Replies

From my reading of your magazine combined with other internet searches, it seems to me to boil down to one quote from Tom Clayton at Los Alamos that he would like to see a massive trial and error program to test every possible palladium alloy, since tiny impurities seem to catalyze dramatic performance gains. "This is how ceramic superconductors were developed," he points out,"by testing 5000 different compounds." But no laboratory has mounted such an effort for cold fusion.

It seems that the key to repeatability will be found in creating a reliable pure alloy of palladium or perhaps some other material not yet discovered.

What do you think?

Return to the Public writes:

"Clayton at Los Alamos . . ."

That’s Claytor.

“. . . he would like to see a massive trial and error program to test every possible palladium alloy, since tiny impurities seem to catalyze dramatic performance gains. 'This is how ceramic superconductors were developed,' he points out,'by testing 5000 different compounds.' But no laboratory has mounted such an effort for cold fusion."

That would be an excellent idea, especially if someone of Claytor’s caliber were in charge. Unfortunately, no laboratory could possibly afford it. It would cost millions of dollars. Most cold fusion researcher pay for all equipment and materials out of their own pockets, and work after hours. The ones I know have spent between $100,000 and $300,000 of their own money and could not begin to do this kind of study.

"It seems that the key to repeatability will be found in creating a reliable pure alloy of palladium or perhaps some other material not yet discovered.

What do you think?"

I think that is a fascinating and vital issue, but it is beyond the scope of today’s discussion, as they say in academia. (Translation: I do not know enough to answer that easily.) The subject is too big for me to address off the cuff, but you are right that purity, dopants, poisons and the correct balance of elements in the alloy are a key issue.

- Jed