of E-Cat.” As you can see, LENR (otherwise loosely known as “cold fusion”) is a proven scientific phenomena, but the excess energy from this exothermic reaction was not large enough for normal industrial or domestic applications. In comes Andrea Rossi, the e-cat fusion developer, an Italian inventor who has a Masters Degree in Engineering from Milan University.

To quote the article “ANDREA ROSSI BIOGRAPHY – STORY”
( http://ecatfusion.com/e-cat/andrea-rossi-biography-the-e-cat-fusor-story ):

“In 2007, Andrea Rossi arrived at the very critical point in his research and concentrated his time on his invention. He also hired Sergio Focardi, a physicist from the University of Bologna who is an acknowledged expert in field. The physicist’s work on nickel hydrogen reactions proved to be invaluable…In 2009, Mr. Rossi introduced to the public a process and a device called the E-Catalyst. This is a revolutionary process in energy production and is also called low energy nuclear reactions. It could be a breakthrough invention since it can solve some of the energy problems of our planet.”

I recommend watching the video contained in this article titled “Nobel laureate touts E-Cat cold fusion” (http://pesn.com/2011/06/23/9501856_Nobel_laureate_touts_E-Cat_cold_fusion/ ). Dr. Brian Josephson, winner of the 1973 Nobel Prize in Physics, stars in the video whose stated purpose is to wake up the media to the E-Cat story, which has not been widely reported on in the mainstream media of the English-speaking world.

By the way, here is a article titled “The New Breed of Energy Catalyzers: Ready for Commercialization?” ( http://www.cleantechblog.com/2011/08/the-new-breed-of-energy-catalyzers-ready-for-commercialization.html ), which contains a relatively current survey of all the companies that are trying to bring LENR to commercialization.

The subject of LENR, a clean, very very cheap, and super abundant energy technology, is too deep to comprehensively cover in this limited space. Using only nickel and hydrogen, both very abundant and cheap, in a LENR exothermic reaction, could be a source of almost unlimited energy for humanity, with a cost close to nothing, and no environmental pollution. Hopefully the limited evidence for LENR cited above will go part of the way toward convincing an open minded reader of the validity of this too good to be true energy technology.

“Total replacement of fossil fuels for everything but synthetic organic chemistry.” —Dr. Joseph M. Zawodny, NASA

Cold Fusion Is Back! – CERN Webinar on Cold Fusion, March 22, 2012

The following is a further posting in a series of articles by David French, a patent attorney with 35 years experience, which will review patents of interest touching on the field of Cold Fusion.

March 23, 2012 –One would think that the above title should be a headline in the newspapers following a live webcast originating from CERN in Geneva on March 22, 2012.  This CERN Colloquium entitled: “Overview of Theoretical and Experimental Progress in Low Energy Nuclear Reactions – LENR” was presented by Drs Francesco Celani and Yogendra Srivastava. Dr Celani is an Italian physicist at the Italian National Institute of Nuclear Physics, Frascati National Laboratories, Italy and the Vice-President of the International Society of Condensed Matter. Dr Srivastava is an emeritus professor of physics at Indiana University in the U.S.

Program:  (slides and video at bottom of screen)

These two scientists have devoted their careers to studying the phenomena originally announced by Pons & Fleischmann in 1989 and discredited in the media and amongst the community of nuclear physicists in the years following.  But, as the speakers confirmed, there are still 1000 researchers around the world who have been studying the phenomena of: “unexplained excess heat” and they have produced results that irrefutably indicate that something real is happening.

Professor Srivastava addressed his preferred theory as to the source of the unexplained excess heat.  He was clear that it had to be nuclear and argued that it arose from a weak force effect.  Essentially, he supported the Widom & Larsen theory that neutrons can be formed in a solid matter matrix by the capture of an electron by a proton:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_capture

http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=229479

This presumably requires overcoming a 780 KeV energy barrier based on the mass difference between the neutron and the combined masses of a proton and an electron.  But once a neutron is formed, it’s available to carry-out all sorts of nuclear reactions, including transmutations of available background metals in the crystal lattice and the conversion of hydrogen or deuterium nuclei trapped in the crystal lattice into tritium, helium 3 or helium 4.  These processes result in the releasing of substantial amounts of heat.

Professor Srivastava did not address the alternate theory, originally proposed by Pons and Fleischmann, that the source of unexplained energy was arising from the fusion of two deuterium nuclei trapped in a metal lattice.  The prospect remains that this process may still be occurring.

“D-D fusion produces a 2.45 MeV neutron and helium-3 half of the time, and produces tritium and a proton but no neutron the other half of the time. D-3He fusion produces no neutron.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron

Arguing against the proposition that D-D fusion is occurring deep in the host crystal lattice is the evidence that apparently indicates that the low energy nuclear reaction effect – LENR tends to occur on the surfaces of active metals such as Palladium and Nickel. 

On the other hand, Professor Peter Hagelstein from MIT, who continues to defend the deuterium fusion concept, has argued, with some effect, that if helium is the resulting material that forms through fusion at critical vacancies in a metal lattice, then the accumulation of helium can choke-back the reaction by plugging the vacancies. However, helium formed near a surface has an opportunity to defuse out of the metal lattice, freeing up the vacancies in the same region to continue the LENR effect.  Hence even the deuterium fusion theory can fit with the observed phenomena that high surface area contributes to the production of excess heat.

The original experiments done by Pons and Fleischmann produced excess heat on the order of 10-20%.  That is, for every unit of electricity consumed in the electrolysis experiments that they were running, the driving of deuterium onto/into Palladium, an additional 20% of heat was appearing in the system.  A problem with results of this nature is that the measurement of an excess heat of only 20% requires careful instrumentation.  A great deal of criticism was made of the calorimetric procedures followed by Pons and Fleischmann.  However, Professor Celani produced data on experiments in the 20 years following 1989 that show heat gains in excess of 50% to 200% and, on occasion, infinite, in the sense that heat was produced even though no electricity was being run through the reaction vessel.

A lot of the objections to the demonstration of the production of excess heat would necessarily be met if it could be reliably shown that heat gains in excess of 100% are being achieved.  Errors in actually measuring the precise amount of excess heat would then be irrelevant.

There are a number of Golden Goals that one would like to see achieved if the LENR effect is to become the gift to humanity that many believers insist is possible.  The critical parameters are:

1. Gain. If electricity or another energy source is needed to precipitate an LENR effect, then gain has to be significant.  It costs 3 calories of thermal energy to generate 1 calorie of electrical energy.  This means that the gain, if electricity must be used, has to be at least 300%.  Gain is important.

2. Power. Power is important because if the phenomenon collapses at higher power rates, then this energy generation source will never be of service to mankind.  Instead, it will be a curiosity.  It is known that a pair of deuterium nuclei can be made to fuse by introducing a Muon in place of an electron in orbit around at least one of a pair of deuterium nuclei.  This is called a “muon catalyzed fusion“.

This produces heat by way of fusion.  But Muons are extremely difficult to generate and have a very short half-life.  The phenomenon is interesting but it’s not likely to be useful to produce power at any relevant level of interest to human society.  Test results shown by Professor Celani indicate results, by solid scientific researchers, in which energy is being generated at rates up to on the order of 20-50 W.  This is promising.  The claims by Andrea Rossi and Defkalion that they are producing energy at the rates in excess of 1 kW are suspect as they are not been scientifically evaluated and proven.  But more than trivial power has been produced. Power is important.

3. Temperature. Temperature is important because of the Carnot principle.  If you’re going to generate work using thermalized energy, then the Carnot theorem sets a limit on the proportion of thermal energy that can be converted to work.  Electricity is equivalent to work energy.  The Carnot formula depends on the temperature difference existing between a heat source and a heat sink.  Thus the maximum energy, the absolute theoretical maximum, that can be extracted from a heat source at 273°C using ice at 0°C as a sink is 50%. 

Typical power generation stations that burn coal, gas or oil rely on temperatures in excess of 800°C and have difficulty achieving efficiencies in excess of 40%.  Many of the experimental tests done in the past were carried-out in electrolytic cells that contained water or heavywater.  Only modest temperature increases were being measured, and the presence of water set an upper limit on any temperature increase that could be created.  More recent experiments in the gas phase have actually been running at 300°C, 400°C and experiments have been attempted by Professor Celani at temperatures as high as 900°C.  Achieving high temperatures will be extremely relevant to providing mankind with inexpensive electrical power.  Temperature is important.

4. Duration. The duration of the unexplained excess energy effect has been the bane of most researchers.  Generally, it has taken a long time to turn-on an LENR effect. And then in most cases the effect has only lasted for a limited period of time, in some cases only minutes.  However, more recent tests have demonstrated a heat generation duration of many days, sometimes weeks.  To be an effective source of energy the active materials have to be able to continue to produce energy beyond a trivial short interval.  Accepting that a nuclear effect is the source of the energy, the prospects for extended periods of heat generation are theoretically possible.  The amount of heat that can be provided through nuclear effects is enormous. Technology must resolve the issue of how to sustain an LENR reaction over an extended period of time.  Duration is important.

5. Control.  From the beginning and even today, the turning-on of an LENR effect has been a sometimes proposition.  Apart from the extended delays that are required before the effect appears, it’s not even clear whether the effect is precipitated by:

– electric current passing through a host crystal LENR environment

– the presence of an electric field applied to the LENR environment

– oscillations in such an electric field

– magnetic fields, whether static or oscillating

– thermal energy present in the form of vibrations present in the host atom nuclei forming a crystal matrix; in electrons present in the crystal matrix, possibly in the conduction band or otherwise; or in protium/deuteron nuclei nesting at critical locations in the crystal matrix

All of these effects represent “handles” by which a low energy nuclear reaction might be controllable.  Ideally, controls should exist to not only turn-on an LENR event but also to adjust its rate, including preventing runaway, and allowing for shutdown.  Control is important.

Professor Celani indicated that in one of the experiments that had been carried-out a heat flux of 1500 W per gram of Palladium was achieved.  This compares favorably with the heat flux at the core of the sun:

“At the center of the sun, fusion power is estimated by model to be about 276.5 watts/m3, [2] a power production density which more nearly approximates reptile metabolic heat generation than it does a thermonuclear bomb. [3] Peak power production in the Sun’s center, per volume, has been compared to the volumetric heats generated in an active compost heap.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_core

 A key comment in the presentation by Professor Celani addressed the effect of loading of the metal lattice.  It has been known that as hydrogen is forced into a nickel or palladium lattice, the electrical resistance of the lattice initially rises, but then falls after a loading ratio of approximately 0.7:1 is passed.  Thereafter, approaching a loading of approximately 1:1 the resistance can drop by 50% from its peak.  Information on the effects of loading beyond this limit is not readily available.  But Professor Celani did observe that the observation of the appearance of excess energy appears uniquely associated with loadings in this negative resistance region.

The suggestion is that loading is a critical parameter for these phenomena to occur.  Any technology which could generate high loadings and maintain high loadings over time could be key to a practical application of the LENR effect.

Post presentation questions

After the speakers had concluded their remarks, questions were invited from the audience.  One particularly persistent questioner insisted repeatedly that the numerous failed attempts by scientists to replicate the ColdFusion effect following the Pons and Fleischmann announcement in 1989 should be given as much weight as the more recent identification of concrete, incontrovertible, excess energy experiments from numerous sources around the world.  The relevance of this objection can be compared to the example of announcing to children at a birthday party that there is a special treasure source of gold foil covered chocolates to be found somewhere in the house.  The children proceed to effect an exhaustive treasure hunt throughout the house.  Many many children come back reporting that no such gold coin chocolates have been found.  But a few report that, while they didn’t find the treasure source itself, they did find some sample chocolate coins which they then place on the table. 

Would it be appropriate to argue in these circumstances that a treasure source does not exist?  Unfortunately, the style of this questioner has predominated in the general physics community since 1989.

Watch Yogendra Srivastava video and slide presentation

Watch Antonio Celani video and slide presentation

Rumpelstiltskin Reaction

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. –John 1:1 Holy Bible

The name cold fusion describes the biggest technological advance in energy since humans tamed fire. It also continues to generate intense emotional responses, both positive and negative.

Such is the Power of Word.

Michael McKubre presents “What happened to cold fusion?”
In his presentation at Cafe Scientifique, Dr. Michael McKubre discussed the various names that have been given to the Fleischmann-Pons Effect of excess heat, as well as the myriad of subsequent phenomenon since discovered that confirm nuclear reactions when hydrogen infuses certain types of metals.

In this presentation slide below, he notes the vocabulary characterizing various aspects of condensed matter nuclear science. Dr. McKubre described a few of the terms during the introduction of the lecture.

All of these terms in red are used to describe what was announced on March 1989 as cold fusion. The term cold fusion actually came from previous work in hot fusion – muon catalyzed hot fusion.

The term stuck, it’s unfortunate, it irritated the physicists. I think the physicists would have been irritated anyway, but this didn’t help.

In attempts to soften the blow we’ve called it low energy nuclear reactions or lattice assisted nuclear reactionsLENR/LANR. Those terms are not very good. Low is subjective and pejorative – you know we don’t really want to produce low energy.

And nuclear is always a bad word. We took the nuclear out of nuclear magnetic resonance and called it magnetic resonance imaging because sociologically, nuclear is not a good term.

Chemically assisted nuclear reactions. A whole slew of things.

The Japanese rather coyly called it new hydrogen energy which really conceals a wealth under that phrase.

If we’re talking about the Fleischmann-Pons Effect, the effect that Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons announced to the world on March 23 which was the electrolytic production of excess energy from a cell containing heavy water D20 and a palladium cathode, then the Fleischmann-Pons Effect is an accurate descriptor.

But the field has expanded vastly beyond that, and we now have an overall terminology condensed matter nuclear science attempting to distinguish what we do from what physicists do with high-energy particles or high-temperature plasmas.” –Michael McKubre

Each name expresses a particular aspect of a highly elusive process that has defied explanation for more than two decades.

As long as there is no definitive theory and scientists are still not sure how this special excess heat effect is initiated, or what the Nuclear Active Environment really is, there will be no definitive name.

The element Helium is correlated with excess heat from the consumption of the hydrogen isotope Deuterium.

One reason the moniker ‘cold fusion’ has “stuck” is that, as the Palladium-Deuterium Pd-D systems have shown, deuterium in can give rise to measurements of Helium out.

In this slide from Dr. McKubre’s presentation, we see excess heat is positively correlated with the production of Helium. The slope of the line represents the rate of change of energy per helium measured and is close to 31 MeV, +/- the error.

Assuming two deuterium nuclei pair up to form a helium nuclei, the measure of the heat generated, or Q-value, would be 24 MeV. Dr. McKubre believes that the observed higher bias may be due to experimental design elements, and that a value closer to the expected 24 MeV Q-value is possible.

These models are based on last century's hot fusion theory of nuclear reactions and do not occur the same way in cold fusion. High-energy particles and dangerous radiation, by-products of hot fusion, are not seen in cold fusion.

In Pd-D systems, two deuterium nuclei are somehow ending up to form a Helium nuclei, which is the essence of fusion, but not fusion as we know it now.

That can’t be all that’s going on either, for the excess heat effect is also generated from Nickel-Hydrogen Ni-H systems, which do not use a fuel of deuterium, but the simplest form of hydrogen, protium.

And because elements not originally present in a cell can be created during the process, there is also a transmutation effect, which could be from either fusion or fission inside the atomic matrix, or, some other new nuclear process.

For these outcomes to occur in different systems, creating multiple different effects, implies nuclear reactions occurring beyond conventionally known theories from 20th century physics.

Nevertheless, the name cold fusion reflects this idea of fusion occurring in “cold” circumstances, i.e. not hot plasmas.

The future of the future is the present.
Marshall McLuhan

In ancient times, before science, words were magic. Uttering a name gave power and dominion over that thing. Saying a word could bring whole universes into existence.

It will be remembered that Thoth is called the “scribe of the gods,” the “lord of writing,” the “master of papyrus,” the maker of the palette and the ink jar,” the “lord of divine words,” i.e., the holy writings or scriptures, and as he was the lord of books and master of the power of speech, he was considered to be the possessor of all knowledge both human and divine.

Ancient Egyptian god Thoth was a master of words of power.

At the creation of the world it was he who reduced to words the will of the unseen and unknown creative Power, and who uttered them in such ways that the universe came into being, and it was he who proved himself by the exercise of his knowledge to be the protector and friend of Osiris, and of Isis, and of their son Horus. From the evidence of the texts we know that it was not by physical might that Thoth helped these three gods, but by giving them words of power and instructing them how to use them.
–E. Wallis Budge Egyptian Magic 1901

What we choose to call this transformational new energy technology will continue to evolve, until the secret formula is unlocked. In an instant, the simple, clear, perfect vision of our clean energy future will be summoned by a new and powerful Name. Scientists in every basement lab and every DOE office will be able to relax for a bit, and then get down to the hard work of implementing a revolution across the globe.

But the kids won’t care. They make up their own names. Change nouns to verbs, verbs to nouns, mess up the plural, create their own magic.

For this year, we’ll stick with Cold Fusion Now, not just cause we mean it, because it fits – and the kids dig it too!

Related Links

SRI International: “What happened to cold fusion?” video lecture with Michael McKubre at Cafe Scientifique by Ruby Carat November 21, 2011

Rumpelstiltskin Brothers Grimm from Short Stories

Addendum: Andrea Rossi on Ca$h Flow

Cold Fusion Now is still on the road, currently in the incredible city of New York, sitting in the beautiful Waldorf Astoria lobby!

But, Mr. Moho asked, and so here it is: what I flash-transcribed from the recent Andrea Rossi interview with James Martinez on Ca$h Flow – albeit in a loose, short note form.

Andrea-Rossi
Andrea Rossi speaks with Massachusetts State Legislators about manufacturing E-Cats.
In the beginning of the interview, James mentioned Nikola Tesla as one of the greatest inventors that ever lived, and introduced Mr. Rossi similarly for his revolutionary technology.

When James asked about the pressure on him and his team to produce a good product, Mr. Rossi replied “What you call pressure, I translate as responsibility.”

“This is why we are working without limits of time to achieve the targets that we wanted to reach in due time. Absolutely, yes, we feel the responsibility. But this feeling of responsibility is also a source of energy to make our work and to overcome the stakes we have to pass through everyday.”

Mr. Rossi gets a lot mail from all over the world and responds “very fast”, dedicating 2-3 hours each day to answering inquiries, because he “can learn a lot from this”.

James believes the entire planet will benefit from this technology saying “We are at a great new time in the world, right now”, and “this is some of the best news for the entire world.” He wanted to give Mr. Rossi a chance to reiterate how safe and clean this new energy technology is:

“The planet will benefit immensely. Eventually, we won’t have the pollution and problems we’ve had from nuclear energy ever again.

We do not use toxic material, we do not use radioactive material, we do not produce radioactive material, and in the thousands of tests that we have made with specialists from the University of Bologna, we never have found any emission of radiation. We have no emission of smoke, no emission of waste of any kind, we have no CO2 emissions, no noise emissions and no liquid emissions.”

James asked: Is it easier to integrate your technology in a developing country, or, do you think it is easier to do it in a more “modern” venue like the United States?

“This is a very good question. There are pros and cons in either case. Because, of course, in a developing country, the pro is that there is less resistance, because you have a blank paper to write upon. In this sense, there is a pro. But the con is that there is less “???” preparation to accept a very new thing.

The contrary is in the developed countries… I can say this, I have an extreme high level interest for this technology in countries like USA, North America, and Europe mainly. Of course, also interest in other areas, but less intense.

Your question is very good, and I am not sure I’m able to answer. In the beginning we will diffuse our work better in developed countries, but would be delighted to go wherever we will be called, absolutely.”

When James asked which countries will have access to the technology first, Mr. Rossi replied they were organizing a network around the world, but the “first point of development and the main center of production will be in the United States.”

On the topic of implementation, James asked whether he had met any resistance from power companies.

“I think that all the energy sources will be integrated. I do not think that we will displace other energy sources. I think that we will reinforce the energy network of the world.

Maybe other sources will be employed in the fields where they are more “???”. I think that we can be integrated in the global energy system. Of course there will be some competition, and this will be better for the public.”

Looking forward, James asked if this technology would be able to be used in an automobile. Mr. Rossi replied that it was a difficult question to answer right now, but he thought that ships and trains would most likely be an easier application.

“To be applied to an automobile, I think yes, but the application of this kind of energy to the cars or trucks will need not less than 10-15 years because there are very big problems to be resolved
with electricity.”

Asked if he was using an E-Cat in his own home, Mr. Rossi said:

“Yes. Yes, because it’s a test. Of course yes, I am using it. This is important. There are some that are working in some houses of my team and I and we have to collect all the data and analyze all the problems. They are our guinea pigs.”

Cold Fusion Now!

Top