One step closer to controlling nuclear fusion

Jan 13, 2012 By Nicolas Guérin
Confined chamber for the plasma. Credit: EPFL

Using a heating system, physicists have succeeded for the first time in preventing the development of instabilities in an efficient alternative way relevant to a future nuclear fusion reactor. It’s an important step forward in the effort to build the future ITER reactor.

Scientists have achieved a milestone: they have managed to stop the growth of instabilities inside a nuclear fusion reactor. How? Here’s a look at this energy source, which despite being challenging to control, is nevertheless extremely promising.

is an attempt to reproduce the energy of the Sun in an Earth-based reactor system. When gas is heated to several million degrees, it becomes . Sometimes in the plasma, an instability will appear and grow large enough to perturb the plasma, making it vibrate despite the presence of the magnetic field in which it is contained. If the plasma touches the walls of the reactor, it will cool rapidly and create large electromagnetic forces within the structure of the machine.

The challenge is to reduce the instabilities deep within in the interior of the plasma so that they don’t amplify, while at the same time allowing the reactor to continue to function normally. Thus it is necessary to work within the specific configuration of these fusion reactors, where the plasma is strongly confined by a magnetic field. By adjusting an antenna that emits electromagnetic radiation, physicists from EPFL’s Center for Research in Plasma Physics were able to quench the instabilities when they appear, in the precise region where they are forming, and without perturbing the rest of the installation.

From theory to practice

The physicists first conducted simulations to verify the extent to which specific radiation frequencies and locations of application would suppress the growth of instabilities. Then they carried out tests to confirm their calculations. The beauty of their approach is that they were able to use antennas that are used as part of the system to heat the plasma, and that are already present in the Joint European Torus (JET), the largest reactor currently in use. Surprisingly, the simulations and the tests showed that heating and instability suppression can be combined, by aiming the radiation slightly off-center in the plasma.

The next step will be to add a detector system that will make it possible to neutralize instabilities in real time over longer time periods. These improvements can then be implemented in the ITER , currently in development in Southern France.

Explore further: Experiment with speeding ions verifies relativistic time dilation to new level of precision

More information: Control of magnetohydrodynamic stability by phase space engineering of energetic ions in tokamak plasmas, J.P. Graves, et al, Nature Commun. *3*, 624 (2012). DOI: 10.1038/ncomms1622

Provided by Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne

4.5 /5 (58 votes)

Related Stories

Plasma: The trouble with bubbles

Jun 24, 2011

Controlling a boiling plasma at several million degrees Celsius – that's the challenge of nuclear fusion, our great energy hope for the future. EPFL's Plasma Physics Research Center (CRPP) has just published ...

With lithium, more is definitely better

Nov 10, 2011

A team of scientists working at the U.S. Department of Energy's Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (PPPL) has found that increasing the amount of lithium coating in the wall of an experimental fusion reactor ...

Sensors pave the way to using energy from the stars

May 30, 2011

(PhysOrg.com) -- The international ITER project is setting out to store the energy of stars in a reactor. To meet this challenge, scientists must be able to measure the properties of matter in fusion. A team ...

Taming thermonuclear plasma with a snowflake

Nov 08, 2010

Physicists working on the National Spherical Torus Experiment (NSTX) at the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory are now one step closer to solving one of the grand challenges of magnetic fusion research -- ...

I-mode powers up on alcator C-mod tokamak

Nov 10, 2011

A key challenge in producing fusion energy is confining the plasma long enough for the ionized hydrogen to fuse and produce net power. Suppressing plasma turbulence is one approach to this, but the resulting ...

Jaguar supercomputer harnesses heat for fusion energy

Apr 18, 2011

University of California-Irvine researcher Zhihong Lin is using the Jaguar supercomputer at Oak Ridge National Laboratory to study fusion reactions, which produce helium from hydrogen and release energy in ...

Recommended for you

Uncovering the forbidden side of molecules

3 hours ago

Researchers at the University of Basel in Switzerland have succeeded in observing the "forbidden" infrared spectrum of a charged molecule for the first time. These extremely weak spectra offer perspectives ...

How Paramecium protozoa claw their way to the top

Sep 19, 2014

The ability to swim upwards – towards the sun and food supplies – is vital for many aquatic microorganisms. Exactly how they are able to differentiate between above and below in often murky waters is ...

User comments : 110

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

rawa1
1.2 / 5 (50) Jan 13, 2012
We need the feasibility analysis, which would compare the perspectives of cold and hot fusion research with respect to their present state. My feeling is, the technicians and engineers don't care about which technical solution is cheaper, until their money are going. The large projects like ITER of NIF are prioritized, because they're giving a job for large lobby of supporting private companies involved in these projects. Nobody cares, if they will be actually useful or not, until their money are going, because the scientific community is both approver, both consumer of money dedicated to these projects. This is apparent conflict of interest.
El_Nose
5 / 5 (4) Jan 13, 2012
so we can now control -- all that is left is ignition ( which i think might actually be fixed) and continuous operatiopn -- which we are working on??
antialias_physorg
4.7 / 5 (50) Jan 13, 2012
We need the feasibility analysis, which would compare the perspectives of cold and hot fusion research with respect to their present state.

Do one.
Or better: I'll save you the trouble.

Hot fusion: Demonstrated and doable.
Cold fusion: Quack science.

Done.

My feeling is, the technicians and engineers don't care about which technical solution is cheaper, until their money are going

And my feeling is you have no clue about engineers, technicians and scientists.

Ji_Podiv_n
4.7 / 5 (18) Jan 13, 2012
There is absolutely no proof that the "cold" fusion is not backed by any experimental evidence.
But "hot" fusion is and we see it every day in our lives.
So ask yourself Mr. Rawa1 should we pursue some distant dream, or a concept about which we know that it works and just needs some refinement?
Dendo100
2 / 5 (22) Jan 13, 2012
Have you checked with NASA recently (1/12/12)..they seem to thing LENR is real...

hot fusion "demonstrated and doable"? 50-60 years of research has led to how many powerplants?

LENR/Cold Fusion does not appear to be quack science, only to those who are too fixed on their ways (or research funding) to see as such.
DrSki
3.7 / 5 (10) Jan 13, 2012
"There is absolutely no proof that the "cold" fusion is not backed by any experimental evidence."

What experimental evidence?
"absolutely no proof" that is "not backed by any" = the research is there, no proof that it isn't

I'm not sure this is what was meant. (watch the double negatives)
Scottingham
5 / 5 (13) Jan 13, 2012
Man, if we can get actual fusion to work, crazy things will start happening in the world. Using oil for energy will seem like an insane waste.
Deathclock
3 / 5 (16) Jan 13, 2012
Yeah, saying that there is no proof that there is no evidence of something is poor logic. There is also no proof that there is no evidence of big foot... because to prove such a thing you would have to exhaust all possible sources of evidence, which is practically impossible.
DrSki
4.6 / 5 (11) Jan 13, 2012
Have you checked with NASA recently (1/12/12)..they seem to thing LENR is real...

hot fusion "demonstrated and doable"? 50-60 years of research has led to how many powerplants?

LENR/Cold Fusion does not appear to be quack science, only to those who are too fixed on their ways (or research funding) to see as such.


1) The LENR (low energy nuclear reaction) research IS testing the hypothesis. So far disappointing results.

2) 20 years of "cold fusion" research has produced a 1-watt blip that shows no excess neutrons, and which doesn't even account for the deuterium being produced in the first place (probably more than 1-watt of energy required per 'batch' of heavy water).

3) If people were "too fixed on their ways"(sic) then the Glenn Research Center at NASA would not be wasting their time. It would be a great find, but so far.....
antialias_physorg
4.7 / 5 (22) Jan 13, 2012
hot fusion "demonstrated and doable"? 50-60 years of research has led to how many powerplants?

None. That is what ITER is for.

With JET it was demonstrated that controlled fusion is possible. This is what I meant by 'demonstrated and doable'. We can ignite and contain a fusion reaction. JET was not designed to deliver more energy than was used for containment and ignition. ITER is designd to deliver 5 times more energy than you put in.
However, it is also only a step towards fusion power plants as the stated goal is to get 480 seconds of continuous operation.

Have you checked with NASA recently (1/12/12)..they seem to thing LENR is real...

NASA also had an entire group work on the gravity shielding effects claimed by the Podkletnov experiments.

Just saying: Not everything NASA looks into turns out to be real.
StevenLjr
4.8 / 5 (11) Jan 13, 2012
Exciting news. Progress makes me happy.
chardo137
3.6 / 5 (19) Jan 13, 2012
If the US would pull its head out of its backside and allow Thorium reactors we could have cheap safe power now with existing technology. Fusion technology is awesome, but still perhaps too far in the future for any real benefit for those of us living in this age.
finitesolutions
4.3 / 5 (6) Jan 13, 2012
Slowly but surely we tame nuclear fusion.
rawa1
1 / 5 (37) Jan 13, 2012
So ask yourself Mr. Rawa1 should we pursue some distant dream, or a concept about which we know that it works and just needs some refinement?
For me the cold fusion is completely real and it's just manifestation of extreme incompetence of mainstream physics, it denies to replicate the phenomena, which alternative physicists are demonstrating at daily basic. What would you say, if Andrea Rossi unveils his technology at public? Apparently, the physicists of the whole world have the same chance to test it.
http://newenergyt...rs.shtml
You still didn't understand my logics - until these articles aren't attempted to replicate, is the lack of peer-reviewed evidence of cold fusion apparently the problem of mainstream physicists - not the people, who published them originally.

rawa1
1 / 5 (36) Jan 13, 2012
The mainstream physicists are acting like the misogynist, who is claiming, he remained unamarries, because the women aren't interested about him. But if you'll analyse his behaviour, you will find, he actually avoided every contact with women. What would you say about such peoples after then? http://www.infini...port.pdf The whole problem is, the physicists are allowed to ask for our money and nobody checks, if their path of research is really the effective one. This community simply lacks the public feedback completely and this is just the very first thing, which must be changed, when it turns out, the cold fusion is real. The responsible people must be punished for their denial of cold fusion, because we are losing incredible amount of money in this way.
Deathclock
4.1 / 5 (26) Jan 13, 2012
For me the cold fusion is completely real and it's just manifestation of extreme incompetence of mainstream physics, it denies to replicate the phenomena, which alternative physicists are demonstrating at daily basic


Well then what the hell is stopping you from demonstrating it yourself and making a fortune? Put up or shut up.

What would you say, if Andrea Rossi unveils his technology at public?


I would say "about damn time"... but we all know it won't happen because he is playing a game of smoke and mirrors.
rawa1
1 / 5 (30) Jan 13, 2012
Well then what the hell is stopping you from demonstrating it yourself and making a fortune? Put up or shut up.
I'm not equipped for it and payed from public taxes. The mainstream physicists have all the necessary equipment and they're even impertinent enough to ask me for the job, which is their duty essentially (and if isn't by now, it just illustrates my own statement about necessity of public feedback of mainstream physics). if they're unable to do so, they can still ask Prof. Focardi or Piantelli for independent replication of their experiments in foreign laboratories, for example.

I'm not asking the mainstream physicists for evidence of cold fusion validity at all. But I do require the peer reviewed replication of cold fusion experiments of Focardi and Piantelli published in respected journal like the Science or Nature. This is the thing, which these liars will never attempt for - or they would be forced to acknowledge their sabotage of technological revolution.
bewertow
3.9 / 5 (24) Jan 13, 2012
rawa1 is full of shit. He probably dropped out of college and now he's bitter because his professors failed him.

Hot fusion works. Not only have we produced Earth-based experiments to prove it, but there's the big glowing ball of plasma in the sky (the Sun, in case you can't figure it out).
Deathclock
3.8 / 5 (20) Jan 13, 2012
I'm not equipped for it and payed from public taxes.


Surely if there were any merit to it it could be demonstrated on paper as well as in the lab? I mean, unless it violates the standard model or something you should be able to demonstrate it with equations, right?
350
4.6 / 5 (22) Jan 13, 2012
Rawa is just a quack pseudo scientist. Just disregard any post he makes and give it a 1 rating, no need to actually bother reading it as it will always go something like this: dense aether theory, cold fusion... His opinion based viewpoints... You're all part of what's wrong with science... It's a good thing there are "scientists" like me... Science doesn't have to have proven results to be credible...

Sounds like a troll right?
pauljpease
5 / 5 (10) Jan 13, 2012
I was skeptical of the claim that NASA is investigating LENR (low energy nuclear reactions) as a possible energy source. However, I googled it. The first pages I found hosting the video were blogs (there are a lot of people out there who seem to have made cold fusion a personal crusade...). However, I went to nasa.gov and searched LENR on their page, and in fact the video is a nasa production http://technology...enr.html (notice the "nasa.gov" in the url. However, the video is light on details, which means that they haven't gotten very far in the their work. And there is no mention of Rossi's e-cat, although it does mention metal hydrides, and it is possible that it is related to Rossi's device since that uses Nickel, which could exist as Nickel Hydride. I'm still very skeptical. Not because I don't believe that low energy nuclear reactions are possible, I just don't think they occur at a sufficient rate to produce usable amounts of energy. Could be wrong..
HROLLER
1.3 / 5 (26) Jan 13, 2012
Cold Fusion:

It's amazing that one of the posters above said that cold fusion is "quack science" and that there's no proof of it working. It's now available.......

ECAT

ecat.com
Deathclock
3.9 / 5 (19) Jan 13, 2012
Cold Fusion:

It's amazing that one of the posters above said that cold fusion is "quack science" and that there's no proof of it working. It's now available.......

ECAT

ecat.com


Somehow I thought there would be more fanfare... or did Rossi get the nomination for the Nobel prize in physics and I just haven't heard about it?
HROLLER
1.2 / 5 (23) Jan 13, 2012
Cold Fusion:

It's amazing that one of the posters above said that cold fusion is "quack science" and that there's no proof of it working. It's now available.......

ECAT

ecat.com


Somehow I thought there would be more fanfare... or did Rossi get the nomination for the Nobel prize in physics and I just haven't heard about it?


Just like everything else, competition is the enemy of the ones who control the main sources of energy. The ECAT is now available for the industrial size of 1 MW and the smaller version, 10kW Home units, will be available in 2012/2013.
ecat.com/ecat-products
Deathclock
3.7 / 5 (18) Jan 13, 2012
Just like everything else, competition is the enemy of the ones who control the main sources of energy. The ECAT is now available for the industrial size of 1 MW and the smaller version, 10kW Home units, will be available in 2012/2013.
ecat.com/ecat-products


Well I'll make you a deal, according to the website the industrial 1mw unit is available for pre-order now... 6 months after they ship the first unit to the first customer I will believe in this cold fusion of nickel into copper.
HROLLER
1.2 / 5 (21) Jan 13, 2012
Just like everything else, competition is the enemy of the ones who control the main sources of energy. The ECAT is now available for the industrial size of 1 MW and the smaller version, 10kW Home units, will be available in 2012/2013.
ecat.com/ecat-products


Well I'll make you a deal, according to the website the industrial 1mw unit is available for pre-order now... 6 months after they ship the first unit to the first customer I will believe in this cold fusion of nickel into copper.


I know who their first 1 customer is. I'll give you a hint; Within' the U.S. military.
ecatfusion.com/e-cat/u-s-military-conducts-further-e-cat-fusion-research
Vendicar_Decarian
4.1 / 5 (14) Jan 13, 2012
It would be nice if Rossi would manage to provide a single verifiable demonstration of his magic box working.

The fact that he hasn't screams "FRAUD!".

Only the true believers, UFO crusaders, 911 Truthers, and Birthers are left.
HROLLER
1.2 / 5 (24) Jan 13, 2012
It would be nice if Rossi would manage to provide a single verifiable demonstration of his magic box working.

The fact that he hasn't screams "FRAUD!".

Only the true believers, UFO crusaders, 911 Truthers, and Birthers are left.


Instead of spewing false accusations, research it. I'll give you 2 hints where you can find it.....ecat.com & youtube.com
HROLLER
1.2 / 5 (24) Jan 13, 2012
I want to make a point with these posters who lie on these comments. The lie only goes so far in a conversation, but the internet exposes those people for who they are.
Deathclock
3.7 / 5 (18) Jan 13, 2012
I know who their first 1 customer is. I'll give you a hint; Within' the U.S. military.
ecatfusion.com/e-cat/u-s-military-conducts-further-e-cat-fusion-research


Thanks but I couldn't find a single reputable source of information about the US military's involvement with this product. Do a google search for "US military Rossi ecat" and all you will find are obvious fly-by-night websites that were established as propaganda.

Can you point me to a reputable source of information about this that is not associated with Rossi himself?
Deathclock
3.4 / 5 (15) Jan 13, 2012
Any proponents of this want to comment on these criticisms?

"He cites the unlikelihood of a chemical reaction being strong enough to overcome the Coulomb barrier, the lack of gamma rays, the lack of explanation for the origin of the extra energy, the lack of the expected radioactivity after fusing a proton with 58Ni, the unexplained occurrence of 11% iron in the spent fuel, the 10% copper in the spent fuel strangely having the same isotopic ratios as natural copper, and the lack of any unstable copper isotope in the spent fuel as if the reactor only produced stable isotopes."
aroc91
4.7 / 5 (12) Jan 13, 2012
It would be nice if Rossi would manage to provide a single verifiable demonstration of his magic box working.

The fact that he hasn't screams "FRAUD!".

Only the true believers, UFO crusaders, 911 Truthers, and Birthers are left.


Instead of spewing false accusations, research it. I'll give you 2 hints where you can find it.....ecat.com & youtube.com


If you brought those up as bodies of evidence in ANY respectable scientific circle, you'd be laughed at.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.2 / 5 (10) Jan 13, 2012
I recognize neither ecat.com or Youtube as reputable scientific authorities.

"Instead of spewing false accusations, research it. I'll give you 2 hints where you can find it.....ecat.com & youtube.com" - Howler

Rossie's Fraud exposed on YouTube.

2011 - Analysis of Ny Teknik Video of Andrea Rossi & His Energy Device

http://www.youtub...XoafHWrU
Deathclock
2.6 / 5 (14) Jan 13, 2012
Wait a minute... you discredit youtube as a non-reputable source and then use it in support of your own argument?
Vendicar_Decarian
5 / 5 (8) Jan 13, 2012
"Thanks but I couldn't find a single reputable source of information about the US military's involvement with this product"

Oh come on now. There is Ecat.com. That is a reliable source of scientific information isn't it? Just like Infowars.com and AliensAreHere.com
Vendicar_Decarian
4.4 / 5 (7) Jan 13, 2012
"Wait a minute... you discredit youtube as a non-reputable source and then use it in support of your own argument?" - Deathclock

Correct. The difference is that I am not using YouTube as a source for scientific information, but showing how the demonstrations shown by YouTube are Fraudulent.

Howler's own source shows the opposite of what he claims, and it is only by blind faith, and self perpetuating ignorance that he continues to believe the Rosssi Fraud.

Vendicar_Decarian
3.7 / 5 (3) Jan 13, 2012
"the 10% copper in the spent fuel strangely having the same isotopic ratios as natural copper" - aroc91

Is there any copper in the system before the reaction?

Or is it electromagnetically deposited from elsewhere in the system?
HROLLER
1.2 / 5 (21) Jan 13, 2012
It would be nice if Rossi would manage to provide a single verifiable demonstration of his magic box working.

The fact that he hasn't screams "FRAUD!".

Only the true believers, UFO crusaders, 911 Truthers, and Birthers are left.


Instead of spewing false accusations, research it. I'll give you 2 hints where you can find it.....ecat.com & youtube.com


If you brought those up as bodies of evidence in ANY respectable scientific circle, you'd be laughed at.


It's a start...From there, you can find main sources of information. It's called "due diligence" (DD).
livescience.com/16864-italian-cold-fusion-machine-passes-test.html
finitesolutions
5 / 5 (7) Jan 13, 2012
Rossi still has to deliver on his claims. Until the first generator powers some electrical consumer devices his claims are fantasies. If he delivers : good for everybody. Otherwise no big deal : it was just a senior moment.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.3 / 5 (11) Jan 13, 2012
Figure 3 at the following link shows the origin of Rossi's copper.

http://www.nytekn...Download the report by Kullander and Ess

It comes from the copper reaction chamber.

I continue to smell FRAUD.
Callippo
1.6 / 5 (14) Jan 13, 2012
Until the first generator powers some electrical consumer devices his claims are fantasies
And the twenty years of Piantelli and Focardi research is fantasy too?

http://www.sede.e...taly.pdf
It comes from the copper reaction chamber
The copper was routinely reported in Piantelli and Focardi publications too. Why the Rossi is so important?

NASA has video confirming their belief in LENR and their research http://www.youtub...embedded
Callippo
1.5 / 5 (15) Jan 13, 2012
Well then what the hell is stopping you from demonstrating it yourself and making a fortune?
I've no research facilities payed from money of tax payers stuffed with equipment. I'm not payed from money of tax payers for doing of physical experiments. The physicists are. What we are paying them for? For doing of experiments, which should provide salary and jobs for another generations of physicists? Or for improvement of life of people, who are paying it?
MorituriMax
2.2 / 5 (5) Jan 13, 2012
Man, if we can get actual fusion to work, crazy things will start happening in the world. Using oil for energy will seem like an insane waste.
you still need oil for lots of things other than gas.
Seeker2
3.5 / 5 (8) Jan 13, 2012
Only the true believers, UFO crusaders, 911 Truthers, and Birthers are left.
Don't forget the AGW deniers.
Moose Dr_
2.1 / 5 (14) Jan 13, 2012
These "no cold fusion" folks are just painfully misinformed. Rossi is unnecessary. Over a dozen other sources have replicated Nickel Hydrogen cold fusion. They include scientists from MIT, SRI, Ames National Lab and of course Nasa.

Quit being uninformed. Here is the list, with links, of the replicators:
http://nickelpowe...30-2011/

Burnerjack
5 / 5 (7) Jan 13, 2012
HROLLER, just because something is for sale doesn't give proof of claims.
Considering the implications for the world, I would expect much more fanfare for the Ecat. As far as conspiracies goes, If it worked, those "in charge of energy" would be all over this to be the first to position themselves for profitting from it. Furthermore, few countries would shrink from the chance to get away from Middle East oil and all the turmoil associated with it.
For the record, "Simplicity is the Art of engineering." No professional engineer doesn't want to produce a product, technology or solution for the lowest possible cost. That "lowest possible cost" is the highest accolade available to an engineer. The ultimate "Job well done".
Vendicar_Decarian
4.6 / 5 (10) Jan 13, 2012
"Quit being uninformed. Here is the list, with links, of the replicators:" - Moose

The first of Moosie's references...

---

Dr. Brian Ahern, Ames National Laboratory

While it is not clear that Ahern is using nickel, it is clear that he is using light hydrogen.

---

So while the true believers are certain that he has replicated Rossie's work it isn't clear that he is even using the same materials or same mechanism as Rossi.

So in what way is this a "repliation".

Well. Some blogger says it is. And it it's written down it must be true. Right?

Do you Rossie Idiots even read the bullshit you claim supports your faith?
Telekinetic
1.6 / 5 (7) Jan 13, 2012
On July 3, 1899, Tesla discovered terrestrial stationary waves within the earth. He demonstrated that the Earth behaves as a smooth polished conductor and possesses electrical vibrations. He experimented with waves characterized by a lack of vibration at points, between which areas of maximum vibration occur periodically. These standing waves were produced by confining waves within constructed conductive boundaries. Tesla demonstrated that the Earth could respond at predescribed frequencies of electrical vibrations. At this time, Tesla realized that it was possible to transceive power around the globe. A few years later, George Westinghouse stopped funding Tesla's research when Tesla showed him that he could offer free electricity to the whole world by simply "ramming a stick in the earth in your backyard". Westinghouse said he would go bankrupt if that happened.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.3 / 5 (26) Jan 13, 2012
TK

So how come umpteem million people havent figured out how to do this since, and we cant see just how they do it on youtube?
sirchick
5 / 5 (7) Jan 13, 2012
HROLLER are you paid to pitch that site to us to buy their products ? lol
sirchick
3 / 5 (2) Jan 13, 2012
@TheGhostofOtto1923 the answer is because its nonsense or it didn't work.
Telekinetic
2.5 / 5 (13) Jan 13, 2012
Tesla was the world's most prolific inventor, responsible for the advent of alternating current and owner of radio-related patents that challenge Marconi as the radio's inventor. To say that he was a fraud, sirchick, is unwarranted. In fact, you ought to be grateful to Tesla- he made it possible for you to use your vibrator.
Here's an interesting link:
http://www.abovet...3576/pg1
aroc91
not rated yet Jan 13, 2012
"the 10% copper in the spent fuel strangely having the same isotopic ratios as natural copper" - aroc91

Is there any copper in the system before the reaction?

Or is it electromagnetically deposited from elsewhere in the system?


Although I'm siding with you here, you've misquoted. That was not me.
JIMBO
1 / 5 (9) Jan 14, 2012
More Fusion Hype. I'd say more than 50 yrs worth by now. This is an important step forward in the same context as bi-planes were to developing an SR-71.
HROLLER speaks the truth, & we have Never heard why the US Navy, which recently purchased their first ECat after the demo, has said nothing to validate their decision. Nothing either from DOE Sec.Chu. Surely he does not expect the Navy to wait on Livermore/NIF ? Submarines need fusion power !
Modernmystic
1.9 / 5 (17) Jan 14, 2012
As was said earlier, if someone starts selling these cold fusion products and they work case closed. This should be within the next year or two if I read correctly. If not then it's the unfounded hype I believe it to be. I'll be happy either way....
Silverhill
4.9 / 5 (7) Jan 14, 2012
Callippo and rawa1:
Cite numbers, from impartial and reputable sources of course, showing how much excess energy has been produced by any species of LENR. Are any of the labs, or physicists' houses, off the grid now because they can produce enough energy via LENR? If not, why not? It would be a fascinating demonstration.

(In other words: prove it, not just claim it. Put up or shut up.)
Callippo
1.4 / 5 (11) Jan 14, 2012
Cite numbers, from impartial and reputable sources of course, showing how much excess energy has been produced by any species of LENR
In these articles the COP > 3 is reported routinely. They're based on reaction of hydrogen with nickel.

http://newenergyt...rs.shtml

The other LENR's aren't particularly interesting for me, as they don't report such high COP, or they're using a palladium, which is expensive and rare.
Callippo
1.4 / 5 (11) Jan 14, 2012
Relatively comprehensive list of cold fusion technologies and their yields has been presented with Celani at the latest Cold fusion conference http://www.aether...2011.pdf It contains the first note about successful independent replication of Piantelli cold fusion, too.
Callippo
1.3 / 5 (13) Jan 14, 2012
"Nearly half a megawatt output with no energy input is a staggering success for a system that is still at the model T Ford stage of development. Engineer Rossi developed and built his invention using his own money. For comparison, billions of dollars have been spent on hot-fusion research that has still to generate a net gain in energy."
http://www.delcot...0177.txt
Why the mainstream physics faces such gigantic failure? Because it's driven with egoistic motivations of its peers, i.e. with tendency to maintain their jobs instead of tendency to help the progress of human civilization. As the result, the society has no ways, how to convince the physicists (which are payed from its money) in research of phenomena, which are important with respect to practical applications, not only with respect to further development of scientific theories. I'm talking about verification of cold fusion, various ZPE engines, antigravity research, etc.
Callippo
1.3 / 5 (12) Jan 14, 2012
I don't believe that low energy nuclear reactions are possible, I just don't think they occur at a sufficient rate to produce usable amounts of energy.
Important thing is, they're possible. The optimization of this process is the matter of additional research, which should be done already. The first plane or computers have no great effectiveness anyway. It's just research work and development, which helped to improve their power to the today level. Apparently physicists "forget" the Moore law in this connection - why? Because most of them are already working on the alternative methods of energy production, conversion and storage and they all will become useless, when it turns out, the cold fusion works as effectively, as its proponents are claiming.

So now we have whole generation of physicists, who will prohibit the further development of cold fusion by all means possible. They managed to do so whole last twenty years, which is one half of their productive carrier.
Telekinetic
1.4 / 5 (18) Jan 14, 2012
You can easily see the difficulty an independent scientist experimenting with a new concept would have just by reading the hostile and demeaning reception by this forum. It's the same in the real world. Most misunderstood phenomena will be received by the general public ,which we all are, as a threat to what has been taught as immutable. The naysayer is not just commenting on the issue, he is puffing himself up like an authority on the matter, when he actually knows too little to even sweep the lab where this new science is investigated. I shouldn't use the word new, because it's as old as the sun. If you're skeptical, present the mathematical proof of why these advancements are impossible.
antialias_physorg
4.5 / 5 (16) Jan 14, 2012
You can easily see the difficulty an independent scientist experimenting with a new concept would have just by reading the hostile and demeaning reception by this forum.

Counterargument: Every single thing ever published in a scientific paper contains something new.

Every. Single. Thing.

If 'established' scientists were scared of people coming up with new ideas then that wouldn't happen.

Reviewers do not know if the scientist authoring a paper is an 'independent' or not. Peer review is anonymous. Stuff passes peer review solely on merit of what is in the paper. Everyone is free to submit papers. Everyone.
GreyLensman
5 / 5 (5) Jan 14, 2012
Have you checked with NASA recently (1/12/12)..they seem to thing LENR is real...

hot fusion "demonstrated and doable"? 50-60 years of research has led to how many powerplants?

LENR/Cold Fusion does not appear to be quack science, only to those who are too fixed on their ways (or research funding) to see as such.

"NASA" is not convinced, but an atmospheric scientist at Langley with no qualifications in fusion put out a video.
Telekinetic
1.3 / 5 (12) Jan 14, 2012
"Engineer Andrea Rossi claims to be in talks with a well known giant American retail chain store to sell his 10 kilowatt home heating LENR reactors, which he calls E-Cats, short for Energy Catalyzer. The retail price is expected to be about $1,500 each, with mass production beginning in the fall of 2012. ...A Greek company called Defkalion Green Technologies states they will start selling their similar Hyperion reactors in a matter of months, and their improved design outputs 25 to 32 times energy input and has longer lasting fuel that is easier to refill. Defkalion claims they have scalable reactor systems up to 5 megawatts (heat) in size, with the largest power plants built into ordinary 20 foot long shipping containers. Both Rossi and Defkalion use low cost nickel dust and ordinary hydrogen gas as nuclear fuel."

Save a few stones for the Greeks, boys, it's probably just another Trojan Horse.
Sonhouse
1 / 5 (3) Jan 14, 2012
We need the feasibility analysis, which would compare the perspectives of cold and hot fusion research with respect to their present state.

Do one.
Or better: I'll save you the trouble.

Hot fusion: Demonstrated and doable.
Cold fusion: Quack science.

Done.

My feeling is, the technicians and engineers don't care about which technical solution is cheaper, until their money are going

And my feeling is you have no clue about engineers, technicians and scientists.


Ducking the issue I see:)
GreyLensman
5 / 5 (6) Jan 14, 2012
Only the true believers, UFO crusaders, 911 Truthers, and Birthers are left.
Don't forget the AGW deniers.

...and Intelligent Dohsigners...
BigPink
5 / 5 (3) Jan 14, 2012
Just like everything else, competition is the enemy of the ones who control the main sources of energy...


I'm curious about the post fusion world and its reception by current energy barons. Such a shift in energy resource would be so seismic as to qualify as a new epoch. Former winners will not wish to be losers. ...and corporate morality is oxymoronic (btw if eCat is real and it's being stymied by those invested in the current energy regime, that should leave many dark little footprints; one should be able to cite such nefariousness, not just make noises).
Callippo
1 / 5 (10) Jan 14, 2012
"NASA" is not convinced, but an atmospheric scientist at Langley with no qualifications in fusion put out a video.
The actual reason if probably quite different. http://pesn.com/2...ression/
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.8 / 5 (20) Jan 14, 2012
Save a few stones for the Greeks, boys, it's probably just another Trojan Horse.
Or perhaps alexander come to conquer the world?
GreyLensman
not rated yet Jan 14, 2012
Here a link to a NASA patent application from October 2011, that Zawodny (the NASA atmospheric science guy making the LENR video) submitted. Note that the patent is assigned to NASA. It's probably the reason the video was released - does anyone know how to find out the status of the application?
Telekinetic
1.3 / 5 (14) Jan 14, 2012
@BigPink:
This should satisfy your curiosity about the 'dark little footprints' of suppression at the highest levels of our institutions of research:
http://www.infini...port.pdf

Oh, and let me know how you like your crow prepared.
Callippo
1.8 / 5 (10) Jan 14, 2012
Here a link to a NASA patent application from October 2011, that Zawodny (the NASA atmospheric science guy making the LENR video) submitted. Note that the patent is assigned to NASA
The link is here http://www.patent...5645.pdf Apparently it's variation of Widom-Larsen Theory. Application itself violates all principles of patent law, being very vague and general. I wouldn't accept such an applications at all.
Callippo
1.8 / 5 (9) Jan 14, 2012
For example, I could patent the usage of oxygen hydrides, with advantage of oxygen dihydride for solvation of ionic and/or aprotic compounds with the same relevance.
Jason_Adelman
2 / 5 (8) Jan 14, 2012
"There is absolutely no proof that the "cold" fusion is not backed by any experimental evidence."

What experimental evidence?
"absolutely no proof" that is "not backed by any" = the research is there, no proof that it isn't

I'm not sure this is what was meant. (watch the double negatives)

What about the fact that the earth can also play a hand in this never ending saga for cleaner types of energy? The Earths Magnetic field could possibly help in this. It is what protects us from harm that comes from the sun and other types of radio logical sources from space. It extends 45,000 miles beyond the ionosphere to protect the planet so why cant we somehow use it for protection here on earth?
Burnerjack
5 / 5 (2) Jan 14, 2012
@ Dendo100: Fusion has been promised for 50-60 yrs. Yeah, so?
Leonardo Da Vinci envisioned the main battle tank in the 15th century.
500 years later, it's here. another 70 or so and we have the Abrams M1A2.
I would suggest fusion power is somewhat more difficult. Just might require a little more patience. No doubt it is quite do-able. Considering the geometric progression of knowledge, I suspect it will be on line "soon".
sirchick
4 / 5 (5) Jan 14, 2012
Telekinetic I never said Tesla was a fraud as he has done plenty of things that work.

But why was that invention ditched and left to collect dust - it just sounds ridiculous.

p.s I'm a guy I don't use a vibrator LOL
antialias_physorg
4.2 / 5 (10) Jan 14, 2012
The Earths Magnetic field could possibly help in this
Do the math. It's far too weak.

You'd need structures that extend far into space to to get any useful energy. Putting structures in space to interact is not an option since they would slow down in the process (i.e. it would make the structure crash back to Earth in a very short time)

This isn't personally against you but I really wished people would do the math before putting out such brainfarts. And if you can't do the math then don't even bother to write it down. Smarter people have thought about it before (and have done the math)
sirchick
4 / 5 (4) Jan 15, 2012
Simply adding to my point that its a rediculous subject bring up in first place. We simply cant build vast structures in space the subject is mute and not related to this article.
Egleton
1.6 / 5 (7) Jan 15, 2012
Pseudoskeptic: Fashionable cheap credibility. Requires no effort and earns street cred.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence: Cheap cache. Favourite of pseudoskeptics.
Peer reviewed journals: Group-think rags.
True scientists dance along the edge of the abyss.
Callippo
1.8 / 5 (10) Jan 15, 2012
Critical value of fusion technology? Get real. Billions have been pumped into it, and it's still 30-40 years into the future. And it's not like it's such a green option anyway: the immense neutron load makes the tokamak walls brittle, so every half year or so you have to replace them. This is very expensive and what's worse, they have become highly radioactive due to the neutron bombardment. Noone every seems to talk about this, but the nuclear waste problem is essentially the same as that of fission.
MorituriMax
3.8 / 5 (10) Jan 15, 2012
HROLLER squirted,
Cold Fusion:

It's amazing that one of the posters above said that cold fusion is "quack science" and that there's no proof of it working. It's now available.......

ECAT

ecat.com


From ecat.com

----
When will the ECAT be available?

The ECAT 1 MW Plant is available for pre-ordering now with an estimated delivery time of 3 months. The first generation of ECAT Home products will be available in 2013.
----

Wow it's available for PRE-ORDERING, not IT'S NOW AVAILABLE. So what do you want to bet, December rolls around an no sign of this past the pre-order stage?

Plus, I haven't seen any articles in the news showing one of these reactors online anywhere to prove it works? Hmmm, HROLLER?
MorituriMax
2.3 / 5 (3) Jan 15, 2012
"Engineer Andrea Rossi claims to be in talks with a well known giant American retail chain store to sell his 10 kilowatt home heating LENR reactors, which he calls E-Cats, short for Energy Catalyzer. The retail price is expected to be about $1,500 each, with mass production beginning in the fall of 2012. ...


So when a new iPhone comes out, we know about it 1 to 2 years in advance with leaked images of what it might look like, rumoured specs, who will be rumoured to carry it, what size battery it has, and so on. Yet with this, literally, world changing technology available within the next 6 to 12 months, we have to track down blurry videos from youtube? Really? REALLY?
Telekinetic
1.7 / 5 (11) Jan 15, 2012
Simply adding to my point that its a rediculous subject bring up in first place. We simply cant build vast structures in space the subject is mute and not related to this article.


'The subject is mute'- So that's why I can't hear you!
Telekinetic
1.4 / 5 (10) Jan 15, 2012
Pseudoskeptic: Fashionable cheap credibility. Requires no effort and earns street cred.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence: Cheap cache. Favourite of pseudoskeptics.
Peer reviewed journals: Group-think rags.

True scientists dance along the edge of the abyss.


Hear! Hear! As you say across The Pond; not the kind of work for a Nancy boy.
BigPink
4.8 / 5 (4) Jan 15, 2012
@Telekinetic

@BigPink: This should satisfy your curiosity about the 'dark little footprints' of suppression at the highest levels of our institutions of research:
http://www.infini...port.pdf
Oh, and let me know how you like your crow prepared.


This links leads me to Dr. Mallowe's angry assertions that something biased happened at MIT with regard to "Cold Fusion" but beyond that not much more. I prefer my crow well done but thanks anyway.
KBK
1 / 5 (8) Jan 15, 2012
Just like everything else, competition is the enemy of the ones who control the main sources of energy. The ECAT is now available for the industrial size of 1 MW and the smaller version, 10kW Home units, will be available in 2012/2013.
ecat.com/ecat-products


Well I'll make you a deal, according to the website the industrial 1mw unit is available for pre-order now... 6 months after they ship the first unit to the first customer I will believe in this cold fusion of nickel into copper.


The first customer already took delivery.

It was the United States Navy.
KBK
1 / 5 (8) Jan 15, 2012
HROLLER squirted,
Cold Fusion:

It's amazing that one of the posters above said that cold fusion is "quack science" and that there's no proof of it working. It's now available.......

ECAT

ecat.com


From ecat.com

----
When will the ECAT be available?

The ECAT 1 MW Plant is available for pre-ordering now with an estimated delivery time of 3 months. The first generation of ECAT Home products will be available in 2013.
----

Wow it's available for PRE-ORDERING, not IT'S NOW AVAILABLE. So what do you want to bet, December rolls around an no sign of this past the pre-order stage?

Plus, I haven't seen any articles in the news showing one of these reactors online anywhere to prove it works? Hmmm, HROLLER?


Even Caesar is on record with killing inventors that create things that would change the given economy.

Low energy fusion and all the rest of it - is up against the entire world's power structure.

Think about it. The level of extant entrenchment--is truly insane.
jtlien
1 / 5 (3) Jan 15, 2012

We have known how make fusion power since the 1950's.
Its called a fusion bomb. Make them smaller. Then drop them into a working fluid to heat the fluid. Then extract power from the fluid. Sakharov and Sam Cohen researched this. Why do it the hard way?
Telekinetic
1.4 / 5 (11) Jan 15, 2012
@Telekinetic

@BigPink: This should satisfy your curiosity about the 'dark little footprints' of suppression at the highest levels of our institutions of research:
http://www.infini...port.pdf
Oh, and let me know how you like your crow prepared.


This links leads me to Dr. Mallowe's angry assertions that something biased happened at MIT with regard to "Cold Fusion" but beyond that not much more. I prefer my crow well done but thanks anyway.

It was MIT's skeptical reports that directly influenced the cutting of Fleischmann and Pons' funding.
ackzsel
4.4 / 5 (7) Jan 15, 2012

The first customer already took delivery.

It was the United States Navy.


I find it a bit suspicious that this "historical event", as it could be called, is only mentioned on sites related to ecat.com and it's inventors.

Still, it will be very difficult to rule out the technology's existence. I suspect the availability to private consumers will be delayed and delayed and delayed again far beyond 2013. More and more promising test results will be claimed witnessed by more undisclosed "customers", until the last investors finally pull out. At this stage the status quo is unchanged and discussions like these will still be abundant.
HROLLER
1 / 5 (22) Jan 15, 2012
I find it a bit suspicious that this "historical event", as it could be called, is only mentioned on sites related to ecat.com and it's inventors.

Still, it will be very difficult to rule out the technology's existence. I suspect the availability to private consumers will be delayed and delayed and delayed again far beyond 2013. More and more promising test results will be claimed witnessed by more undisclosed "customers", until the last investors finally pull out. At this stage the status quo is unchanged and discussions like these will still be abundant.


You do A LOT of speculation there. Stick to the facts and just do a little due diligence on this technology. And for someone who asked if I was part of marketing this ECAT; NO I AM NOT affiliated with any group involved with this. For the naysayers; get off of this comment section and research it. THE INFORMATION IS OUT THERE.
Silverhill
5 / 5 (7) Jan 15, 2012
HROLLER:
For the naysayers; get off of this comment section and research it. THE INFORMATION IS OUT THERE.
No, the burden of proof is on the claimant. YOU say it's out there, in verified, unbiased form; YOU provide links to it.
(As some folks put it, "Pix or it didn't happen.")
extinct
1.5 / 5 (6) Jan 15, 2012
magnetically suspended radioactive plasma at "several million degrees"? hmm... i wonder if anything could go wrong there.
(begin sarcasm) nah, never! our species definitely is not suicidal. we are smart and we learn from our mistakes (end sarcasm)
boland1992
not rated yet Jan 15, 2012
I found this lecture presnted by I believe it is a research group funded by the US Navy on Lattice-Enabled (not low-energy) Nuclear Reactions. If you watch the entire thing it seems not only plausible, but very scientific. They have had many a peer review done (I haven't checked but that is what is stated here) I'm all for this, if it works, it works, if it doesn't, it doesn't, but if something seems promising, why not strive for it? Is it really time wasted or money lost when ultimately something is learned in the end. I thought that knowledge and curiousity were what got us all this far in the first place? anyway, please enjoy, hopefully, even just if it's one of you, find this lecture interesting.

Go to youtube.com and type in this into the search bar, it should be the video at the top:

Twenty-Year History of Lattice-Enabled Nuclear Reactions (LENR) - Hiding in Plain Sight
HROLLER
1 / 5 (17) Jan 16, 2012
Momentous Breakthroughs Announced During Anniversary E-Cat Interview:
pesn.com/2012/01/14/9602012_Momentous_Breakthroughs_Announced_During_Anniversary_E-Cat_Interview/
antialias_physorg
3.7 / 5 (6) Jan 16, 2012
We have known how make fusion power since the 1950's.
Its called a fusion bomb. Make them smaller. Then drop them into a working fluid to heat the fluid.

You have no clue how fusion bombs work, don't you?
Osiris1
1 / 5 (4) Jan 16, 2012
That was not "Dr Mallowe" as telestatic put it...His name was Dr. Eugene Mallove, well known in the LENR community and a fellow Vortexian along with K. Thorne and others. Dr. Mallove met his death from very suspicious circumstances quite a few years ago now. I do not know if the perp or perps were ever found, or whether they were state actors from our gov't or others. The best news today is, however, the above about controlling plasma instability. Not to put too fine a point on it, be nice if more would stay on topic here.....with constructive ideas. Too many of these become similar to "debates" among various flavors of Sikhs about chairs in temples that degenerate into chair throwin contests requiring the intervention of the RCMP.....EH!?
plasticpower
5 / 5 (5) Jan 16, 2012
I am so tired of all this cold fusion crap! Do you people SERIOUSLY consider that you know better than literally thousands of the brightest minds all over the world who are working on making REAL fusion (ITER) a reality?
rawa1
1 / 5 (8) Jan 16, 2012
Do you people SERIOUSLY consider that you know better than literally thousands of the brightest minds all over the world who are working on making REAL fusion (ITER) a reality?
The people who are working on hot fusion are experts in completely different areas of physics and they tend to ignore the research in competetive areas at all.. The ITER project is planned to become opened for business not before 2026. During thirty years of ITER project existence this project has been delayed many times because of both financial crisis, both technical difficulties. Actually just the cold fusion may help to end the financial crisis and bring the ITER project into real life, but not vice-versa.

http://en.wikiped...t_status
wictor
1 / 5 (2) Jan 16, 2012
Rossi already had many opportunities to prove his invention works, but he didn't do it. He never let any third party to make convincing measurements. Either it turns out to be a fraud or someone who has tested his ecat will show up. Time will tell.

I would like to ask some of the strongest naysayers to have a look at the presentation of SPAWAR @ US Navy. I think it is the most credible research regarding LENR.They have found multiple evidences that something is happening there and also made multiple cross-checks to rule out possible systematic errors in their measurements.

1) they have measured excess heat
2) a thermocamera showed that the heat is generated in focused spots on the electrode
3) microscopic 'volcano like' structures have been found on the electrode proving melting and evaporations
4) with CR-39 detection they found evidence of nuclear reactions
5) probably transmutated elements found

The presentation in PowerPoint:
ecatsite.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/spawar.ppt
rowbyme
3.7 / 5 (3) Jan 16, 2012
No, you're wrong refering to Rawa as a psuedo scientist...he's the janitor, he saw some papers on one of the professor's desks.
HF770
1 / 5 (5) Jan 17, 2012
Cold Fusion.. Hydrostatic Dense Matter Chemistry... Doesn't it all boil down to getting closer? Quack Science is pretty close to Quark Science as far as I can see. The real quack science is in the socio-political-economic complexity that exist for making things "work right", more complex than the science!
rawa1
1.5 / 5 (8) Jan 17, 2012
The suppression of cold fusion and other exotic energy technologies has killed millions of men, women, and children across the globe. Every day, tens of thousands of deaths occur that are directly related to high energy costs. When will the killing spree end? And who will become responsible for it?

http://pesn.com/2...locaust/
Dendo100
1 / 5 (2) Jan 17, 2012
@ Dendo100: Fusion has been promised for 50-60 yrs. Yeah, so?

The point is we've spent billions on hot fusion (with virtually no progress), and spent virtually nothing on cold / lenr / widom/larson theory. That there is excess heat produced is not of question any more.. Its now a question of understanding the effect, and engineering useful products from it. Forget Rossi, but imagine if we would have spent 10% of the hot fusion budget on cold fusion going back to 1989 Pons/Fleisman.. My guess is we would be done already.

If Rossi is producing product, then he would have out-performed all of us with an incredible effort in light of the entire scientific community being at odds with him and this field of research.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.7 / 5 (24) Jan 17, 2012
The suppression of cold fusion and other exotic energy technologies has killed millions of men, women, and children across the globe. Every day, tens of thousands of deaths occur that are directly related to high energy costs. When will the killing spree end? And who will become responsible for it?

http://pesn.com/2...locaust/
Rawa/calippo fails to appreciate the human compulsion to expand their numbers faster than their ability to support themselves, like any other lifeform. For viruses and chipmunks this means that a certain percentage will always be suffering and starving. It means exactly the same for people.

More energy = more food = more people = more war = more ecological ruination = etc.

Your calculations do not consider what the alternative would be like. It would be worse unless the ancient, obsolete religionist cultures which drive overpopulation can be destroyed. With them in place, more resources only means MORE TROUBLE.
Au-Pu
3 / 5 (2) Jan 17, 2012
To endeavor to replicate the solar processes is no mean feat and for them to have spent 50 years trying to do so is not surprising and the latest results are very promising. We know that the solar processes actually do work, we see evidence of it every day.
So be patient.
As for cold fusion, claims were made but to the best of my knowledge no other party of repute has been able replicate it. Which in my book says it is bullshit.
Some people are wishfull believers and no amount of truth or logic will sway them from what they want to believe. My attitude is to let them inhabit their fools paradise and let them spend their money on their fantasies. After all it is their money and their fantasy.
I will stick to the real science of nuclear fusion.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.7 / 5 (23) Jan 17, 2012
As for cold fusion, claims were made but to the best of my knowledge no other party of repute has been able replicate it. Which in my book says it is bullshit.
And yet no one seems to know what to make of this announcement from NASA and the fact that they have apparently applied for a patent for it -?
http://www.youtub...Keuh_2Bw

-This story was covered in forbes but the mainstream media have generally been quiet about it.

Youre also forgetting the navy which did research which produced unexplained neutrons.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.7 / 5 (24) Jan 18, 2012
Here is Dr zawodny backpedaling somewhat under the weight I assume of a flood of commentary...20120114:
http://joe.zawodny.com/
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.7 / 5 (24) Jan 18, 2012
Here is a discussion of the Widom-Larsen theory that the dr seems to adhere to:
http://www.newene...ry.shtml
Estevan57
2.1 / 5 (30) Jan 21, 2012
Rawa1, why don't you save your comments for the advancements made in cold fusion instead of starting an argument in the nuclear fusion forum? You comment on almost all of the news items on advances in nuclear fusion but are lacking in comments on cold fusion. Is this because there are so few?