Science and Technology news... :: View topic

good@rock.com · Guest

We can make energy out of matter, and matter out of energy. With cold
fusion, we will unlock the power of the atom, and the world will have
infinite energy and be able to create matter out of energy and thus
infinite wealth.

Cold fusion is for real. Just like the light bulb it may take many
attempts to get right.

Thomas Edison failed more than 1,000 times when trying to create the
light bulb. When asked about it, Edison allegedly said, "I have not
failed 1,000 times. I have successfully discovered 1,000 ways to NOT
make a light bulb."

Cold fusion is for real.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_fusion

From Wired Magazine "What If Cold Fusion Is Real?"

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/6.11/coldfusion_pr.html

"That>s what makes cold fusion so nonreproducible," says Storms. "You
have to load the palladium with very high concentrations [of
deuterium], and many samples simply won>t tolerate it."

"Heat has practical applications," concedes McKubre, "but what am I
supposed to do with the ability to turn expensive elements into cheap
ones?"

This, finally, is his explanation for many negative results. There>s
still a snag, though. Just because he knows how to select good
palladium, doesn>t mean he knows how to make it. "Pons and Fleischmann
used to test samples from a supplier, Johnson Matthey, and over the
years they figured out how to create palladium that worked most of the
time. But Johnson Matthey signed a nondisclosure agreement with
Technova, the Toyota-supported group that financed the research in
France. The Japanese thought cold fusion would be hugely successful,
and therefore everyone would want this certain type of palladium, and
they>d clean up."

Of course, it never happened. Technova abandoned cold fusion. But
according to Storms the nondisclosure agreement still exists, and
Johnson Matthey is still bound by it. (A spokesperson at Johnson
Matthey would not confirm that an agreement exists.)

"Someone should buy it from Technova," I suggest.

Storms laughs. "Why should they? It>s worthless! You can>t make any
money from cold fusion - at least, not using the Pons-Fleischmann
method."

And so, at this point, Storms is stymied. He shows me a paper he has
written, with a grim cover letter: "Ironically, it is now possible to
know why we failed but it is too late to follow a more successful
path ... Without access to widely circulated journals, this negative
attitude within the scientific community obviously cannot be changed.
Even overwhelming proof, as demanded by many scientists in the past,
can have no effect because no mechanism exists for it to be
communicated to the scientific professions."

Hayek · Guest

good@rock.com wrote:
[quote]We can make energy out of matter, and matter out of energy. With cold
fusion, we will unlock the power of the atom, and the world will have
infinite energy and be able to create matter out of energy and thus
infinite wealth.

Cold fusion is for real. Just like the light bulb it may take many
attempts to get right.

Thomas Edison failed more than 1,000 times when trying to create the
light bulb. When asked about it, Edison allegedly said, "I have not
failed 1,000 times. I have successfully discovered 1,000 ways to NOT
make a light bulb."

Cold fusion is for real.
[/quote]
http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/hiv/cjinterviewep.htm

Hiv is the cold fusion of virology.

Uwe Hayek.

--
Als ik nu op dit moment geld transfereer [in België] naar een
andere rekening staat dat een uur later daar gecrediteerd.
-- Boutros Gali, realiteitsdeskundige.

webpa · Guest

On Jul 22, 10:05 pm, "g...@rock.com" <good...@rock.com> wrote:
[quote]We can make energy out of matter, and matter out of energy. With cold
fusion, we will unlock the power of the atom, and the world will have
infinite energy and be able to create matter out of energy and thus
infinite wealth.

Cold fusion is for real. Just like the light bulb it may take many
attempts to get right.

Thomas Edison failed more than 1,000 times when trying to create the
light bulb. When asked about it, Edison allegedly said, "I have not
failed 1,000 times. I have successfully discovered 1,000 ways to NOT
make a light bulb."

Cold fusion is for real.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_fusion

From Wired Magazine "What If Cold Fusion Is Real?"

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/6.11/coldfusion_pr.html

"That>s what makes cold fusion so nonreproducible," says Storms. "You
have to load the palladium with very high concentrations [of
deuterium], and many samples simply won>t tolerate it."

"Heat has practical applications," concedes McKubre, "but what am I
supposed to do with the ability to turn expensive elements into cheap
ones?"

This, finally, is his explanation for many negative results. There>s
still a snag, though. Just because he knows how to select good
palladium, doesn>t mean he knows how to make it. "Pons and Fleischmann
used to test samples from a supplier, Johnson Matthey, and over the
years they figured out how to create palladium that worked most of the
time. But Johnson Matthey signed a nondisclosure agreement with
Technova, the Toyota-supported group that financed the research in
France. The Japanese thought cold fusion would be hugely successful,
and therefore everyone would want this certain type of palladium, and
they>d clean up."

Of course, it never happened. Technova abandoned cold fusion. But
according to Storms the nondisclosure agreement still exists, and
Johnson Matthey is still bound by it. (A spokesperson at Johnson
Matthey would not confirm that an agreement exists.)

"Someone should buy it from Technova," I suggest.

Storms laughs. "Why should they? It>s worthless! You can>t make any
money from cold fusion - at least, not using the Pons-Fleischmann
method."

And so, at this point, Storms is stymied. He shows me a paper he has
written, with a grim cover letter: "Ironically, it is now possible to
know why we failed but it is too late to follow a more successful
path ... Without access to widely circulated journals, this negative
attitude within the scientific community obviously cannot be changed.
Even overwhelming proof, as demanded by many scientists in the past,
can have no effect because no mechanism exists for it to be
communicated to the scientific professions."
[/quote]
Isn>t it amazing? When it>s too good to be true, and isn>t, it MUST
have been suppressed by a gigantic conspiracy.

Benj · Guest

On Jul 23, 7:07 pm, webpa <we...@aol.com> wrote:

[quote]Isn>t it amazing? When it>s too good to be true, and isn>t, it MUST
have been suppressed by a gigantic conspiracy.
[/quote]
Isn>t it amazing? When a reported discovery obviously has the
potential to upend HUGE economic vested interests and suddenly seems
to disappear into a black hole, a host of sheep always appear bleating
that any suggestion of foul play is insanity.

Guest · Posted: Fri Jul 25, 2008 3:56 am Post subject: Re: THE WORLD NEEDS COLD FUSION.

On 7ÔÂ23ÈÕ, ÏÂÎç12Ê±05·Ö, "g...@rock.com" <good...@rock.com> wrote:
[quote]We can make energy out of matter, and matter out of energy. With cold
fusion, we will unlock the power of the atom, and the world will have
infinite energy and be able to create matter out of energy and thus
infinite wealth.

Cold fusion is for real. Just like the light bulb it may take many
attempts to get right.

Thomas Edison failed more than 1,000 times when trying to create the
light bulb. When asked about it, Edison allegedly said, "I have not
failed 1,000 times. I have successfully discovered 1,000 ways to NOT
make a light bulb."

Cold fusion is for real.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_fusion

From Wired Magazine "What If Cold Fusion Is Real?"

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/6.11/coldfusion_pr.html

"That>s what makes cold fusion so nonreproducible," says Storms. "You
have to load the palladium with very high concentrations [of
deuterium], and many samples simply won>t tolerate it."

"Heat has practical applications," concedes McKubre, "but what am I
supposed to do with the ability to turn expensive elements into cheap
ones?"

This, finally, is his explanation for many negative results. There>s
still a snag, though. Just because he knows how to select good
palladium, doesn>t mean he knows how to make it. "Pons and Fleischmann
used to test samples from a supplier, Johnson Matthey, and over the
years they figured out how to create palladium that worked most of the
time. But Johnson Matthey signed a nondisclosure agreement with
Technova, the Toyota-supported group that financed the research in
France. The Japanese thought cold fusion would be hugely successful,
and therefore everyone would want this certain type of palladium, and
they>d clean up."

Of course, it never happened. Technova abandoned cold fusion. But
according to Storms the nondisclosure agreement still exists, and
Johnson Matthey is still bound by it. (A spokesperson at Johnson
Matthey would not confirm that an agreement exists.)

"Someone should buy it from Technova," I suggest.

Storms laughs. "Why should they? It>s worthless! You can>t make any
money from cold fusion - at least, not using the Pons-Fleischmann
method."

And so, at this point, Storms is stymied. He shows me a paper he has
written, with a grim cover letter: "Ironically, it is now possible to
know why we failed but it is too late to follow a more successful
path ... Without access to widely circulated journals, this negative
attitude within the scientific community obviously cannot be changed.
Even overwhelming proof, as demanded by many scientists in the past,
can have no effect because no mechanism exists for it to be
communicated to the scientific professions."[/quote]

Guest · Posted: Fri Jul 25, 2008 3:56 am Post subject: Re: THE WORLD NEEDS COLD FUSION.

On 7æœˆ24æ—¥, ä¸Šåˆ12æ—¶51åˆ†, Hayek <haye...@nospam.xs4all.nl> wrote:
[quote]g...@rock.com wrote:
We can make energy out of matter, and matter out of energy. Â With cold
fusion, we will unlock the power of the atom, and the world will have
infinite energy and be able to create matter out of energy and thus
infinite wealth.

Cold fusion is for real. Â Just like the light bulb it may take many
attempts to get right.

Thomas Edison failed more than 1,000 times when trying to create the
light bulb. Â When asked about it, Edison allegedly said, "I have not
failed 1,000 times. Â I have successfully discovered 1,000 ways to NOT
make a light bulb."

Cold fusion is for real.

http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/hiv/cjinterviewep.htm

Hiv is the cold fusion of virology.

Uwe Hayek.

--
Als ik nu op dit moment geld transfereer [in BelgiÃ«] naar een
andere rekening staat dat een uur later daar gecrediteerd.
-- Boutros Gali, realiteitsdeskundige.[/quote]

Bill Snyder · Guest

On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 10:31:41 -0700 (PDT), Benj
<bjacoby@iwaynet.net> wrote:

[quote]On Jul 23, 7:07Â pm, webpa <we...@aol.com> wrote:

Isn>t it amazing? Â When it>s too good to be true, and isn>t, it MUST
have been suppressed by a gigantic conspiracy.

Isn>t it amazing? When a reported discovery obviously has the
potential to upend HUGE economic vested interests and suddenly seems
to disappear into a black hole, a host of sheep always appear bleating
that any suggestion of foul play is insanity.
[/quote]
Isn>t it amazing? When you dump a bunch of shit in the road,
suddenly all these tools of the establishment show up saying,
"Gee, this stinks." Just goes to show how vast the conspiracy is,
I guess.

--
Bill Snyder [This space unintentionally left blank]

Richard Schultz · Guest

In sci.physics.fusion Benj <bjacoby@iwaynet.net> wrote:
: On Jul 23, 7:07?pm, webpa <we...@aol.com> wrote:

:> Isn>t it amazing? ?When it>s too good to be true, and isn>t, it MUST
:> have been suppressed by a gigantic conspiracy.

: Isn>t it amazing? When a reported discovery obviously has the
: potential to upend HUGE economic vested interests and suddenly seems
: to disappear into a black hole, a host of sheep always appear bleating
: that any suggestion of foul play is insanity.

Isn>t it amazing? When a reported discovery violates fundamental
principles of physics, it suddenly seems to disappear into a black hole,
and anyone who suggests a connection between the two is accused (by people
who don>t know anything about physics) of being part of some huge
secret conspiracy that only the accuser knows about.

-----
Richard Schultz schultr@mail.biu.ac.il
Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
-----
". . .Mr Schutz [sic] acts like a functional electro-terrorist who
impeads [sic] scientific communications with his too oft-silliness."
-- Mitchell Swartz, sci.physics.fusion article <EEI1oz.43q@world.std.com>

Benj · Guest

On Jul 24, 7:20 pm, Bill Snyder <bsny...@airmail.net> wrote:

[quote]Isn>t it amazing? When you dump a bunch of shit in the road,
suddenly all these tools of the establishment show up saying,
"Gee, this stinks." Just goes to show how vast the conspiracy is,
I guess.
[/quote]
Isn>t it amazing how when tools of the establishment show up to
ridicule and "debunk" any topic that is to be discouraged from any
reasonable discussion, they always have to have the last word?

Did too!

Benj · Guest

On Jul 25, 4:28 am, schu...@mail.biu.ack.il (Richard Schultz) wrote:

[quote]Isn>t it amazing? When a reported discovery violates fundamental
principles of physics, it suddenly seems to disappear into a black hole,
and anyone who suggests a connection between the two is accused (by people
who don>t know anything about physics) of being part of some huge
secret conspiracy that only the accuser knows about.
[/quote]
Isn>t it amazing that when anyone brings up the subject of political
and economic interests just MIGHT be interested in discoveries that
have the potential to up-end their establishment businesses and power
cliques, there is always a host of sheep who seem to know ALL the laws
of physics including those not discovered yet who scream that these
laws have been "violated". Needless to say a careful examination or
even ANY examination of the reported discovery is not a requirement to
having a negative opinion.

Lets ask a couple of questions here:

1. And does not interest by huge economic interests (say oil
companies) constitute a "huge" interest in the impact of new
discoveries upon the business?

2. Aren>t conspiracies ALL "secret"? That>s what makes them
conspiracies, no?

3. If they are "secret" how can the accuser "know" about them?

4. Isn>t the sudden presence of bleating "debunkers" a suspicious
fact?

5. Suspicions are not the same as "knowing" about consipracies. They
are "secret" remember?

6. Why is it that all "debunkers" can do is simply assert that they
are right and you should pay not attention to the man behind the
curtain. No hard facts are ever offered. From whence to they claim
the authority that their opinions should be blindly accepted without
question?

7. And lastly, Why is it that the debunkers throw chaff into the wind
to deftly steer any reasonable discussion of these issues into the
backwaters of school yard name calling and to other more PC topics.
Why is any reasonable discussion of "off limits" topics not allowed?

Tell us again how you have no agenda!

Benj · Guest

On Jul 25, 9:25 pm, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
[quote]"g...@rock.com" wrote:
We can make energy out of matter, and matter out of energy. With cold
fusion, we will unlock the power of the atom,

Shame it doesn>t exist.

Graham
[/quote]
Please list your credentials backing up this statement paying
particular attention to your study of physical laws and principles
that have not yet been discovered.

Or is it just that you "won' like us anymore" if we don>t believe
every word you utter?

Of course you did say "doesn>t exist" rather than "will never exist".
So now I>m wondering about the depth of your research into the various
claims of "cold fusion" by various people up to now. Since you have
obviously studied each one of these in depth to determine that none of
the claims are valid, I presume you are willing to discuss the various
experiments with us in great detail highlighting the various reasons
for failure.

Eeyore · Guest

"good@rock.com" wrote:

[quote]We can make energy out of matter, and matter out of energy. With cold
fusion, we will unlock the power of the atom,
[/quote]
Shame it doesn>t exist.

Graham

Vince Morgan · Guest

"Richard Schultz" <schultr@mail.biu.ack.il> wrote in message
news:g6c2s4$vsg$1@news.iucc.ac.il...
[quote]In sci.physics.fusion Benj <bjacoby@iwaynet.net> wrote:
: On Jul 23, 7:07?pm, webpa <we...@aol.com> wrote:

:> Isn>t it amazing? ?When it>s too good to be true, and isn>t, it MUST
:> have been suppressed by a gigantic conspiracy.

: Isn>t it amazing? When a reported discovery obviously has the
: potential to upend HUGE economic vested interests and suddenly seems
: to disappear into a black hole, a host of sheep always appear bleating
: that any suggestion of foul play is insanity.

Isn>t it amazing? When a reported discovery violates fundamental
principles of physics, it suddenly seems to disappear into a black hole,
and anyone who suggests a connection between the two is accused (by people
who don>t know anything about physics) of being part of some huge
secret conspiracy that only the accuser knows about.

-----
Richard Schultz schultr@mail.biu.ac.il
Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
[/quote]
And now a chemist knows all there is to know about nuclear physics.
Get real.

Cwatters · Guest

"Benj" <bjacoby@iwaynet.net> wrote in message
news:e60655e1-8b4e-480c-a3cd-9aa27700e1c4@d45g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 25, 9:25 pm, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@hotmail.com>

[quote]I presume you are willing to discuss the various
experiments with us in great detail highlighting the
various reasons for failure.
[/quote]
Why not be more positive? Perhaps you could start by discussing how you
think it might be made to work.

Benj · Guest

On Jul 26, 10:08 am, "Cwatters"
<colin.wattersNOS...@TurnersOakNOSPAM.plus.com> wrote:

[quote]Why not be more positive? Perhaps you could start by discussing how you
think it might be made to work.
[/quote]
Well since you are taking a reasonable approach, I see no reason why I
might not do the same! First let me say that I have not personally
investigated any of the "cold fusion" claims and research and am not
asserting that any of them actually work!

But your suggestion IS the correct one! Namely to first ask the
question "how COULD it work?" Or in other words is there any evidence
that it might be possible? I suggest that the answer to that one is
"yes".

Here>s where I think so many physicists have jumped the track. Nuclear
reactions in the present era are well known to exist. Atomic bombs
and accelerators of various types have shown that if you "smash"
things together these kinds of reactions do occur. And it is widely
established that for these kinds of primitive reactions a lot of
energy is required to make them go.

This is in many ways analogous to ordinary chemical reactions which
can be made to operated with certain energies required. But we also
know that in the case of chemical reactions there are OTHER ways to
get them going! These ways include the use of catalysts and enzymes.
Enzymes are especially interesting in that through the use of
geometric conformity they induce reactions to take place (usually in
living things) that would be "impossible" in other circumstances. Now
we need to ask the question: "Could there possibly exist such a thing
as a "nuclear enzyme"? Is there any evidence that suggests that
possibility?

The answer to the earnest student of these subjects would be a
resounding "yes". I refer of course, to the "low energy
transmutations" proposed and studied by C. Louis Kervran and others.
Obtaining iron-clad proof, when living matter is involved is obviously
difficult at best, but I>d have to suppose far from "impossible".
Over his lifetime Kervran obtained strong evidence of nuclear
reactions taking place at plant and animal temperatures!
Transmutations of Calcium in chickens fed no calcium, transmutations
of elements in Oats or sea creatures, and outdoor transmutations on
the stones of monuments. In short a Host of suggested possibilities
for low energy nuclear reactions. He even examined possible physics
mechanisms to bolster this idea, though the nuclear physics is even
now not very well developed.

The evidence there is VERY strong that nuclear reactions can indeed
take place in two ways. First in the high energy smash them together
primitive way that all physicists are familiar with, but also in a
second more highly sophisticated and technological way that life
processes seem to know about.

So if you want a discussion of just HOW so-called "cold fusion" might
be possible, I>d say that HERE is a really good place to start. To
simply scream that such reactions without MeVs of energy is
"impossible" is to really make the claim that one is conversant with
ALL laws of physics including the one>s not discovered yet. How stupid
is that?

Clearly the usual approach you find here of name-calling and bold
assertion that any such thing is "impossible" is not only ignorant and
counter productive, but also seems to smack of blatant propaganda
techniques. So that makes me ask the question: "Why is establishment
science so interested in "debunking" the idea of low energy nuclear
reactions?"

You don>t suppose "national security" is involved, do you?

Now just where did I leave my tinfoil helmet?


www.GetXFactor.com Leading Technology, Science, Agriculture News and information	Part of the Identityscape.com network... getxfactor.com jmoodmusic.com smartbusinesschoices.com mintdepot.com lowfaresalways.com evangelicalview.com shoppingpodder.com soproudlywehail.com webnews.ws currenthumor.com

Science and Technology news... Forum Index -> Electronics - Miscellaneous Forum	Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next
Page 1 of 5