[Kevmo]

Interesting but extremely doubtful.

[Kevmo]

The Cold Fusion/LENR Ping List

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

---

http://lenr-canr.org/

Forbes article link:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffmcmahon/2013/03/14/tiny-nuclear-reactions-inside-compact-fluorescent-bulbs/

http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex- href=”mailto:l@eskimo.com”>l@eskimo.com/msg77883.html

[Sherman Logan]

“Consequently, for nearly 100 years LENR processes have effectively been hidden in plain sight from the vast majority of the scientific community.”

Or. They aren't really there. Your "extraordinarily sensitive" instruments are providing you with false data.

[bolobaby]

Sounds much, much more dangerous than fracking.

I should do a documentary about all the radiation we’re exposing our children to.

Then...

WE SHOULD BAN ‘EM!!!

[wolfpat]

So, is this guy saying that the mercury already present in these things is being transmuted to something else, and then decaying back to mercury again?

[BitWielder1]

Really? I doubt very much that a simple light bulb has enough energy density to cause a nuclear reaction in a heavy element like Mercury.
Could there be something in the refining, manufacturing or measuring process that favors certain isotopes?
Maybe the bulb is leaking more of the "other" (lighter?) isotope. The article does not say what the isotopes are.
Have they compared new and old bulbs.
Or better yet, a large number of used and unused bulbs from the same batch?

[taxcontrol]

I just have visions about some scientist adding a tiny copper or metal wire to the inside and creating a super powerful bulb. He then goes on to put thousands of the modified bulbs and builds a terrawatt scale laser.

[Moonman62]

Next up is an article about cold fusion taking place when mints are chewed in the dark. NASA scientists are abuzz.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kiwLJ17XwLw

[Moonman62]

“If this outstanding new data is substantiated by further experimentation, it provides yet more proof that LENRs are likely to be a truly ‘green,’ safe nuclear technology.”

They'll be green because they won't produce enough energy (probably zero) to be useful.

[Charge Carrier]

Sounds like the typical pseudo-scientific malarkey that has been surrounding cold fusion for some time. After my own little quick survey, here is a reputable retort to the theory:

http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/43138/widom-larsen-theory

I am not an expert in nuclear physics. But clearly, the “mainstream” does not accept this. However, being trained both as a condensed matter physicist and chemist, I appreciate the appeal cold fusion, a.k.a. these days “LENR”, has for some otherwise level-headed scientist. But alas it is not energetically viable under currently accepted theories. If some mechanism exists for something like LENR, then it will have to be discovered and proven by experimental evidence, because that would represent probably the greatest breakthrough in physics since the Michelson-Morley experiment, which disproved ether and foreshadowed the quantum and Einstein relativity revolution. That is, it is a paradigm shifting crisis in conventional thinking, ala Kuhnian revolution.

And so I sound like a skeptic, which IMHO is a good scientist. Show me the evidence! However, I would not want to discourage the tinkerers and dreamers to continue their efforts to flail at convention. Ultimately that is what is required to usurp those of us who are conservative in our views ;)

[Lurkina.n.Learnin]

Bump for later