| Author |
Message |
Independent Voice
science forum beginner
Joined: 17 Oct 2005
Posts: 7
|
 Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2005 1:48 pm Post subject:
There is a contradiction
|
|
|
Some people say no, no and no, cold fusion does not exist.
On the other hand same people accept "muon catalyst fusion"
as a well established fusion process wich occurs at ordinary
temperatur.
To bring this contradiction to one point I say,
the P&F-effect is nothing more than a muon based fusion
process.
See also
16ac075.0503200754.141481a5@posting.google.com
independent voice |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Richard Tobin
science forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 165
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2005 2:41 pm Post subject:
Re: There is a contradiction
|
|
|
In article <1130161717.285434.223940@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
Independent Voice <IndVo765@aol.com> wrote:
| Quote: | To bring this contradiction to one point I say,
the P&F-effect is nothing more than a muon based fusion
process.
|
And I say that it's chocolate-induced fission. Perhaps you'd like
to compare the experimental evidence for the presence of muons and
chocolate in "cold fusion" experiments?
-- Richard |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hhc314@yahoo.com
science forum addict
Joined: 18 Sep 2005
Posts: 90
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 25, 2005 4:56 am Post subject:
Re: There is a contradiction
|
|
|
Please provide the evidence that P&F ever produced fusion of any type
before dwelling on the details of what may of happend if anything did.
It's about like dwelling on theories about how flying saucers navigate
with first determining that they actually exist.
Harry C. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hhc314@yahoo.com
science forum addict
Joined: 18 Sep 2005
Posts: 90
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 25, 2005 5:00 am Post subject:
Re: There is a contradiction
|
|
|
Please make that "without first determining" rather than "with first
determining."
Gimme a break! It's late!
Kindest regards, Harry C. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lynn Kurtz
science forum Guru
Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 603
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 25, 2005 6:39 pm Post subject:
Re: There is a contradiction
|
|
|
On 24 Oct 2005 22:00:54 -0700, hhc314@yahoo.com wrote:
| Quote: | Please make that "without first determining" rather than "with first
determining."
Gimme a break! It's late!
Kindest regards, Harry C.
|
And "may have happened" instead of "may of happened".
Break granted. :-)
--Lynn |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Schutkeker
science forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 30 May 2005
Posts: 172
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 29, 2005 1:54 am Post subject:
Re: There is a contradiction
|
|
|
"Independent Voice" <IndVo765@aol.com> wrote in
news:1130161717.285434.223940@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
| Quote: | the P&F-effect is nothing more than a muon based fusion
process.
|
Show us some detailed scientific evidence that this is true. If it's just
a theory, without hard data to support it, don't waste our time with it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Schutkeker
science forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 30 May 2005
Posts: 172
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 29, 2005 1:57 am Post subject:
Re: There is a contradiction
|
|
|
hhc314@yahoo.com wrote in news:1130216201.255161.325600
@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
| Quote: | Please provide the evidence that P&F ever produced fusion of any type
|
You realize that the grand event that occurred in Pons & Fleischmann's
"breakthrough" experiment was that the water in their bucket simply boiled
away and then their cathode burned out. They're lucky that they didn't
burn down their entire lab, or worse, the entire building. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Independent Voice
science forum beginner
Joined: 17 Oct 2005
Posts: 7
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2005 6:01 pm Post subject:
Re: There is a contradiction
|
|
|
Harry C. wrote:
| Quote: | Please provide the evidence that P&F ever produced fusion of any type
before dwelling on the details of what may of happend if anything did.
|
The last 15 years one side gave facts for CF, the other side denied the
facts categorical.
In this manner we will turn around and around when I follow your demand
to give an experimental evidence for CF.
To stop this carrousel we have to discuss better:
Is there a hypothesis which can explain the origin of enormously energy
- which is necessary for fusion - under the conditions of the P&F
experiment.
Second are there observations (excludet fusion products) which can
support this hypothesis.
The enemis of each CF hypothesis should give the facts why CF is
impossible.
I am waiting for your arguments.
Independent voice |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hhc314@yahoo.com
science forum addict
Joined: 18 Sep 2005
Posts: 90
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2005 10:35 pm Post subject:
Re: There is a contradiction
|
|
|
John Schutkeker wisely posted:
"Show us some detailed scientific evidence that this is true. If it's
just
a theory, without hard data to support it, don't waste our time with
it."
John, I tend to believe that the voiced differences of opinion on the
existance of Cold Fusion are based on the belief structures typical of
non-scientists ("I chose to belive in CF because that's what I believe
we need to have.") vs. scientists and engineers ("I'll believe in the
existance of CF only when it is repeately demonstrated to exist though
replicated, quantitative experiments performed by qualitified
observers.").
I'll also go out on a limb and claim that except for those having some
formal scientific training, most laymen are incapable of grasping the
great extent to which long established knowledge would be nulled were
CF actually be found to exist. Laymen advocates of CF are quick to
forget that both nuclear fission and fusion were both surfaced through
the application of existing scientific knowledge. They prefer to ignore
the fact that the same phycics that predicted both fission and fusion
preclude Cold Fusion.
I hold no malice against the CF proponents, although as a physicist I
tend to class them with the promoters of Creationism vs. Evolution
based upon Natural Selection. Still, I can't help but to view them as
being ignorant in a child-like, innocent sense.
Harry C. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Schutkeker
science forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 30 May 2005
Posts: 172
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 7:10 am Post subject:
Re: There is a contradiction
|
|
|
Hi Harry,
You're certainly right that I should save my energy for more
constructive pursuits and that bickering with crank scientists is just
tilting at windmills. These guys are so stubborn that neither
browbeating them nor ridiculing them works, and those are tried and true
methods for winning arguments when cogent logic can't carry the day.
Maybe someday I'll learn to stop beating my head against their brick
wall.
That said, I *can* contribute an important insight into the reason for
Fleischmann's & Pons' irreproducible result. What happened was a
trivial error in their experimental procedure. They apparently simply
turned up too high either their cathode current or the current to an
auxiliary heating coil, before going home for the night. This just
caused all the water in their experiment to boil away and melt the
apparatus.
They're lucky they didn't set their lab on fire and cause the sprinkler
system to douse everything in the building. Is this the first you've
ever heard of that theory, or has somebody floated it before?
John
hhc314@yahoo.com wrote in
news:1131143753.596180.241250@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
| Quote: | John Schutkeker wisely posted:
"Show us some detailed scientific evidence that this is true. If it's
just
a theory, without hard data to support it, don't waste our time with
it."
John, I tend to believe that the voiced differences of opinion on the
existance of Cold Fusion are based on the belief structures typical of
non-scientists ("I chose to belive in CF because that's what I believe
we need to have.") vs. scientists and engineers ("I'll believe in the
existance of CF only when it is repeately demonstrated to exist though
replicated, quantitative experiments performed by qualitified
observers.").
I'll also go out on a limb and claim that except for those having some
formal scientific training, most laymen are incapable of grasping the
great extent to which long established knowledge would be nulled were
CF actually be found to exist. Laymen advocates of CF are quick to
forget that both nuclear fission and fusion were both surfaced through
the application of existing scientific knowledge. They prefer to
ignore the fact that the same phycics that predicted both fission and
fusion preclude Cold Fusion.
I hold no malice against the CF proponents, although as a physicist I
tend to class them with the promoters of Creationism vs. Evolution
based upon Natural Selection. Still, I can't help but to view them as
being ignorant in a child-like, innocent sense.
Harry C.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Schutkeker
science forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 30 May 2005
Posts: 172
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 7:37 am Post subject:
Re: There is a contradiction
|
|
|
"Independent Voice" <IndVo765@aol.com> wrote in
news:1130695299.817002.73240@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
| Quote: | The enemis of each CF hypothesis should give the facts why CF is
impossible.
I am waiting for your arguments.
|
It would produce a lethal dose of neutrons. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Independent Voice
science forum beginner
Joined: 17 Oct 2005
Posts: 7
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 6:53 pm Post subject:
Re: There is a contradiction
|
|
|
John Schutkeker wrote:
| Quote: | "Independent Voice" <IndVo765@aol.com> wrote in
news:1130695299.817002.73240@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
The enemis of each CF hypothesis should give the facts why CF is
impossible.
I am waiting for your arguments.
It would produce a lethal dose of neutrons.
|
Fission produces also a lethal dose of neutrons.
Is it therefor not true?
independent voice |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Schutkeker
science forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 30 May 2005
Posts: 172
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 12, 2005 1:44 pm Post subject:
Re: There is a contradiction
|
|
|
"Independent Voice" <IndVo765@aol.com> wrote in
news:1131648782.358825.18080@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com:
| Quote: | John Schutkeker wrote:
"Independent Voice" <IndVo765@aol.com> wrote in
news:1130695299.817002.73240@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
The enemis of each CF hypothesis should give the facts why CF is
impossible.
I am waiting for your arguments.
It would produce a lethal dose of neutrons.
Fission produces also a lethal dose of neutrons.
Is it therefor not true?
|
In order to contain fission neutrons within a reactor, thick walls of
shielding are constructed around the reaction vessel. No such shielding
was used on F&P's cold fusion experiment. Thus everybody in the building
would have developed radiation poisoning within a few months of exposure. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Independent Voice
science forum beginner
Joined: 17 Oct 2005
Posts: 7
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 17, 2005 7:58 pm Post subject:
Re: There is a contradiction
|
|
|
During incubation time of CF (some weeks) no neutron emission may
happen.
After incubation time CF-reaction starts rapidly to the point:
electrolyt boils of, cathode burns out, equipment will destroyed.
This scenario you described yourself.
Fortunately nobody was inside the room at this time.
Furthermore the short time it happend no lethal dose of neutrons can
occur.
On the other hand, please explain how a cathode mp. 1560 oC, bp. 3000
oC is able to evapurate without a circuit (electrolyt boild away
before).
It only may be explained by a fusion reaction.
independent voice |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Schutkeker
science forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 30 May 2005
Posts: 172
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2005 8:13 am Post subject:
Re: There is a contradiction
|
|
|
"Independent Voice" <IndVo765@aol.com> wrote in
news:1132257518.999718.182730@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com:
| Quote: | Fortunately nobody was inside the room at this time.
|
Neutrons can fly right through the walls of the room and the building.
| Quote: | Furthermore the short time it happend no lethal dose of neutrons can
occur.
|
The neutron dose does not depend on the emission time, but on the total
reaction energy. For shorter emission times, the flux becomes
proportionately higher, making the dose momentarily *more* toxic.
| Quote: | On the other hand, please explain how a cathode mp. 1560 oC, bp. 3000
oC is able to evapurate without a circuit (electrolyt boild away
before).
|
The cathode circuit is a triode, and it can still function in the absence
of the electrolyte. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Google
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Forum index
»
Science and Technology
»
Physics
»
Fusion
