Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Wonder Warthog

In 1989 Fleischmann and Pons reported that they produced excess heat via cold fusion Low-Energy Nuclear Reaction. Their experiments could not be replicated, plus flawed positive replications were withdrawn, plus Fleischmann and Pons had not actually detected nuclear reaction byproducts as previously claimed.

A hoax is a deliberately fabricated falsehood made to masquerade as truth. It is distinguishable from errors in observation or judgment.


33 posted on 11/05/2011 6:39:09 AM PDT by olezip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]


To: olezip
"Their experiments could not be replicated, plus flawed positive replications were withdrawn, plus Fleischmann and Pons had not actually detected nuclear reaction byproducts as previously claimed."

Nice regurgitation of the "hot physics" meme about cold fusion. Unfortunately, there have been quite a few replications, many very recently. And done by researchers who are completely above board and legit.

"A hoax is a deliberately fabricated falsehood made to masquerade as truth. It is distinguishable from errors in observation or judgment."

So, based on that criterion, please point out ANY true hoax involving CF. As I said, I've been following the subject for quite a few years, and I'm not aware of anything that has been a actual hoax.

93 posted on 11/05/2011 4:34:08 PM PDT by Wonder Warthog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies ]

To: olezip

The Pons-Fleischmann excess heat effect has been replicated more than 14,700 times.

https://springerlink3.metapress.com/content/8k5n17605m135n22/resource-secured/?target=fulltext.pdf&sid=xwvgza45j4sqpe3wceul4dv2&sh=www.springerlink.com

Jing-tang He
• Nuclear fusion inside condense matters
• Frontiers of Physics in China
Volume 2, Number 1, 96-102, DOI: 10.1007/s11467-007-0005-8
This article describes in detail the nuclear fusion inside condense matters—the Fleischmann-Pons effect, the reproducibility of cold fusions, self-consistency of cold fusions and the possible applications

http://www.boliven.com/publication/10.1007~s11467-007-0005-8?q=(%22David%20J.%20Nagel%22)


Scientific American

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=when-scientists-sin

1. Jed Rothwell
11:52 AM 6/20/10
Shermer says that Goodstein concluded that cold fusion was most likely a case of scientists who “convince themselves that they are in the possession of knowledge that does not in fact exist.”

Cold fusion has been replicated in over 180 major laboratories, by roughly 1,500 professional scientists. These replications have been published in roughly 800 papers in mainstream, peer reviewed journals such as J. Electroanal. Chem. and Japanese J. of Applied Physcis. J. He of the Institute of High Energy Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences estimates that the effect has been observed in roughly 14,000 experimental runs (Front. Phys. China (2007) 1: 96 102).

Many of the results were at low signal to noise ratio, but others were high, such as heat from 10 to 100 W, and tritium at 50 times background (Los Alamos, Texas A&M) up to several million times (BARC).

Most of the researchers who have reported positive results are senior, distinguished experts, such as the Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission, government of India, and the experts at Los Alamos in charge of the Tritium Systems Test Assembly and the Tokamak Fusion Test Reactor at Princton. Only senior researchers can get funding because of academic politics.

When a result has been widely replicated at high signal to noise ratios and reported in the literature, that result is real, by definition. There is no other standard of reality in science. If it were possible for hundreds of scientists in hundreds of laboratories to be wrong, the experimental method would not work, and no result would be meaningful, and science itself would not work. If Shermer and Goodstein would substitute some other standard of truth, and ignore replication and peer-review, they are engaged in some form of faith-based religion or a popularity contest, not science.


123 posted on 11/05/2011 9:54:04 PM PDT by Kevmo (When a thing is owned by everybody nobody gives value to it. Communism taught us this. ~A. Rossi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson