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


1 posted on 01/06/2014 10:10:19 PM PST by Kevmo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: dangerdoc; citizen; Liberty1970; Red Badger; Wonder Warthog; PA Engineer; glock rocks; free_life; ..

The Cold Fusion/LENR Ping List

http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/coldfusion/index?tab=articles


http://lenr-canr.org/

Vortex-L
http://tinyurl.com/pxtqx3y


2 posted on 01/06/2014 10:11:19 PM PST by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kevmo
The question is:

Can this be economically be expropriated by the public?

3 posted on 01/06/2014 10:14:07 PM PST by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Sarg is not an amateur instead he’s an engineer and a physicist.

A Google of his name indicates that he's also an expert on UFO propulsion, LOL!

8 posted on 01/06/2014 10:41:47 PM PST by Moonman62 (The US has become a government with a country, rather than a country with a government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kevmo

How can you have the gall to repeatedly post this crap on FR?

That Prof Sarg is a UFO conspiracy theory quack, if not the best known Canadian UFO quack.

I mean, you’ve been posting this crap on FR for what, 3 years? Why are you not banned? Did you invest in this ponzi sham? Are you getting paid to create url crosslink traffic for SEO results by the scammers?


11 posted on 01/07/2014 12:33:41 AM PST by JerseyHighlander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kevmo
For what it’s worth...

“Cold fusion is a hypothetical type of nuclear reaction that would occur at, or near, room temperature, compared with temperatures in the millions of degrees that is required for “hot” fusion. It was proposed to explain reports of anomalously high energy generation under certain specific laboratory conditions. It has been rejected by the mainstream scientific community because the original experimental results could not be replicated consistently and reliably, and because there is no accepted theoretical model of cold fusion.

Cold fusion gained attention after reports in 1989 by Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann, then one of the world’s leading electrochemists,[1] that their apparatus had produced anomalous heat (”excess heat”), of a magnitude they asserted would defy explanation except in terms of nuclear processes. They further reported measuring small amounts of nuclear reaction byproducts, including neutrons and tritium.[2] The small tabletop experiment involved electrolysis of heavy water on the surface of a palladium (Pd) electrode.[3]

The reported results received wide media attention,[3] and raised hopes of a cheap and abundant source of energy.[4] Many scientists tried to replicate the experiment with the few details available. Hopes fell with the large number of negative replications, the withdrawal of many positive replications, the discovery of flaws and sources of experimental error in the original experiment, and finally the discovery that Fleischmann and Pons had not actually detected nuclear reaction byproducts.[5]

By late 1989, most scientists considered cold fusion claims dead,[6][7] and cold fusion subsequently gained a reputation as pathological science.[8][9]

In 1989, a review panel organized by the United States Department of Energy (DOE) found that the evidence for the discovery of a new nuclear process was not persuasive enough to start a special program, but was “sympathetic toward modest support” for experiments “within the present funding system.”

A second DOE review, convened in 2004 to look at new research, reached conclusions similar to the first.[10] Support within the then-present funding system did not occur.

A small community of researchers continues to investigate cold fusion,[6][11] now often preferring the designation low-energy nuclear reactions (LENR).[12][13] Some have reported that under certain conditions they observe excess heat effects by interaction of hydrogen or deuterium with palladium, nickel or platinum.[14] Since cold fusion articles are rarely published in peer reviewed scientific journals, the results do not receive as much scrutiny as more mainstream topics.[15]” .......”

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

13 posted on 01/07/2014 4:22:02 AM PST by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kevmo
Jan 21, 2011

Cold Fusion Claims Resurface

by Benjamin Radford

Hopes about cold fusion have been raised once again by two Italian researcher who claim to have fused atomic nuclei at room temperature.

Cold fusion has been a holy grail of physics for decades. If it could be achieved, it would be a cheap, clean, and limitless energy source.

According to a column at Physorg.com:

Italian scientists Andrea Rossi and Sergio Focardi of the University of Bologna announced that they developed a cold fusion device capable of producing 12,400 W of heat power with an input of just 400 W. Last Friday, the scientists held a private invitation press conference in Bologna, attended by about 50 people, where they demonstrated what they claim is a nickel-hydrogen fusion reactor. Further, the scientists say that the reactor is well beyond the research phase; they plan to start shipping commercial devices within the next three months and start mass production by the end of 2011.

If this all sounds fishy to you, it should.

This is of course not the first time that scientists have made such a claim. On March 23, 1989, two chemists at the University of Utah, Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann, announced that they had discovered a technique for creating cold fusion using deuterium.

That was surprising enough, but they also claimed to have done it with inexpensive equipment that could be found in most high school chemistry classes. It caused a big stir in the media and in science circles, but months and years passed without the promised cold fusion.

Physics professor Robert Park, in his book Voodoo Science (Oxford University Press, 2000), notes: “One reason Pons and Fleischmann had to be wrong was because the number of neutrinos they claimed to see was at least a million times too small to account for the energy they reported.”

Furthermore, there were early indications that something wasn’t right about the researchers’ experiments. For one thing, the byproducts of deuterium fusion include neutron, tritium and gamma rays. In fact, their experiment would have produced lethal doses of nuclear radiation on a scale that approached Russia’s Chernobyl reactor. It didn’t.

The University of Utah, embarrassed by the whole affair, announced in 1998 that they would let Pons’ and Fleischmann’s cold fusion patent lapse. The researchers remain adamant that their research was valid, though no one has been able to reproduce their findings.

The Italian scientists, like Pons and Fleischmann, skipped the typical route of publishing their study and results in a peer-reviewed science journal, instead taking it directly to the press and public. This is a strong sign of pseudoscience, and smacks of a mistake, if not an outright hoax.

In many ways cold fusion is similar to perpetual motion machines. The principles defy the laws of physics, but that doesn’t stop people from periodically claiming to have invented or discovered one.

http://news.discovery.com/tech/alternative-power-sources/cold-fusion-claims-resurface.htm

14 posted on 01/07/2014 4:29:54 AM PST by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kevmo
New book offers scientific reasoning for UFO technology

Field Propulsion by Control of Gravity by Stoyan Sarg, Ph.D. explains a new theory of propulsion in an effort to explain the reported movements of unidentified aircraft

TORONTO (MMD Newswire) January 28, 2010 — Field Propulsion by Control of Gravity: Theory and Experiments by Stoyan Sarg, Ph.D. seeks to explain the science behind a propulsion system that would be consistent with the movements and appearance often attributed to UFOs.

According to Sarg, the nature of UFO phenomena is still considered a mystery because the observed and registered physical effects are not explainable from the point of view of modern physics. Citing overwhelming evidence, Sarg contends that the scientific community should reconsider previously held assumptions about gravity and propulsion as related to flight. With that in mind, Sarg presents a theory called “Basic Structures of Matter - Supergravitation Unified Theory,” which predicts an effect called stimulated anomalous reaction to gravity. It is based on a process that invokes quantum mechanical interactions between oscillating ion-electron pairs and the space-time continuum. According to Sarg, the effect could lead to development of a new propulsion system for a spacecraft. ....”

http://www.mmdnewswire.com/stoyan-sarg-phd-6841.html

15 posted on 01/07/2014 4:34:27 AM PST by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kevmo

Until I see evidence of an E-cat powering a home hot water heater, stove/range, refrigerator, HVAC, etc. it’s all a religious hoax.


24 posted on 01/07/2014 6:12:44 AM PST by Rebelbase (Tagline: optional, printed after your name on post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kevmo

If this stuff really works and an E Cat could power an entire house or car what will happen to the oil,natural gas, coal, nuclear etc industries? It will be either smeared out of existence or somehow kept from general public use.


30 posted on 01/07/2014 10:09:12 AM PST by Georgia Girl 2 (The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | 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