Cold Fusion Sabotaged

Discussion in 'General Science & Technology' started by Singularity, Mar 11, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Singularity Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,287
    Last edited: Nov 10, 2006
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. MetaKron Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,502
    Restrictions like that are pretty futile because it's a lot easier to manufacture tritium than plutonium or enriched uranium.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. kevinalm Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    993
    Depends what you mean by easier. To manufacture tritium in _quantity_ you need a fission reactor. And iirc not just any reactor, you need something along the lines of a breeder reactor. Anyway, to produce tritium in significant quantities you need to be a country, or at least a major corporation.

    One of the early concerns about the paladium setup was that it might allow someone to cook up tritium in their basement. The lack of neutron production reported suggested that the deuterium/deuterium fusion reaction perhaps was being skewed toward tritium production. Eventually of course the concensus was that no fusion was occurring.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. MetaKron Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,502
    The water that cools the reactor becomes tritiated water and the tritium is far easier and safer to extract from that water than is plutonium from the fuel rods. Tritium production from fusion would hardly be a concern because tremendous amounts of heat would be generated per gram of tritium.

    Scientific "consensus" is not a particularly meaningful term. It's a lot more like hand-waving. It looked to me like any "consensus" on cold fusion was forced or contrived and there was a lot of disagreement from a number of qualified people. Many of the anti-cold fusion people simply dismissed the qualifications of people like Pons and Fleischmann or Eugene Mallove. All that was not a consensus among all scientists in the field. It was a consensus among the usual bunch who think that they know everything about a subject that they have not studied or worked with and still manage to think that they are superior to those who did.
     
  8. CANGAS Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,612
    In my humble opinion ( what is that, anyway? ), consensus concerning science is as worthless, as the quaint saying goes, as the teats on a bull.

    The published literature is rife with compelling evidence that LENR ( Low Energy Nuclear Reactions ), alias Cold Fusion, is a real thing.

    Any real scientist would dig into the literature and thoroughly digest it before claiming that cold fusion is real or not real.

    Whether it is real or not, it definitely deserves a fair trial BEFORE it is hanged.
     
  9. kevinalm Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    993
    Did some googling and found out to my surprise that tritium is not very hazardous from a radialogical standpoint. Unlike most beta emitters it is extremely low energy, < 15 kev or so. Won't even penetrate the outer dead layer of skin. Only hazard is some form of absorbtion or ingestion. The gas (tritiated hydrogen gas) basically can't be absorbed. Tritiated water can be, but even large doses can be treated, for example diuretics and fluids. Biological half life is very short (a few days) and can be shortened to hours with treatment.
     
  10. CANGAS Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,612
    You say potaytoe and I say putahta. The degree of perceived danger is a little subjective. I feel much better about the whole thing when I believe that there is not any of the stuff anywhere near me.

    In special circumstances wherein it could be possible to ingest a relatively large quantity ( or touch it ), the victim could easily be completely unaware of it until it was too late. And accurate diagnosis with concomitant correct treatment is often only a fond dream for any ailment.

    I am personally optimistic about alternative energy resources including LENR and believe that LENR does not depend upon any substances having any recognizable, low or high, danger level. I believe that the free market forces of greed and coercion have significantly slowed LENR progress, not an inherent danger due to dangerous substances.

    My comment is not intended as a jab at you. Your information is very welcome and appreciated. I just tend to be as cautious as possible.
     
    Last edited: Nov 17, 2006
  11. Syzygys As a mother, I am telling you Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,671
    1. There is such a thing as greed. From Carnegie to Gates, they were major financial jerks first before they realized that they have too much money and it is 'impossible" to spend it. That's when they started to give it away...

    2. Very cheap energy has lots of dangerous implications. One would be the devaluation of human power. Also what is cheap is not appreciated, because easy come, easy go....
     
  12. MetaKron Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,502
    What is "cheap" may not be appreciated, but I know families that make less than a living wage that have had to pay 400 USD or more for heat in the winter and it wasn't a hard winter. They could also be getting screwed on the price but I can't prove that.

    A $400 utility bill robs the family of money for things like health insurance, clothing, and maybe even food. It certainly makes it harder to repair the house or car, and the car is needed for work. This money goes to people who are obscenely wealthy and who actually have the power to select a barely functional person for U.S. President and send several industry representatives to keep an eye on him.

    People could live on the wages that they make if energy was cheap.
     
  13. CANGAS Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,612
    Amen Metakron!

    Right now, it is only the greed of men who are not righteous that stands between hard working men and a decent standard of living.
     
  14. Singularity Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,287
    I think the current Oil market situation can only be called as Black Marketing.

    Why should they charge more for nothing ?
    What good are they for us by being rich ?

    Why should they make more than 100 percent profit ?
     
  15. Syzygys As a mother, I am telling you Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,671
    Is there a law against making more than 100% profit? And what the hell is black marketing?

    Let's say you buy a stock at $10. Do you automatically have to sell it when it reaches $20???

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  16. Communist Hamster Cricetulus griseus leninus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,026
    Oil is used for much more than petrol. You can't make plastics with fusion.
     
  17. CANGAS Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,612


    Many people live in harsh climates where freezing to death TONIGHT is a reality. LENR ( sometimes called cold fusion could get you through the night.
     
  18. Singularity Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,287
    If we had a Digg option , the above comment would have scored 99% votes.

    http://Digg.com
     
  19. MetaKron Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,502
    Funny you should use the term "consensus." Consensus means unanimity, and any unanimity about this phenomenon was forced and manufactured, not the real opinions of every scientist concerned. It was a very shameful episode for the scientific community.
     
  20. MetaKron Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,502
    It takes a lot of heat to make plastics from oil. We may well be burning more oil to make a pound of plastic and form it than what actually goes into the plastic. A good source of energy is just as valuable as the raw materials. With enough energy all of our landfills could be recycled into usable materials too.
     
    Last edited: Nov 19, 2006
  21. Communist Hamster Cricetulus griseus leninus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,026
    My point was not that cold fusion is useless, it was that the oil industry exists for more than energy production, so cold fusion would not hurt them so much. There goes some of their motive for suppressing cold fusion.
     
  22. MetaKron Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,502
    Hamster, hundreds of billions of dollars are spent on oil that is used for energy. On top of that, stock swindles make it necessary to keep increasing profits for the energy industry because it is like a Ponzi scheme and it takes a lot of shuffling to keep on top. They can't afford to let go of a penny.
     
  23. CANGAS Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,612

    AOK.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page