Wow.
I hope the Arabs like the taste of sand.
Cold fusion conspiracy theory. Yes, the government wants the only working E-CAT prototype (cat litter not included) so they can put it in a warehouse next to the 500 mpg carbeurator they aquired years ago that we all heard about.
What good would cold fusion be?? And how do you do this without creating Friction? And friction is needed to create steam and power turbines.
1. You've got the wrong government agency. This is something that would be put out by the Department of Energy, not DTRA. The person perpetrating this just grabbed a random agency (something with the word "nuclear" in it) and ran with them.
2. DTRA's website and DTIC have nothing about this on their websites.
3. If this report were released through DTRA, wouldn't E-Cat just link to that PDF instead of hosting their own?
4. When searching on the faculty of University of New Mexico, Dr. Patrick K. McDaniel does not exist.
E-Cat World = E-Cat Litter, disregard or don your foil hat now.
One other thing: it seems like University of New Mexico would have something about this on their website. They don’t.
News from Andrea Rossi, watch out for the bs
Just more Rossi bullsh*t, eh? You poor gullible fool.
In the 26 years since the ill-named, and ill-timed, announcement of “cold fusion” by Drs. Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons at the University of Utah critics have consistently raised five concerns: 1. Fusion neutron production isn’t commensurate with observed heat 2. Lack of a theory 3. Counter to “all that’s known in nuclear physics” 4. Irreproducibility 5. Lack of independent replication It can be argued that the phenomenon is neither “cold” nor “fusion”: but it is nuclear . Neutrons are not easily produced, nor, are they produced by purely chemical means. Hence, neutrons are the hallmark of nuclear reactions. Although neutron production isn’t commensurate with measured heat, several of our papers discuss neutron production. There is an abundance of contradictory theories, and hence, we’ve shied away from theory until we had data. Although the mantra, “theory guides, data decides”, doesn’t preclude experimental data, several voices outside the field refuse to recognize the phenomena unless there is a theory. However, our model-ing has provided guidance and suggests previously unrecognized magnetic and nuclear effects that clearly enable condensed matter nuclear reactions. The major “cold fusion” criticism has been the need to overcome the Coulomb Barrier between two positively charged deuterons at room temperature, 0.025 eV, as opposed to the hot fusion ion temperature of 5 keV (55 million K). However, low energy accelerator experiments with metal deuteride targets demonstrate enhanced electron screening that significantly raises the Gamow Factor thereby increasing the low temperature deuterium fusion cross-section. Other nuclear theories have been suggested to lower the Coulomb Barrier, though few of these are consistent with our data. Most important, the patented co-deposition protocol (US 8,419,919) discussed in these papers has shown independent reproducibility and replication across multiple laboratories in four countries negating two primary criticisms of Condensed Matter Nuclear Science (CMNS): irreproducibility and lack of independent replication.
60% of GOVERNMENT and government workers are USELESS...
it is a cancer eating the country..... glorified WELFARE
Uh, could you please post a link to said public report published by the US Defense Threat Reduction Agency?
In the mean time, while I'm waiting for that link so I can read the report, I'm releasing for public publication the following advertisement for the current consumer version of the LENR power plant available for sale to the public AT THIS VERY MOMENT IN TIME:
Apparently, one of the authors, Lawrence Forsley, posted it on his ‘part’ of this website “academia dot edu” here:
http://utexas.academia.edu/LawrenceForsley
This is not as big a “conspiracy” as a few are purporting. It is also sad that so few are able to actually read a collection of technical research papers such as this and then boldly claim “Bogus!”