Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

OnlyMe

Nickel To Copper Cold Fusion

Recommended Posts

Bold claims, could be interesting.

http://www.techeye.net/science/italian-scientists-claim-to-invent-cold-fusion

Italian scientists claim to invent cold fusion

Prepare for a trademark war with AMD

24 Jan 2011 08:37 | by Nick Farrell in Rome | posted in Science

Ads by TechClicks

Every now and then someone hits the headlines saying that they have managed to do it, but everyone else seems to have difficulty reproducing their experiment.

Despite the intense skepticism from other boffins, a team of Italian scientists Andrea Rossi and Sergio Focardi of the University of Bologna announced that they developed a cold fusion device capable of producing 12,400 W of heat power with an input of just 400 W.

They demonstrated a nickel-hydrogen fusion reactor which they say will be .shipped as a commercial device within the next three months and start mass production by the end of 2011.

Read more: http://www.techeye.net/science/italian-scientists-claim-to-invent-cold-fusion#ixzz1BzhJmF7K

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The reactors need to be refueled every 6 months, which the scientists say is done by their dealers."

??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Despite the intense skepticism from other boffins, a team of Italian scientists Andrea Rossi and Sergio Focardi of the University of Bologna announced that they developed a cold fusion device capable of producing 12,400 W of heat power with an input of just 400 W.

haha! a jacuzzi at a Bunga-Bunga party

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gerald Celente (Trends Research journal) has been dropping hints in interviews about a new source of power "within the next few weeks". I wonder if this is what he was referring to?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Along the same lines - a "nuclear" battery. When you extract chemical engery from a mix of chemicals you'd expect at some stage for the reaction to top. Same applies in nuclear reactors - the core fuel is used up over time and needs replacing/refining, you never get something for nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bold claims, could be interesting.

http://www.techeye.net/science/italian-scientists-claim-to-invent-cold-fusion

Italian scientists claim to invent cold fusion

Prepare for a trademark war with AMD

24 Jan 2011 08:37 | by Nick Farrell in Rome | posted in Science

Ads by TechClicks

Every now and then someone hits the headlines saying that they have managed to do it, but everyone else seems to have difficulty reproducing their experiment.

Despite the intense skepticism from other boffins, a team of Italian scientists Andrea Rossi and Sergio Focardi of the University of Bologna announced that they developed a cold fusion device capable of producing 12,400 W of heat power with an input of just 400 W.

They demonstrated a nickel-hydrogen fusion reactor which they say will be .shipped as a commercial device within the next three months and start mass production by the end of 2011.

Read more: http://www.techeye.net/science/italian-scientists-claim-to-invent-cold-fusion#ixzz1BzhJmF7K

Given the strength of the forces involved at the nuclear level, it is exteremely unlikely that cold fusion, in which a small amount of energy is passed into a system, would yield these results. In nature, it takes an object as massive as the sun to get fusion going so I doubt there is anything in this at all. Still, if it's on sale by the end of the year and the work peer reviewed and published in a decent journal, these gentlemen will no doubt be choosing their outfits for next year's Nobels very soon. Or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given the strength of the forces involved at the nuclear level, it is exteremely unlikely that cold fusion, in which a small amount of energy is passed into a system, would yield these results. In nature, it takes an object as massive as the sun to get fusion going so I doubt there is anything in this at all. Still, if it's on sale by the end of the year and the work peer reviewed and published in a decent journal, these gentlemen will no doubt be choosing their outfits for next year's Nobels very soon. Or not.

The Sun's mass is simply a mechanism to get the particles close enough together for them to fuse. It does not require gravity to do this, it can be done in a particle smasher too. Take for example the direct ignition facility. This concentrates hundreds of lasers on a ball of fuel creating incredible energy densities. Yet this is not how the fuel ignites. The lasers, playing on the surface of the sphere, super heat it. The plasma particles rush inwards in a collapsing bubble and it is at the centre of this bubble that they come close enough to fuse. Now the fuel pellets are enormous from an atomic scale. The question is if smaller bubbles can somehow be created in the metal matrix and somehow be made to collapse in a similar style of mechanism. Smaller bubbles, fusing just a pair of particles, would require little input energy. Direct ignition a million times a second with micro bubbles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Sun's mass is simply a mechanism to get the particles close enough together for them to fuse. It does not require gravity to do this, it can be done in a particle smasher too.

Yes, but that's a bit like saying that the Ferrari's engine is simply a mechanism to get the car to go over 200mph. Without the engine, that car is going nowhere, even if it looks very pretty and has Ayrton Senna at the wheel. The point is that without that mechanism, or something that can provide a similar amount of energy, fusion is not going to occur. The effect of gravity in a star is ultimately to heat plasma to about 10 million degress, at which point fusion can begin.

The question is if smaller bubbles can somehow be created in the metal matrix and somehow be made to collapse in a similar style of mechanism. Smaller bubbles, fusing just a pair of particles, would require little input energy. Direct ignition a million times a second with micro bubbles.

But you'd still need to get them up to that temperature to overcome the electromagnetic repulsion between protons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bold claims, could be interesting.

Despite the intense skepticism from other boffins, a team of Italian scientists Andrea Rossi and Sergio Focardi of the University of Bologna announced that they developed a cold fusion device capable of producing 12,400 W of heat power with an input of just 400 W.

They demonstrated a nickel-hydrogen fusion reactor which they say will be .shipped as a commercial device within the next three months and start mass production by the end of 2011.

Read more: http://www.techeye.net/science/italian-scientists-claim-to-invent-cold-fusion#ixzz1BzhJmF7K

If they can demonstrate the device actually working with no caveats.. great.

Until then, never trust science-by-press-release.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they can demonstrate the device actually working with no caveats.. great.

Until then, never trust science-by-press-release.

Indeed - they appear to be having difficulty explaining how it works, which has led to their patent claim being rejected:

http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-01-italian-scientists-cold-fusion-video.html

"Rossi and Focardi have applied for a patent that has been partially rejected in a preliminary report. According to the report, “As the invention seems, at least at first, to offend against the generally accepted laws of physics and established theories, the disclosure should be detailed enough to prove to a skilled person conversant with mainstream science and technology that the invention is indeed feasible. … In the present case, the invention does not provide experimental evidence (nor any firm theoretical basis) which would enable the skilled person to assess the viability of the invention. The description is essentially based on general statement and speculations which are not apt to provide a clear and exhaustive technical teaching.” The report also noted that not all of the patent claims were novel."

Perhaps they have stumbled onto something - best thing is to publish the exact details of their experiments so others can attempt to repeat them - this is the stage most cold fusion claims fall down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given the strength of the forces involved at the nuclear level, it is exteremely unlikely that cold fusion, in which a small amount of energy is passed into a system, would yield these results. In nature, it takes an object as massive as the sun to get fusion going so I doubt there is anything in this at all. Still, if it's on sale by the end of the year and the work peer reviewed and published in a decent journal, these gentlemen will no doubt be choosing their outfits for next year's Nobels very soon. Or not.

surely by placing a nickle coin on a seat, and have krusty sit on it, would produce the pressure required?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Along the same lines - a "nuclear" battery. When you extract chemical engery from a mix of chemicals you'd expect at some stage for the reaction to top. Same applies in nuclear reactors - the core fuel is used up over time and needs replacing/refining, you never get something for nothing.

Except when the big bang happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

event-horizon-movie-poster1.jpg

thats too horrible to contemplate....imagine several coins stacked and the Krusty ( for it is She) makes the reaction happen....would that be a Fusion PIle? or would that be piles?....no...im stopping now.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except when the big bang happened.

It didnt. It just looks like it did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another perpetual motion machine? :lol::lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heaviside, explaining how he could receive short-wave radio over the horizon, but unable (at the time) to explain why:

"I do not need to understand the process of digestion, in order to be able to enjoy my dinner"

John Carson (Bell Labs), talking about Armstrong's invention of FM radio:

"I have proved, mathematically, that this type of modulation inherently distorts without any compensating advantages whatsoever. Static, like the poor, will always be with us."

No theoretical explanation of a phenomena, doesn't mean the phenomena doesn't exist. Let's wait and see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heaviside, explaining how he could receive short-wave radio over the horizon, but unable (at the time) to explain why:

"I have proved, mathematically, that this type of modulation inherently distorts without any compensating advantages whatsoever. Static, like the poor, will always be with us."

No theoretical explanation of a phenomena, doesn't mean the phenomena doesn't exist. Let's wait and see.

I quite agree with the FM radio. It was thought to be "impossible"! At one time! :huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last time his scam was treating waste products and extracting gold, ended up with thousands of tons of toxic waste which was meant to have been purified to

avoid laws on the way it was disposed of.

Went to jail for it and now he's back having invented cold fusion,

It's good to keep an open mind and closed wallet :)

Edit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No theoretical explanation of a phenomena, doesn't mean the phenomena doesn't exist. Let's wait and see.

Of course, but if you can't explain it, should you be allowed to patent it? It's clearly more of a discovery than an invention, if indeed there is any truth to it.

I would love for this to be true, but it just feels wrong. If I had discovered how to solve the world's energy problems at a stroke, I would be publishing my experiments anywhere and everywhere, encouraging other scientists to reproduce my findings.

I understand the commercial aspect, but surely by publishing in multiple places you would have some claim under the first-to-invent rule in the USA, plus you would surely have the potential to make plenty of money just from book deals, etc.?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heaviside, explaining how he could receive short-wave radio over the horizon, but unable (at the time) to explain why:

"I do not need to understand the process of digestion, in order to be able to enjoy my dinner"

John Carson (Bell Labs), talking about Armstrong's invention of FM radio:

"I have proved, mathematically, that this type of modulation inherently distorts without any compensating advantages whatsoever. Static, like the poor, will always be with us."

No theoretical explanation of a phenomena, doesn't mean the phenomena doesn't exist. Let's wait and see.

Indeed. In this particalr case the measurement of input power and relative output (and their size, not picowatts or something stupid) suggests that half an hour of testing would verify whether there is more power coming out than being put in.

The fact that it hasn't got a patent means noting - that particular system is bent as a nine bob note as well, keeping all those involved in the system in lolly and protecting the big boys - someting like this would be denied a patent so others could gain from it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 312 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.