You're assuming I'm being elite. I merely described that Hot Fusion is way of saying "Deuterium and Tritium require .1 MeV of non rest mass energy between them to fuse" without glossing over a random person's eyes.
You can, actually. It's an equation. What comes out one side has to equal what went in the other - the total is conserved. If you remove one input, something has to be lost in the output to balance. The cold fusion equation is imbalanced, more comes out than went in.
Doesn't mean it's impossible, strictly speaking, it means there's something else involved. Even LENR's strongest proponents haven't achieved it under conditions where they can find what's missing and balance the equation. And to make matters worse, even though more comes out one side than goes in, you still have things missing that should be there - the gamma rays are completely absent. There's actually a viable hypothesis as to where the gamma rays went... but that just imbalances the equation even more.
Well, if you don't know that it has already been done, then maybe you should indeed first read that up, yes.
Only unstable radioactive isotopes of gold have been produced as far as I know, though. So not only is it too expensive, its commercially worthless product.
Being skeptical is not quite the same as knowing that it is wrong.
My God. You don't know which words to nitpick and which not to. Skeptical in this case meaning "You damn well better be able to reproduce this at least 1000 times because there's hundreds of thousands of experiments which flat out say 'NO'".
You don't apply the scientific method
When your chances are near 1 and near 0, it takes a lot of convincing. Chances that slim are not enough to say "Every Scientist Halt what you are doing and forget everything you already know".
There's a reason why the Guys at LHC were ignoring those 3 and 4 sigma results they got last year and the year before. They didn't want to claim they found the Higgs boson and have it turn out they merely saw a Z boson with a lot of energy.
You can, actually. It's an equation. What comes out one side has to equal what went in the other - the total is conserved. If you remove one input, something has to be lost in the output to balance. The cold fusion equation is imbalanced. Doesn't mean it's impossible, strictly speaking, it means there's something else involved. Even LENR's strongest proponents haven't achieved it under conditions where they can find what's missing and balance the equation.
I think you quoted the wrong thing in your post. It says you quoted sophlogimo but has text from one of my posts.
My God. You don't know which words to nitpick and which not to. Skeptical in this case meaning "You damn well better be able to reproduce this at least 1000 times because there's hundreds of thousands of experiments which flat out say 'NO'".When your chances are near 1 and near 0, it takes a lot of convincing. Chances that slim are not enough to say "Every Scientist Halt what you are doing and forget everything you already know".
There's a reason why the Guys at LHC were ignoring those 3 and 4 sigma results they got last year and the year before. They didn't want to claim they found the Higgs boson and have it turn out they merely saw a Z boson with a lot of energy.
This guy is a known troll (albeit a polite one) who gets his jollies off of engaging in a circular rhetorical debate where he constantly nitpicks, obfuscates the issues, and then berates you once he has you confused as to what the original issue was.
See, he keeps baiting the "gold" issue. At least he admits that it's a tangent. Oh, and beta decay can give you a gold nuclei for a few days before it decays itself.
This guy is a known troll (albeit a polite one) who gets his jollies off of engaging in a circular rhetorical debate where he constantly nitpicks, obfuscates the issues, and then berates you once he has you confused as to what the original issue was.
Oh he's a troll? Its hard for me to notice because the tactics you described don't work on me very well (its both a blessing and a curse to be very literally minded [gives laser focus; detracts from the metaphorical peripheral vision]).
No, he is not. The person who claims that, however, is one of a few who constantly try to poison debates. It is really annyoing.
LOL - that's the point - there's nothing to debate. You have made it all up and are just engaging in witty banter to your amusement. I happen to call you out on it.
Yeah, but its not like you can fire Neutrons at a large chunk of Mercury and get stable Gold out of it.
Depends on how crazy you are. Reading SNS's stuff on Hg-196, Hg-198 has also been converted to stable gold. Apparently this can be done fairly quickly, but you need an unmoderated fast neutron reactor around. Those things tend to be fairly sensitive if I'm not mistaken, I'm not sure you'd want to go sticking unapproved metals in the core unless you've got a thing for sodium fires.
Apparently there is this guy who is selling 1 million euro heating plants that are claimed to fuse nickel and hydrogen into copper at temperatures and pressures below 200 degrees Celsius/50 atmospheres. People have claimed he would be debunked with in a year... in May 2011. That guy is still there, and his business is growing. Apparently there have been a few scientists who had a look at his work and did not find any errors or tricks.
The device was demonstrated to an invited audience several times, and commented on by various academics and others, but was not independently tested. Mark Gibbs of Forbes commented: "until a verifiably objective analysis is conducted by an independent third party that confirms the results match the claims there's no real news".
Logimo - please don't bring a knife to a gunfight.
Yes, there is. It may be an error, or it may be an improbable amount of hoaxes, but the phenomenon "Cold Fusion", be it an actual scientifically researchable effect or just a social phenomenon, is definitely there and deserves discussion.
If you'd like to discuss the phenomena, that's fine. But you're going about it wrong way. Claiming that "European bureaucracy is convinced that Cold Fusion is real" is not it...
Depends on how crazy you are. Reading SNS's stuff on Hg-196, Hg-198 has also been converted to stable gold. Apparently this can be done fairly quickly, but you need an unmoderated fast neutron reactor around. Those things tend to be fairly sensitive if I'm not mistaken, I'm not sure you'd want to go sticking unapproved metals in the core unless you've got a thing for sodium fires.
I was mainly talking about how any stable gold you may get would still be under neutron bombardment and probably wouldn't stay stable gold.
The isotope ratios of leftover nickle and copper didn't match up. Not enough neutrons went in to allow the nickle:copper ratio produced, and all of it was natural, stable isotopes in their natural ratios. More damning: there was no mixed nickle-copper alloy, the copper was produced in solid, pure dust, and the nickle remained in solid, pure dust, with the same isotope ratios as the input.
Or was the whole thing faked, with natural copper powder added to natural nickel powder and passed off as ?products? of the reaction? (Remember, from above, that copper is naturally found with 70% Cu-63 and 30% Cu-65 isotopic abundance.) What do you suppose was the ratio of copper ?created? by this e-Cat? Analysis of the ?final sample? showed that it contained the exact same 70-30 split of copper-63 to copper-65 found in nature. If you?re not convinced that this is very suspicious as well, you may also want to consider that even if 100% of the initial nickel-62 and nickel-64 was fused with hydrogen into copper, you?d get less than half the copper (4.5%) in your products compared to what was claimed (10%). Furthermore, ? assuming hydrogen was the fuel ? no more than 1% of the total final sample could have been transmuted into copper-65 given any conceivable chain reaction involving nickel nuclei and hydrogen, compared to the claimed 3%.
I don't get the combat metaphor... is this some kind of winning a contest for you? :rolleyes:
Another quote:
"Peter Ekstr?m, lecturer at the Department of Nuclear Physics at Lund University in Sweden, concluded in May 2011, "I am convinced that the whole story is one big scam, and that it will be revealed in less than one year.""
Well, so much about being convinced.
"Dennis M. Bushnell, Chief Scientist at NASA Langley Research Center, described LENR as a "promising" technology and praised the work of Rossi and Focardi.[21] Roland Pettersson, retired Associate Professor from Uppsala University, who witnessed the 6 October demonstration said "I'm convinced that this works, but there is still room for more measurements".[22] Skeptic James Randi, discussing the E-Cat in the context of previous cold fusion claims, predicts that it will eventually be revealed to not function as advertised.[23] Australian skeptic Ian Bryce, after investigating for investor and skeptic **** Smith (entrepreneur), believes that the power attributed to fusion is being supplied to the device through the earth wire.[24]"
So apparently, there are many different views on the subject... we might see it debunked within another year. Or another four years?
I, personally, would be willing to believe that this was neither an error nor a hoax when the first independent customer reports about his device and gives a report with numbers and photos... how about you guys? What would convince you, hypothetically speaking?
See, another ad hominum and another mis-direction. Are you even reading the stuff you're posting?
That means that the scientists from the European bureaucracy are convinced that cold fusion, the effect first observed by scientists Fleischman and Pons in 1989, is real.
( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_fusion )
After 1989, few scientists were able to reproduce the effect, so Pons and Fleischman were either called liars or ridiculed, as were all those who claimed they had confirmed it. Apparently, reliable reproduction is possible now.
And this would mean:
Cheap and very clean nuclear power doable in tabletop-sized reactors at room temperature with no radioactive waste, using resources that are abundantly available.
No, the 'European bureaucracy' has not been convinced of anything.
Confirming the original CF claims in multiple independent laboratories has NOT been possible to date.
Is there something going on? Yes. What is it? Dunno. Is it fusion? Based on all current scientific knowledge and methodology, no.
The isotope ratios of leftover nickle and copper didn't match up. Not enough neutrons went in to allow the nickle:copper ratio produced, and all of it was natural, stable isotopes in their natural ratios. More damning: there was no mixed nickle-copper alloy, the copper was produced in solid, pure dust, and the nickle remained in solid, pure dust, with the same isotope ratios as the input.
Yeah, but that is only a test of the end "waste" product. What we really need is a test of the whole device, don't we.
No.
Furthermore;
No to the 'EU convinced'
No to the scientific paper that was really a 'brochure'.
No to the phony company website claiming to sell snake oil.
No to the following of the basic scientific method.
Please go and get some basic scientific education.
Furthermore;
No to the 'EU convinced'
No to the scientific paper that was really a 'brochure'.
No to the phony company website claiming to sell snake oil.
No to the following of the basic scientific method.
Please go and get some basic scientific education.
Because we are already in possession of the Holy Grail Of All Eternal Knowledge. Of course. How could I forget that.
You do not get pure elements as waste products (especially from elements that would love to alloy with each other). That violates statistics and entropy so hard the universe would cry if it happened.
Comments
You can, actually. It's an equation. What comes out one side has to equal what went in the other - the total is conserved. If you remove one input, something has to be lost in the output to balance. The cold fusion equation is imbalanced, more comes out than went in.
Doesn't mean it's impossible, strictly speaking, it means there's something else involved. Even LENR's strongest proponents haven't achieved it under conditions where they can find what's missing and balance the equation. And to make matters worse, even though more comes out one side than goes in, you still have things missing that should be there - the gamma rays are completely absent. There's actually a viable hypothesis as to where the gamma rays went... but that just imbalances the equation even more.
Only unstable radioactive isotopes of gold have been produced as far as I know, though. So not only is it too expensive, its commercially worthless product.
There's a reason why the Guys at LHC were ignoring those 3 and 4 sigma results they got last year and the year before. They didn't want to claim they found the Higgs boson and have it turn out they merely saw a Z boson with a lot of energy.
This guy is a known troll (albeit a polite one) who gets his jollies off of engaging in a circular rhetorical debate where he constantly nitpicks, obfuscates the issues, and then berates you once he has you confused as to what the original issue was.
See, he keeps baiting the "gold" issue. At least he admits that it's a tangent. Oh, and beta decay can give you a gold nuclei for a few days before it decays itself.
In the process of looking that up, though, I did find out I was wrong. The Spallation Neutron Source has produced Au-197 from Hg-196.
Walks like a duck.
Quacks like a duck.
Must be Cold Fusion. :rolleyes:
LOL - that's the point - there's nothing to debate. You have made it all up and are just engaging in witty banter to your amusement. I happen to call you out on it.
Depends on how crazy you are. Reading SNS's stuff on Hg-196, Hg-198 has also been converted to stable gold. Apparently this can be done fairly quickly, but you need an unmoderated fast neutron reactor around. Those things tend to be fairly sensitive if I'm not mistaken, I'm not sure you'd want to go sticking unapproved metals in the core unless you've got a thing for sodium fires.
Logimo - please don't bring a knife to a gunfight.
If you'd like to discuss the phenomena, that's fine. But you're going about it wrong way. Claiming that "European bureaucracy is convinced that Cold Fusion is real" is not it...
http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/2011/12/05/the-nuclear-physics-of-why-we/
The isotope ratios of leftover nickle and copper didn't match up. Not enough neutrons went in to allow the nickle:copper ratio produced, and all of it was natural, stable isotopes in their natural ratios. More damning: there was no mixed nickle-copper alloy, the copper was produced in solid, pure dust, and the nickle remained in solid, pure dust, with the same isotope ratios as the input.
See, another ad hominum and another mis-direction. Are you even reading the stuff you're posting?
This was your second post in the thread:
No, the 'European bureaucracy' has not been convinced of anything.
Confirming the original CF claims in multiple independent laboratories has NOT been possible to date.
Is there something going on? Yes. What is it? Dunno. Is it fusion? Based on all current scientific knowledge and methodology, no.
Don't know how else to put it more basic.
And, Strike Three - you're outta' here.
No.
Furthermore;
No to the 'EU convinced'
No to the scientific paper that was really a 'brochure'.
No to the phony company website claiming to sell snake oil.
No to the following of the basic scientific method.
Please go and get some basic scientific education.
You obviously aren't. It's called a library. Go grab a chemistry book and start reading.