If you know Pres. Bush, ask him to have the Patent Office stop interfering with cold fusion.
The US can be helped by American creativity and Yankee ingenuity.
.......... K
TECHNICAL REPORT 1862, February 2002
Thermal and Nuclear Aspects of the Pd/D2O System (In two volumes)
These reports are available at: Vol.I, 3.5 Meg ~121 pages pdf file
If you know Pres. Bush, ask him to have the Patent Office stop interfering with cold fusion.
The US can be helped by American creativity and Yankee ingenuity.
.......... K
prisoner6
The deturiated acetone sonoluminace that ORNL is working on is cold fusion. We just haven't figured out how to do it on a scale that will be useful.
2) It is disingenuous to call this a "US Navy Report". It's simply something a US Navy employee wrote up on his own time stating his opinion. He has every right to do so, but it's hardly the same thing as "the US Navy supporting cold fusion." What it sounds like upon reading, of course, is a government employee writing his little heart out to get $$$$$$$ for his department.
The official position of the US Navy does not support cold fusion of the Fleischmann and Pons type. In fairness, the official Navy position does not deny it either.
BuzzWord alert! BuzzWord alert! Danger! Incoming BuzzWords!
Regardless of preliminary qualifications and implicit due diligence for proper research, a paper is being tendered as a deliverable for said study which doesn't really address anything of quantifiable, identifiable, measurable, or repetitively describable format. Persons paid to perform scientific research like to get their money for nothing and their chicks for free, also. And BTW, ongoing state and local politics sometimes address broadbased topics which happen to touch upon one of the same physical terms seen in this study, namely 'energy'.
IMHO, the study isn't worth the paper its printed on. Worse, it took funding which is difficult to obtain to actually study said reported phenomenon and fails to render scientific professional due diligence in its deliverables.
Was that altitude measured above sea level or ground level?....sarcastic inquiring minds need to know..../sarcasm off.
Too bad the forward isn't as simply directed and focused in its measurable metrics as the above quote.
I've found the topic of 'Cold Fusion' to offer good opportunity in the identification problem, history of science, and philosophy of science. Many of the topics implied by the study require an intuition of the founding arguments used in science for basic terminology. The actual meanings, scope, and limitations of terms between different branches of science as well as identifying the mathematical methods used to describe phenomena from different scientific points of view.
Simple terms such as each term in Maxwell's Eqns (quantum, QED), terms from electrochemistry, terms from solid-state physics, derived terms and terms used as identifiable measurables all have some basic implied meanings constraining their range and domains of valid use.
The Cold Fusion problem exemplifies a problem where the quantification of some of these measurables might exceed the functional domains of other functions. Using a handful of measurables might lead to actual circular reasoning and measurements which imply false meanings without indications of the problem to junior postdoctorate level researchers.
I found study of the topic to mandate a review of the researcher's academic background to more fully appreciate their point of view and implied understandings of basic scientific terms. My viewpoint is more from rigorous Material Science ( Mechanical, Electronic, and Chemical), applied mathematics, and common engineering. Too many researchers in this field are either PhDs in Physics, with less than a 3rd year college experience in scientific study of Chemistry, or Physical Chemists, with less than 5 yrs of collegiant study in applied mathematics, or engineers / applied mathematicians with only one or two years of study in chemistry and physics.
I've found that a good 3 yrs of study of both Chemistry and Physics at the undergraduate level is required to even identify the semantical and meaningful conflicts between the sciences. Another 2-3 years of study in each discipline is then required, devoted to simply studying the etymology of the eqns and basic scientific terms. Essentially, this further study amounts to forming a history of science intuition. Then for a particular problem, such as 'Cold Fusion' a quick study and reformulation of scientific reports in an applied mathematics format allows the problem to take shape meaningfully.
Until this is done, too many sparsely described phenomenon are discussed using less than 5 variables when perhaps 10 are involved amongst peers who are only intuitive with discussing 1-3 variable problems.
Seems the Official reports have recommendations along the lines of "We're on to something here" and ".....more funding is needed in the area of ...."
Entrepreneurial inquisitiveness is easily squashed in bureaucracies.