Cold fusion, politics and the limited scientific method


I just started reading and learning about cold fusion. It is some sort of nuclear reaction that occurs in normal tempereature. I am no chemist or physicist at all, but from what I can understand this method seems to be a very interesting way of producing excess heat in an easy way. The effect was first noticed in 1989, but because the scientific theory at that time could not explain the results, it was pretty much abandoned by most scientists.

I feel this is a typical field or situation where science locks itself in a little cocoon of what is known and repeatable and “safe” because it can be explained by theory. In my opinion this is completely wrong. Where would we be today if there hadn’t been scientists on the brink of pseudotechnology and understanding daring to go into the unknown. If we continue to fiddle around in our own safe back yard where we can explain everything, and refuse to give the unknown a chance, where will science go? Nowhere.

Considering the situation with power demand all over the world, In my opinion every string has to be pulled and examined, and deserves a second and third and 10:th chance as far as clean power production goes. Even cold fusion. After all many scientists all over the world have been able to repeat the results with cold fusion, and allthough it might not be explainable by the theories we have today, does that mean that we have to abandon the thought all together?

I hope that science would embrace the unexplainable a little more, because that would give us the edge we need to go forward. A scientist without imagination and a thirst for the unknown is in my opinion not a good scientist. The world today relies too much on science, as if that was everything there is. I’m sure that science is very good at explaining some things in our world and universe, but there is no evidence that what science cannot explain does not exist. Science has a limited set of tools and a limited scope on what it can research according to its scientific method. But who is to say that it is omnipotent?

Think about it.

And I have a nagging feeling that politics and economy are involved here as well. I dont think that big oil money with their lobbyists would like if we all of a sudden found out a new way of getting clean power.

Think about that aspect too.

Read about cold fusion at Wikipedia, general info about it, and about Eugene Mallow, one of the pioneers, who was murdered(!).

Movie regadring of the unexplained murder of Dr Mallow

Excerpts from his video “Fire from water”, (Google Video)

And while you are at it, if you have not seen it, watch the documentary on electric cars “Who killed the electrc car”

For those of you who like to share knowledge, here’s the torrent for that movie.

Advertisements

6 thoughts on “Cold fusion, politics and the limited scientific method

  1. I would like to say some words concerning what said by the journalist Bob Weber:
    “Regardless of experimental results, one needs a convincing theory of CF”
    in the link:
    http://www.strategykinetics.com/2006/02/cold_fusion.html

    Before to understand cold fusion, we neeed to have a complete understanding of the nuclear phenomena. However we dont have it.

    In the Introduction of my book QUANTUM RING THEORY, it is written in the page 4:
    …………………………………………….
    “Perhaps one would like to say that the foundations for cold fusion are the same of that proposed in Quantum Mechanics. Indeed, in Jan-2004 the cold fusion researcher Dr. Dimitriy Afonichev sent me an e-mail where he said the following:
    ‘I think that occurrence of cold fusion can be explained on the basis of the existing theories’.
    Truthfully his words transmit not merely a personal opinion, because actually several theorists those try to explain the cold fusion occurrence share his viewpoint. However such opinion is very intriguing, since the own academic community is agreeing that the existing theories in the branch of Nuclear Physics are unable to explain even the ordinary nuclear properties, as confessed by Eisberg and Resnick in their book Quantum Physics, where they say in the first page of the Chapter 15:
    ‘Though we dispose nowadays of a sufficient complete assembly of information about the nuclear forces, we realize that they are too much complexes, not having been possible up to now to use this acknowledge for building an extensive theory of the nuclei. In other words, we cannot explain the whole properties of nuclei in function of the properties of the nuclear forces that actuate on their protons and neutrons’.
    So, as the existing theories are unable to explain the nuclear properties responsible for the hot fusion occurrence (which occurs according to the principles of Quantum Mechanics), it’s hard to believe that such existing theories could explain nuclear properties that would be responsible for the occurrence of some so much complex as it is the cold fusion (which occurs by infringing the principles of QM). “
    …………………………………………….

    For a layman to understand easily that said in the Introduction of my book, take for instance the interaction between two neutrons.
    Two neutrons have no repulsion. But in a short distance, they are attracted by the strong force. So, after interacting within a nucleus, two neutrons would have to form the 0n2, and would never separate anymore.
    But 0n2 does not exist in nature. Heisenberg tried to explain it with the introduciton of the concept of Isospin. Unfortunatelly the isospin is an abstract mathematical concept.
    Two neutrons tied strongly by the strong force cannot be separated by an abstract concept, because an abstract concept cannot produce a FORCE capable to win the force of attraction by the strong force.
    Only a FORCE of repulsion can win the force of attraction.
    A NEW NUCLEAR MODEL (that shows what is the force of repulsion between two neutrons in short distances) is proposed in my book Quantum Ring theory.

    In 2002 the Infinite Energy magazine has published my paper “What is Missing in Les Case’s Catalytc Fusion” , in which I have proposed some improvements to be addopted, in order to avoid the missing of replicability.

    In 2003 in the ICCF-10 Lets and Cravens exhibited their experiment, in which they have adopted the suggestions of mine in my paper published in 2002 by IE.

    In my book I propose an explanation for Lets-Cravens experiment, showed in paper entitled “Lets-Cravens Experiment and the Accordion-Effect”

    The Accordion-Effect is a nuclear property unknown by nuclear theorists, and it is responsible for the resonance that takes place between a nucleus (for instance Pd) and the oscillation of deuterons due to zero-point energy.

    After reading some of my papers, the late Dr. Eugene Mallove said in 2004: “Guglinski has interesting and intriguing ideas”.
    That’s why he suggested to put my papers on a book form, and to publish it.

    However, Dr. Mallove did not read my papers concerning the new nuclear model.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s