Skip to comments.How I Made Money from Cold Fusion
Posted on 01/23/2010 12:28:49 PM PST by Kevmo
Freeper gets a fascinating contract listed on Intrade, bets that the experiment will be replicated, and cashes in.
In 2008, Dr. Yoshiaki Arata performed a fascinating experiment with Deuterium Gas loaded onto a Palladium matrix, and without any input power, showed that there was some excess heat. Generating excess heat in cold fusion cell wasn't a new development -- scientists had been replicating the Pons-Fleischman effect for 2 decades. What was a new development was how easily replicable this particular experiment was. It seemed to me that this would be the easiest way to replicate anomalous heat production, removing the tired old standby excuse that the energy input from electrolysis was causing this excess heat, because there was NO energy input in this experiment. So I proposed to Intrade that they open up a contract that this experiment would be replicated in a peer reviewed, scientific Journal.
I also posted a discussion thread on the Intrade forum
"This week, Dr. Yoshiaki Arata demonstrated Cold Fusion in a reproducible environment. I sent in a suggestion to intrade that a contract be opened up that it would be replicated in a peer-reviewed journal by January 1, 2009. I haven't heard yet if there's any interest."
AZoNano.com Energy Breakthrough as Japanese Physicist Sucessfully and ...
To my surprise, Intrade opened up this contract in 2008, where it basically stagnated. Since I was not involved in the peer review process, my assessment was that the experiment would only take several weeks to make it through the grueling process, rather than several months. It was actually someone at Free Republic who set me straight on that:
The contract closed at the end of 2008 at zero, meaning that anyone who bet that the experiment would be replicated and published had lost their bet.
I found the contract fascinating and asked Intrade to open a new contract in 2009, which they did. A few months into 2009, there started to be some replication experiments published by scientists, but the whole process was outshined by Dr. Pamela Mossier-Boss publishing her exciting results where she showed that there were Neutrons being generated in the cold fusion cell at the Navy Space Warfare Systems Center (SPAWAR).
'Cold Fusion' Rebirth? New Evidence For Existence Of Controversial Energy Source
ScienceDaily (Mar. 23, 2009) [Researchers are reporting compelling new scientific evidence for the existence of low-energy nuclear reactions (LENR), the process once called "cold fusion" that may promise a new source of energy. One group of scientists, for instance, describes what it terms the first clear visual evidence that LENR devices can produce neutrons, subatomic particles that scientists view as tell-tale signs that nuclear reactions are occurring. The report, which injects new life into this controversial field, will be presented March 23 in Salt Lake City, Utah, at the American Chemical Society's 237th National Meeting. "Our finding is very significant," says study co-author and analytical chemist Pamela Mosier-Boss, Ph.D., of the U.S. Navy's Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center (SPAWAR) in San Diego, Calif. "To our knowledge, this is the first scientific report of the production of highly energetic neutrons from an LENR device."]
And then the CBS TV newsmagazine 60 Minutes chimed in with their report on cold fusion on April 19, 2009, pushing the Arata replication results further into the background. The video and an article describing it are here:
I started posting references to replication of Arata's experiment in the Intrade Forum, saying such things as, "Oh, and the experiment was a replication of Arata's demonstration last May. So it was in quantitative fact proof that Arata's demonstration worked as stated. " From the PhysOrg article and discussion:
'Cold fusion' rebirth? New evidence for existence of controversial energy source
I transferred as much money as I was willing to lose over to Intrade. This was harder that I thought it would be, because Intrade does not accept credit cards. I bought up as many contracts as I could, and posted that I would pay $5-$6 for a contract that would pay out at $100. In reality, it's paying 50-60Cents per contract, and the payout is $10, for some bizarre reasoning that Intrade uses 1/10th of the actual monetary figures. To my surprise, there were still folks at Intrade posting that I was "Mental" , or as BobbyE wrote: "I have trouble getting reality shows listed early but this crap of a contract gets listed? What was the total volume? Unreal." My response was: "Feel free to make money from my foolishness. Those 500 contract bids at $5.50 are mine. Put your money where your mouth is."
This was where I learned that there's a huge difference between what people say and what they actually do at Intrade. For all the huffing and puffing about this contract being a waste of time or effort or stupid, they still wouldn't take my money. I was forced to raise my price 5X to 7X what I originally asked before I could purchase contracts. That's when I wrote this article here on Free Republic:
The End of Snide Remarks Against Cold Fusion
Friday, June 05, 2009 5:56:08 PM · by Kevmo · 95 replies · 2,126+ views
Free Republic, Gravitronics.net and Intrade ^ | 6/5/09 | kevmo, et al
I ventured as much money on the contract as I was willing, with the expectation that the price would shoot up at any moment. I was surprised it didn't. I posted several articles showing that the experiment had been replicated and that the results were showing up in peer reviewed journals. But the price did not go up. There was one physicist at Intrade who argued against my claim, saying that the American Chemical Society wasn't a peer reviewed platform. The experiment had been published in a "symposium", and then in a peer reviewed book, which isn't a journal! I had to find other references to the replication experiments being published in at least one peer-reviewed journal and that the press had made mention of it. I found a bunch of articles and posted them, and even the hot-particle physicist know-it-all acknowledged that the experiment had been replicated in a peer reviewed journal.
After the closeout date of the contract, Carl Wolfenden at Intrade had to pick his way through all the articles and support information that I generated and he decided that the terms of the contract had been met and it was paid out at 100. It couldn't have been easy for Mr. Wolfenden, because Intrade had at one time a physicist on staff but he had gone on to greener pastures. That's probably why Intrade hasn't yet posted the follow-on contract that I requested -- that Dr. Pamela Mellier-Boss's CR-39 Triple Tracks Neutron detection experiment would be replicated in a peer-reviewed PUBLICATION.
So now I tell my friends that I'm the first layman to make money on Cold Fusion. Now I have even more trouble finding people who will take my bet. I feel that Intrade has made history, in a way. There's a parallel in scientific publication history, when Scientific American refused to publish articles that the Wright Brothers were flying, because it was supposedly impossible -- the greatest luminaries in science at the time had tried and failed ignominiously, like Dr. Langley at the Smithsonian. No one remembers who the genius was that turned down the article in Scientific American, but A.I.Root has his own unique place in history. So the lesson is that one puts forth his sincere witness of the technology in progress and lets the chips fall where they may.
Gleanings in Bee Culture, January 1, 1905
This issue of the Medina, Ohio based beekeeping magazine has the distinction of publishing the first eyewitness account of the Wright Brothers' historic manned flight in Kitty Hawk, North Carolina. A. I. Root, the publisher of Gleanings in Bee Culture and a longtime friend of the flight pioneers, was permitted to write this first account and sent it off to "Scientific American." After nearly a year of silence on the part of the magazine, Root wrote its editor, who responded that it was difficult to believe that the event had actually occurred and that even if it had, the airplane would never have any practical application. When Root showed this response to the Wright Brothers, they suggested that he go ahead and publish it in his beekeeping magazine.
for your various ping lists
Seems like a lot of work compared to waiting for “Obama Money”.
I got a fascinating tip on a horse at Louisiana Downs that it would win. Got fifty bucks off that one. :->
Very interesting and very cool.
Now, if you want to save on taxes, skip the middle man and send me the free money direct. ;>)
Thank for posting this.
In your instance, did society gain anything from your efforts?
How many times did you find yourself saying to other bettors that if they’re so confident the horse wouldn’t win, why not put the money down?
Absolutely, people enjoyed a good race and I tipped the $50 to a cute waitress at Superior Bar and Grill later. :->
Ok, the point of fusion is to generate power unless you just want a physics parlor trick. So if you can do fusion and not create heat, whats the point?
Whats next, non-combustible gasoline?
Uh. I thought you were talking about software.
“So if you can do fusion and not create heat, whats the point?”
Cold Fusion creates heat. That is the point. Hot fusion takes place at incredibly high temperatures and pressures such as in an H-bomb.
What temperature range is considered “cold fusion”?
LOL, me too.
From the original article, this took place at approximately 70°C. I believe the difficulty here is proving the excess heat didn’t come completely from a chemical reactions.
From a practical standpoint the question is... can a configuration be found where the process will produce enough heat to make it worthwhile as an energy source?
“The process consisted of Arata and his co-researcher Yue-Chang Zhang, forcing deuterium gas under pressure into an evacuated cell. The cell contains palladium dispersed in zirconium oxide. Arata claims the deuterium is absorbed by the Palladium sample to produce dense or “pynco” deuterium. The deuterium nuclei are then close enough to fuse releasing heat and helium. After the injection of deuterium gas, the temperature rose to about 70 °C, which according to Arata was due to both chemical and nuclear reactions. With the gas turned off the temperature in the centre of the cell remained significantly warmer than the cell wall for 50 hours.”
So then the goal is not really to do it with no heat at all,, it’s more to be able to throttle it down to something far less than that of an H-bomb, but still hot enough to use for say ,,steam generation, like a nuke plant?
But not really totally room temperature being the final goal?
Scientists have been working for decades on hot fusion experiments because theoretically the fuel which is most commonly some form of hydrogen would be both plentiful and cheap. Unfortunately it is very difficult to create a sustainable hot fusion reaction. If perfected this might be similar in appearance to traditional nuclear power.
The hope for cold fusion is that a reaction could be designed that could be maintained in a very small reactor that would produce a useful amount of energy. We are talking about something that might range from a traditional power plant down to something that might be similar to a laptop battery that would produce power for years instead of store power for a few hours. Unfortunately, after a some false starts no one has come close to achieving this goal so far.
You make that sound like a bad thing.
Where do you get the idea that heat was not created?
Beaudette, C.G., “Excess Heat: Why Cold Fusion Research Prevailed.” 2002: Oak Grove Press
The full text of this book is now available in the LENR-CANR Library:
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.