atrasicarius wrote:

rJD wrote:

Pyrion wrote:Why are so many people eager to make fun of those non-mainstream-scientists?

Probably something to do with the slack and dishonest (and unscientific) behaviour of Pons & Fleischmann since their announcement in 1986 that they'd "discovered" cold fusion, along with the vast amounts of money and publicity they've garnered for it, without any results whatsoever to show for all the hype and moolah.

Wiki article

Let them research, maybe something profound will be found. Maybe it's all just bogus, maybe it's not.

The research takes money - every dollar, pound and euro spent on cold fusion is money that could be spent elsewhere. It may be possible but until we have good evidence that it is, pouring money into it in the hope that it's not just a pipe dream seems a ridiculous diversion of resources.

We have good evidence that something is going on there. We arent sure if it's actually fusion at all, or if it will be possible to produce energy from it, but I'd say the very fact that there's an unexplained phenomena here warrants further investigation. We'd probably understand what's going on by now if F&P hadnt jumped the gun and announced "LOL FREE ENERGY FOR EVERYONE!" Instead, since the initial promises turned out to be bullshit, no one wants to investigate it anymore.

tnjrp wrote:Indeed one notes that Rossi and Focardi don't seem to have a proper theory as to why their arrangement works and also (according to Physorg.com) their paper on the subject "has been rejected by peer-reviewed journals".

Sovereign wrote:Yeah but on the same hand several credible physicists were at their demonstration and did report that the device operated as claimed and produced electricity. One thing they should have done was to open up the device and make sure that there wasn't another electrical storage device inside designed to run for the allotted demonstration time. I'm not sure how far the inspection went

tnjrp wrote:

Sovereign wrote:Yeah but on the same hand several credible physicists were at their demonstration and did report that the device operated as claimed and produced electricity. One thing they should have done was to open up the device and make sure that there wasn't another electrical storage device inside designed to run for the allotted demonstration time. I'm not sure how far the inspection went

One might suspect that not very far at all. I also doubt if a physicist can tell much about how a device operates just by looking at it working.

As a bit of an aside, here's Rossi's patent application for the device, to those who might feel curious:
http://newenergytimes.com/v2/news/2011/ ... Report.pdf

In a detailed report, two Swedish physicists exclude chemical reactions as the energy source in the Italian ‘energy catalyzer’. The two physicists recently supervised a new test of the device in Bologna, Italy.

The reactor itself, which is loaded with the nickel powder and secret catalysts pressurized with hydrogen, has an estimated volume of 50 cubic centimeters (3.2 cubic inches). The reactor is made of stainless steel.

A copper tube surrounds the steel reactor. The water to be heated flows between the steel and the copper. In operation, the construction is also surrounded by insulation and a lead shielding with a thickness of approximately two centimeters (0.8 inches).

Before starting, Kullander and Essén calibrated the water flow and estimated it at 6.5 kg per hour. The power required to heat the flowing water from 18 degrees and convert it completely into steam was calculated to 4.7 kW.

They also filled the reactor with hydrogen at a pressure of about 25 bars. The reactor was according to Rossi loaded with 50 grams of nickel powder.

Tyrannical wrote:

And I thought a two inch cube seemed small for a fusion reactor

atrasicarius wrote:If the word "secret" appears in your scientific paper, you're doing it wrong.

Berthold wrote:Secrecy is sometimes necessary when the financial gains from an invention are important.

See some discussion of the Bologna project here.

I was mistaken in that thread, but, well, my physics is a bit rudimentary.

The claim

Rossi and Focardi say that, when the atomic nuclei of nickel and hydrogen are fused in their reactor, the reaction produces copper and a large amount of energy. The reactor uses less than 1 gram of hydrogen and starts with about 1,000 W of electricity, which is reduced to 400 W after a few minutes. Every minute, the reaction can convert 292 grams of 20°C water into dry steam at about 101°C. Since raising the temperature of water by 80°C and converting it to steam requires about 12,400 W of power, the experiment provides a power gain of 12,400/400 = 31. As for costs, the scientists estimate that electricity can be generated at a cost of less than 1 cent/kWh, which is significantly less than coal or natural gas plants.

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

The claim

Rossi and Focardi say that, when the atomic nuclei of nickel and hydrogen are fused in their reactor, the reaction produces copper and a large amount of energy. The reactor uses less than 1 gram of hydrogen and starts with about 1,000 W of electricity, which is reduced to 400 W after a few minutes. Every minute, the reaction can convert 292 grams of 20°C water into dry steam at about 101°C. Since raising the temperature of water by 80°C and converting it to steam requires about 12,400 W of power, the experiment provides a power gain of 12,400/400 = 31. As for costs, the scientists estimate that electricity can be generated at a cost of less than 1 cent/kWh, which is significantly less than coal or natural gas plants.