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

To: All; y'all; Lurker
How many times has the Pons-Fleischmann Anomalous Heating Event been replicated in peer reviewed journals? More than 153 times.
6 posted on 10/04/2021 10:29:13 AM PDT by Kevmo (I’m immune from Covid since I don’t watch TV.🤗)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]


To: All; y'all; et al; no one in particular; null and void

Interesting discourse about replications and money spent.

https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/4036835/posts?page=69#69

Fortunes have been lost pursuing LENR over the past 3 decades from both government and private sources.
***Guvmint fortunes have been lost? I think you have your signals crossed because guvmint fortunes have been lost on Controlled HOT Fusion but very little guvmint money in comparison has been spent on cold fusion. It’s $Millions lost versus $Billions. Asked & Answered: Cold Fusion is 25 ORDERS of MAGNITUDE better bang for the buck than Controlled Hot Fusion (CHF).
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/4000502/posts?page=45#45

The reason funding from private and government sources has mostly dried up is because after tireless
***More like cursory. From the asked & answered thread, a quote from Jed Rothwell:

Actually, to be a little more historically accurate, they did not try to replicate P&F. They tried to replicate one aspect of P&F, which unfortunately, P&F themselves got wrong. What they did in most cases was: set up an electrochemical cell with a palladium cathode and heavy water, and then look for neutrons. They did not look for excess heat, and they did not measure some critical parameters such as loading. P&F reported neutrons, but most people soon concluded that part of their paper was wrong. Fleischmann himself thought it was a mistake. He told me that in person, at MIT. Excess heat is the most critical parameter. It is the “principal signature of the reaction” as Fleischmann put it. If you don’t see excess heat, you don’t have cold fusion, so there is no point to looking for anything else. It is like fishing in a dry hole, as Ikegami put it. The other mistake made by many hot fusion and high energy physicists was to do the experiment without consulting with electrochemists. They made many mistakes. Enough to eliminate any chance of success. As I put it, they were trying to tune a piano with sledge hammer. See p. 11: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJlessonsfro.pdf Electrochemists who reviewed other experiments discovered similar errors, such as confusing the anode and the cathode. I suppose that if a group of electrochemists were to try to build a Tokomak plasma fusion reactor without consulting with plasma physicists, they would make similar mistakes.
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3963819/posts?page=15#15

examination over months, years and decades with hundreds of millions of dollars being spent...
***of private money versus hundreds of billions of dollars in public money pissed down the CHF rathole.

Fleischmann and Pons’s observations have been thoroughly and completely discredited.
***They have been replicated hundreds of times by the top notch names in electrochemistry. I’ll believe them over some skeptopath like you.
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3963819/posts


53 posted on 02/11/2022 8:44:46 AM PST by Kevmo (I’m immune from Covid since I don’t watch TV.🤗)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | 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