Re: CF Suppression?
At 11:51 am 13/09/2005 -0400, Jed wrote: I do not think we need something commercial. A very convincing demonstration cell at one laboratory would suffice, if it were presented correctly. James Patterson might have ended the cold fusion controversy in a few months, if he had only taken steps to demonstrate his cell with good test equipment to a wide audience. Mizuno might have convinced the world in four days, if he had called in other scientists and set up proper monitoring equipment when his cell began to produce massive heat after death... You could add PF if they had used a 6inch cube of Pd and managed to blow themselves up together with half the neighbourhood - a case of massive death after heat. Grimer
Re: CF Suppression?
At 11:56 PM 9/13/2005, Ed Storms inaccurately pontificates: Michael Foster wrote: Is Ed Storms actually a Super Double Secret Dysinformation Agent who has penetrated the white knights of Vortex-L? ... Storms: This is not true, a proper person can buy heavy-water. The issue is liability. D2O is a poison. Therefore, like all such chemicals, it is sold only to businesses. Now either Ed is stupid or uninformed, which I seriously doubt, or he assumes that I am stupid and/or uninformed, which I guess is open to speculation. You need to replace half the water in your body with D2O before it becomes toxic. On that scale, Karo syrup is more poisonous. Storms: Well Michael, I have no trouble buying heavy water. Despite Storms' claim, it has gotten more difficult to obtain heavy water. Despite Storms' claim, compared to many things, D2O is NOT poisonous in small amounts. In small amounts, D2O is used in medical tests, medical studies, and even as a tracer in drug-compliance studies. Storms: The difference between D2O and Karo syrup is that you would know that you were drinking D2O. Despite Storms' claim to having an unusually-sensitive tongue which he alleges can detect D2O, one would NOT know they were drinking D2O. They have the same taste. [ http://www.google.com/search?hs=v2ohl=enlr=client=firefox-arls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficialq=taste%22heavy+water%22+humansbtnG=Search [ FWIW, however, some types of rats reportedly can detect D2O in very high doses http://www.ebmonline.org/cgi/content/abstract/152/4/677 ] Refs: Pharmacological uses and perspectives of heavy water and deuterated compounds by D.J. Kushner, Alison Baker, and T.G. Dunstall; Can. J. Physiol. Pharmacol./Rev. Can. Physiol. Pharmacol. 77(2): 79-88 (1999) Material Safety Data Sheet on D2O http://www.msdsonline.com/Tools/DMSDS.asp?MSDS_Id=56247Lib=Y ECOTOX: http://www.epa.gov/ecotox/ PubMed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed CSA (Cambridge Scientific Abstracts): http://www.csa2.com/ Myth: You can commit suicide by drinking X litres of D2O http://lachlan.bluehaze.com.au/myths/d2o_death.html http://www.google.com/search?hs=Wkghl=enlr=client=firefox-arls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficialq=toxicity+%22heavy+water%22btnG=Search
Re: CF Suppression?
From: Mitchell Swartz At 11:56 PM 9/13/2005, Ed Storms inaccurately pontificates: Michael Foster wrote: Is Ed Storms actually a Super Double Secret Dysinformation Agent who has penetrated the white knights of Vortex-L? ... Storms: This is not true, a proper person can buy heavy-water. The issue is liability. D2O is a poison. Therefore, like all such chemicals, it is sold only to businesses. Now either Ed is stupid or uninformed, which I seriously doubt, or he assumes that I am stupid and/or uninformed, which I guess is open to speculation. You need to replace half the water in your body with D2O before it becomes toxic. On that scale, Karo syrup is more poisonous. Storms: Well Michael, I have no trouble buying heavy water. Despite Storms' claim, it has gotten more difficult to obtain heavy water. Despite Storms' claim, compared to many things, D2O is NOT poisonous in small amounts. In small amounts, D2O is used in medical tests, medical studies, and even as a tracer in drug-compliance studies. Storms: The difference between D2O and Karo syrup is that you would know that you were drinking D2O. Despite Storms' claim to having an unusually-sensitive tongue which he alleges can detect D2O, one would NOT know they were drinking D2O. They have the same taste. [ http://www.google.com/search?hs=v2ohl=enlr=client=firefox-arls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficialq=taste%22heavy+water%22+humansbtnG=Search [ FWIW, however, some types of rats reportedly can detect D2O in very high doses http://www.ebmonline.org/cgi/content/abstract/152/4/677 ] Refs: Pharmacological uses and perspectives of heavy water and deuterated compounds by D.J. Kushner, Alison Baker, and T.G. Dunstall; Can. J. Physiol. Pharmacol./Rev. Can. Physiol. Pharmacol. 77(2): 79-88 (1999) Material Safety Data Sheet on D2O http://www.msdsonline.com/Tools/DMSDS.asp?MSDS_Id=56247Lib=Y ECOTOX: http://www.epa.gov/ecotox/ PubMed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed CSA (Cambridge Scientific Abstracts): http://www.csa2.com/ Myth: You can commit suicide by drinking X litres of D2O http://lachlan.bluehaze.com.au/myths/d2o_death.html http://www.google.com/search?hs=Wkghl=enlr=client=firefox-arls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficialq=toxicity+%22heavy+water%22btnG=Search This is a lengthy list of collected evidence to support what I presume is your contention that Mr. Storms often doesn't know what he's talking about. How much more of your finite resources do you plan to spend on the furtherance of this goal? End the end, what will you have accomplished? Is this what you want to be remembered for as having accomplished in your life? Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com
Re: CF Suppression?
Mitchell Swartz wrote: At 11:56 PM 9/13/2005, Ed Storms inaccurately pontificates: Michael Foster wrote: Is Ed Storms actually a Super Double Secret Dysinformation Agent who has penetrated the white knights of Vortex-L? ... Storms: This is not true, a proper person can buy heavy-water. The issue is liability. D2O is a poison. Therefore, like all such chemicals, it is sold only to businesses. Now either Ed is stupid or uninformed, which I seriously doubt, or he assumes that I am stupid and/or uninformed, which I guess is open to speculation. You need to replace half the water in your body with D2O before it becomes toxic. On that scale, Karo syrup is more poisonous. Storms: Well Michael, I have no trouble buying heavy water. Despite Storms' claim, it has gotten more difficult to obtain heavy water. Please tell me Michael, where have you tried to get heavy water and were refused? I have had no trouble getting it from Cambridge Isotopes. Despite Storms' claim, compared to many things, D2O is NOT poisonous in small amounts. I know this and made no claim it was poisonous in small amounts. Nevertheless, it will kill you if you should drink enough. In small amounts, D2O is used in medical tests, medical studies, and even as a tracer in drug-compliance studies. Storms: The difference between D2O and Karo syrup is that you would know that you were drinking D2O. Despite Storms' claim to having an unusually-sensitive tongue which he alleges can detect D2O, one would NOT know they were drinking D2O. They have the same taste. Sorry, I left out not in the statement. Michael is correct, H2O and D2O taste the same. The point to this exchange is that difficulty to obtain certain chemicals has more to do with legal issues than because the government is trying to suppress certain kinds of work. I would be most interested in real evidence that I'm wrong. Has anyone talked to anyone in the government who has admitted to such control? Ed [ http://www.google.com/search?hs=v2ohl=enlr=client=firefox-arls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficialq=taste%22heavy+water%22+humansbtnG=Search [ FWIW, however, some types of rats reportedly can detect D2O in very high doses http://www.ebmonline.org/cgi/content/abstract/152/4/677 ] Refs: Pharmacological uses and perspectives of heavy water and deuterated compounds by D.J. Kushner, Alison Baker, and T.G. Dunstall; Can. J. Physiol. Pharmacol./Rev. Can. Physiol. Pharmacol. 77(2): 79-88 (1999) Material Safety Data Sheet on D2O http://www.msdsonline.com/Tools/DMSDS.asp?MSDS_Id=56247Lib=Y ECOTOX: http://www.epa.gov/ecotox/ PubMed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed CSA (Cambridge Scientific Abstracts): http://www.csa2.com/ Myth: You can commit suicide by drinking X litres of D2O http://lachlan.bluehaze.com.au/myths/d2o_death.html http://www.google.com/search?hs=Wkghl=enlr=client=firefox-arls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficialq=toxicity+%22heavy+water%22btnG=Search
Re: CF Suppression? -D2 access
OrionWorks wrote: From: Mitchell Swartz At 11:56 PM 9/13/2005, Ed Storms inaccurately pontificates: Michael Foster wrote: Is Ed Storms actually a Super Double Secret Dysinformation Agent who has penetrated the white knights of Vortex-L? ... Storms: This is not true, a proper person can buy heavy-water. The issue is liability. D2O is a poison. Therefore, like all such chemicals, it is sold only to businesses. Now either Ed is stupid or uninformed, which I seriously doubt, or he assumes that I am stupid and/or uninformed, which I guess is open to speculation. You need to replace half the water in your body with D2O before it becomes toxic. On that scale, Karo syrup is more poisonous. Storms: Well Michael, I have no trouble buying heavy water. Despite Storms' claim, it has gotten more difficult to obtain heavy water. Despite Storms' claim, compared to many things, D2O is NOT poisonous in small amounts. In small amounts, D2O is used in medical tests, medical studies, and even as a tracer in drug-compliance studies. Hey folks be nice both Mitchell and Ed might be right. There is every chance the restrictions Mitchell and others are facing simply are not opperating in Ed's part of the USA. With a Los Alamos background he might simply never meet anyone who questions his quallification to buy the stuff. I know other people who worked at Los Alamos and they got lab work done that most others would have never got access to. When I was at ANU staff and grad students where just walking into the stores and taking things. Nobody worried much as long as you did the paperwork on the way out.
Re: CF Suppression?
At 10:09 AM 9/14/2005, Steven Vincent Johnson wrote: Despite Storms' claim, it has gotten more difficult to obtain heavy water. Despite Storms' claim, compared to many things, D2O is NOT poisonous in small amounts. In small amounts, D2O is used in medical tests, medical studies, and even as a tracer in drug-compliance studies. Storms: The difference between D2O and Karo syrup is that you would know that you were drinking D2O. Despite Storms' claim to having an unusually-sensitive tongue which he alleges can detect D2O, one would NOT know they were drinking D2O. They have the same taste. [ http://www.google.com/search?hs=v2ohl=enlr=client=firefox-arls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficialq=taste%22heavy+water%22+humansbtnG=Search [ FWIW, however, some types of rats reportedly can detect D2O in very high doses http://www.ebmonline.org/cgi/content/abstract/152/4/677 ] Refs: Pharmacological uses and perspectives of heavy water and deuterated compounds by D.J. Kushner, Alison Baker, and T.G. Dunstall; Can. J. Physiol. Pharmacol./Rev. Can. Physiol. Pharmacol. 77(2): 79-88 (1999) Material Safety Data Sheet on D2O http://www.msdsonline.com/Tools/DMSDS.asp?MSDS_Id=56247Lib=Y ECOTOX: http://www.epa.gov/ecotox/ PubMed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed CSA (Cambridge Scientific Abstracts): http://www.csa2.com/ Myth: You can commit suicide by drinking X litres of D2O http://lachlan.bluehaze.com.au/myths/d2o_death.html http://www.google.com/search?hs=Wkghl=enlr=client=firefox-arls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficialq=toxicity+%22heavy+water%22btnG=Search Steven Vincent Johnson: This is a lengthy list of collected evidence to support what I presume is your contention that Mr. Storms often doesn't know what he's talking about. How much more of your finite resources do you plan to spend on the furtherance of this goal? End the end, what will you have accomplished? Talk is based upon the assumption that you can get somewhere if you keep putting one word after another. -Iblis Ginjo
Re: CF Suppression?
From: Steven Vincent Johnson: From: Mitchell Swartz This is a lengthy list of collected evidence to support what I presume is your contention that Mr. Storms often doesn't know what he's talking about. How much more of your finite resources do you plan to spend on the furtherance of this goal? End the end, what will you have accomplished? Talk is based upon the assumption that you can get somewhere if you keep putting one word after another. -Iblis Ginjo Onc can interpret the context Gino's comments in several ways. Two interpretations are: (1) Me putting one word after another is nothing more than meaningless prattle. (2) By putting one word after another your goal will be to suggest that Mr. Storms often doesn't know what he is talking about. I'm sure there are additional interpretations. I'm aware of the fact that you are well known in many circles (certainly more known than I), and that you have performed CF experiments. There is a photo of you in the lenr-canr.org web site that shows you explaining experimental results to an attendee of the ICCF-10 Conference. See: http://lenr-canr.org/Collections/ICCF10.htm I sincerely hope the fruits of your CF analysis will eventually bare fruit if they haven't already, for all of our sake. It seems to me that you might increase your chances of realizing the fruits of your labor if more time was spent explaining and clarifying the conclusions of your experiments as compared to focusing on a personal assumption that Mr. Storms doesn't always know what he is talking about. Granted, it's only my personal opinion but I don't think it reflects well on you. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com
Re: CF Suppression?
At 03:03 PM 9/14/2005, you wrote: From: Steven Vincent Johnson: From: Mitchell Swartz This is a lengthy list of collected evidence to support what I presume is your contention that Mr. Storms often doesn't know what he's talking about. How much more of your finite resources do you plan to spend on the furtherance of this goal? End the end, what will you have accomplished? Talk is based upon the assumption that you can get somewhere if you keep putting one word after another. -Iblis Ginjo Onc can interpret the context Gino's comments in several ways. Two interpretations are: (1) Me putting one word after another is nothing more than meaningless prattle. (2) By putting one word after another your goal will be to suggest that Mr. Storms often doesn't know what he is talking about. I'm sure there are additional interpretations. I'm aware of the fact that you are well known in many circles (certainly more known than I), and that you have performed CF experiments. There is a photo of you in the lenr-canr.org web site that shows you explaining experimental results to an attendee of the ICCF-10 Conference. See: http://lenr-canr.org/Collections/ICCF10.htm I sincerely hope the fruits of your CF analysis will eventually bare fruit if they haven't already, for all of our sake. It seems to me that you might increase your chances of realizing the fruits of your labor if more time was spent explaining and clarifying the conclusions of your experiments as compared to focusing on a personal assumption that Mr. Storms doesn't always know what he is talking about. Granted, it's only my personal opinion but I don't think it reflects well on you. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com Steven: Please do not belittle yourself, nor Dr. Storms. There is a third, more logical, interpretation. We have spent years reporting our results of quality control, materials fabrication, engineering and nuclear theory, device development, and progressive cold fusion results, resulting in more than 40 papers. In that prism, accuracy is very important to me (although it often is NOT found on the 'net). In this case, the point was that D2O is NOT poisonous (as would be cyanide or carbon monoxide). The correction to this myth is exactly what was posted -- and was clearly demonstrated by reference. You have purported to know what I think, but do not. Instead, such projections inform about you. Thank you for your other comments. Our cold fusion efforts (much more than analysis) have wrought much 'fruit' with some of the highest long-term results to date to my knowledge, and have resulted in the development of technology and Q/A systems which are immediately applicable to others in the field. As such, if you want scientific explanations and conclusions of our experiments you might try the papers, and in the meantime, the JET Thermal Products website also has a lot of information from previous years. Hope that clarifies. Best wishes. Dr. Mitchell Swartz Opportunities are a tricky crop, with tiny flowers that are difficult to see and even more difficult to harvest - anon (after Herbert) Cold Fusion Timeshttp://world.std.com/~mica/cft.html The journal of the scientific aspects of loading isotopic fuels into materials ISSN# 1072-2874 JET Thermal Products http://world.std.com/~mica/jet.html Working for Safe and More Efficient Heat Products to Serve You
Re: CF Suppression?
Mitchell Swartz wrote: We have spent years reporting our results of quality control, materials fabrication, engineering and nuclear theory, device development, and progressive cold fusion results, resulting in more than 40 papers. I suggest you put make some of these papers freely available on-line, or if they are on-line already, you tell us the URLs. If you will not do this, you are effectively suppressing yourself. I am a big fan of distributing information via the Internet. - Jed
RE: CF Suppression?
Development isn't, commercialization is. Not just CF but anything that shows any possibility of destabilizing the world economy by attacking one of the main support pillars (oil/energy, cheap labor, raw materials, commerce). Just as the argument that there can be no other intelligent life forms in the galaxy, it is a hard argument to sell that all the creative resourceful imaginations on this planet have not throughout history created viable alternative energy sources. Probability and chaos theory alone should be sufficient leave that door open. Couple that with observed self organization of chemical structures following nothing more than basic entropy the bell curve shifts it from probable to likely. A very intoxicating theory has stuck with me ever since being exposed to it. What if we are the architects of our own reality? Not so much exploration and discovery but actual creation through true belief? Hard to prove unless you believed you could, eh? Ha ha Certainly would explain the exotics from the likes of Schauberger, Tesla, Keeley that have never been able to be replicated. Extend that to telekinesis, faith healing, miracles... Is it that surprising that the harder we seem to look the more we find almost exactly what we were looking for? Conceive it, believe it, achieve it. -john -Original Message- From: Michael Foster [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 1:47 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: CF Suppression? Is cold fusion being actively suppressed? Although I'm not a fan of conspiracy theories, I believe it is. Is it the big oil companies? Nah, they couldn't possibly be more bored with the idea. Besides, any company that size usually moves and makes decisions with the speed of a glacier. If CF becomes a viable energy source, they'll just be caught with their pants down. I think there might be cold fusion suppression activity among government scientists doing nuclear research of various types. You have those scientists who are simply arrogant and lazy enough to believe it just can't be true, because it goes against the tenets of their standard model religion. No amount of experimental evidence will convince them. That's not what I'm talking about. What I mean is active suppression of LENR research and information for fear of its being used to make fissionable material by nuclear transmutation. I came to suspect this possiblity for a number of reasons. I was already a little suspicious about this when I read recently about cluster impact fusion (CIF) a few months ago. At first, it seemed that credible scientists were, in effect, going to make a case for LENR. Papers were being published in mainstream scientific journals. CIF seemed to be an established fact. Nuclear transmutation was happening on the metal targets of the charged heavy water clusters. Suddenly, a whole bunch of scientists made a joint state- ment to the effect that the data were flawed and it couldn't possibly be working. End of episode. Did anyone else find this a little funny? You know,just a little..funny. Another thing that makes me wonder is the fact that individuals can no longer buy heavy water or deuterium. I mean, what do they think we're going to do, use a 100gm of heavy water as a neutron moderator in our teeny tiny nuclear reactors? I was rather upset when Jed told us about that retired scientist who couldn't buy any heavy water to do some CF research. And finally, I had a personal experience a long, long time ago that confirms that anything that smacks of cheap isotope separation is not smiled upon. I had a student job at the U.S. Bureau of Mines when I was in college. Working there was a much better education on a number of subjects than any of my college classes could have been. My job was sort of general lab assistant and was mostly a sinecure. I had a lot of free time to mess around and there were a lot equipment and materials. I had a nutty idea about isotope separation. No expensive uranium hexafluoride centrifuging and diffusion for me. I'm a cheap guy. So I asked my boss if I could do a little experimenting on the side with this idea. He said it was OK with him as long as it didn't interfere with what he wanted done. I couldn't get any uranium because the nuclear section was more or less off limits to me, and besides the melting point is too high for the equipment I had available. To make a long story short, I was apparently able to get significant concentration of Pb207 from the natural isotope mix using the molten metal and a simple electromagnetic technique. I will definitely not give the details here for fear of another MIB visit. Word spread about my little science fair project. I came in one day and my entire setup was gone. I was called to the office of the head of the facility whose title I can't recall... director? He told me I was not to waste taxpayer time and money on my personal projects. I thought
Re: CF Suppression?
John Coviello wrote: That is one of the big arguments skeptics use against the reality of cold fusion. If it actually works as proponents claim, why isn't one of those always eager venture capitalists funding research into this technology that could be the next big thing with a massive return on investment? Not a bad question really. I agree it is not a bad question, and both sides can learn from the answer. However, it tells us more about the nature of modern corporations than about the legitimacy of cold fusion. As you said, the Japanese development of hybrid automobiles shows the weakness of this assertion. There are many other well-known examples, such as the fact that both IBM and Hewlett-Packard developed personal computers long before the Apple was introduced, but they did not market them. My answer would be that cold fusion is still in the basic research stage, just starting to enter commercialization stage, so it hasn't really caught the attention of the venture capitalists yet . . . Right. I would go even further. At this stage it may be inappropriate to consider commercialization. Cold fusion is still at the very basic research level, making it the sort of thing that cannot be patented. Plus, of course, the patent office itself is blocking progress. It also appears to be the sort of thing that is best researched using the fully open academic model, rather than secret or semisecret corporate RD. Some corporations are researching cold fusion in a semi-secret matter. I wish them the best of luck, but I fear they may fail because the basic science has not been firmly established. Actually, we are starting to see some seed money flow into cold fusion with an angel investor funding Entergenics of Israel and Solar Limited buying D2Fusion and perhaps investors providing funding to iESi (who knows?). So, we slowly but surely seem to be turning that corner. As I said, the fundamentals have not been established well enough, so I am a little bit afraid these ventures may fail the way the NEDO project did. Cold fusion might not survive another fiasco. Our corporations and venture capitalists will get into the game when it is obvious that money can be made. Yes. All corporations worldwide will do that. Things can change quickly, so be prepared for cold fusion to suddenly get really big if something commercial hit the markets in coming years. I do not think we need something commercial. A very convincing demonstration cell at one laboratory would suffice, if it were presented correctly. James Patterson might have ended the cold fusion controversy in a few months, if he had only taken steps to demonstrate his cell with good test equipment to a wide audience. Mizuno might have convinced the world in four days, if he had called in other scientists and set up proper monitoring equipment when his cell began to produce massive heat after death. The history of cold fusion is littered with lost opportunities, bungled projects, mismarketing and other tragic might-have-beens. I suppose that is true of most technologies, such as bicycles or computers, but the mistakes made in cold fusion have infinitely greater consequences. If cold fusion perishes, much of the earth might be destroyed by global warming. - Jed
Re: CF Suppression?
Jones Beene wrote: Ed, Personally, I don't think CF is being suppressed. This would require an intent and effort to accomplish. In contrast, I think it is simply ignored because most people think it is not real. Lets dispense with the term CF for a moment ... you would agree, would you not, that if the electrolytic loading of D2 into cathodes of U metal were able to transmute some significant percentage of the 238 into fissionable material, then there is a huge non-proliferation risk, no? Yes, but this is not likely to happen. The cold fusion process tends to reduce the nucleus to the lowest energy state. U238 has a lower energy than U235. That is, IMHO, where the prior official initial attempts at suppression may have arisen. However, I doubt that this kind of transmutation can take place in anything over trace amounts (Dash et al). The Dash work has not been replicated and has not been fully evaluated. Certainly with thorium, which has been better investigated, the evidence indicates that transmutation has the effect of converting fertile material to harmless material - which is the opposite of what a terrorist would want. Exactly so. I suspect that people who have looked at the corresponding situation with U have come to the similar conclusion - that: just as with thorium, there is no added proliferation risk from heavy water electrolysis of uranium. For this reason, the government should have a big incentive to embrace transmutation, if for no other reason to get rid of radioactive waste. Yet, the government shows no interest. Therefore, rational self-interest does not play a role in the government's approach. This leaves only ignorance and incompetence as an explanation. I hope people who voted for Bush are getting what they want, because the rest of us are not. Ed Jones
Re: CF Suppression ( copy 2)
John Coviello wrote.. Actually, we are starting to see some seed money flow into cold fusion with an angel investor funding Entergenics of Israel and Solar Limited buying D2Fusion and perhaps investors providing funding to iESi (who knows?). So, we slowly but surely seem to be turning that corner.It will be fun to turn on CNN one day and watch Lou Dobbs talk about the big cold fusion venture capitalist craze.John, I am concerned that the CF theme can easily be painted with a tar brush by attracting all sorts of angels both light and dark. A magician makes his money off delusions not product. We are workingtoward product , not delusions. Introducing speculation regarding Lou Dobbstalkabout a big new venture capitalist craze is NOT conducive to ongoing research in CF. At this point in time the last thing we need to talk about is a " stock market feeding frenzy on CF". Our small company, like many in industry, invest in applied research in new technology as a part of our business plan. No thought is given to IPO's because we are privately held. Our research in radical new methods of pretreating seawater for desalinization using certain technology we gleamed from CF research performed by others allows the free market to do what it does best.. build on the shoulders of others. Granted , there is a place for stock market speculators as long as they do not infringe on the integrity of those dedicated to the search for new energy. Nobody suggests it will be easy, few actually believe its possible. Once that is firmed set in the mind the next step is getting it done. IfBill Gatescan make a silk purse out of a sow's ear, CF ia a piece of cake. Get to work. Richard
Re: CF Suppression?
Mitchell Swartz wrote: Cold fusion is now at the engineering stage, well beyond the basic research stage. I hope so, as I said. If iESi's claims are real that is certainly true. I await independent replication and confirmation. And as such, several devices and modifications of cold fusion can, and will be, patented. I assume this means they will be patented if opposition at the Patent Office is overcome -- as I hope it will be. What is even more interesting is that in the years 2003 through 2005, the Patent Office frequently has cited the ramblings of Jed Rothwell and Ed Storms on vortex (along with the plethora of usual anti-cold fusion suspects) to block American cold fusion patents applications. That is interesting, and weird. It shows how desperate they are to find justification for their views. They are scraping the bottom of the barrel. But in any case, I do not see how anyone can blame us for that! Storms and I have a right to our opinions, after all, and we cannot be held responsible when others quote us out of context or interpret our statements to mean things we clearly never intended to mean. For example, neither (nor the usual suspects) attended the recent MIT Cold Fusion Colloquium where several individuals presented and did describe their reproducible cold fusion systems. You should publish a proceedings, so that others who were not able to attend can learn about these things. - Jed
Re: CF Suppression?
Ed Storms posted; For this reason, the government should have a big incentive to embrace transmutation, if for no other reason to get rid of radioactive waste. Yet, the government shows no interest. Therefore, rational self-interest does not play a role in the government's approach. This leaves only ignorance and incompetence as an explanation. I hope people who voted for Bush are getting what they want, because the rest of us are not. IMHO, there is a third explanation, a blind adherence to the status quo, which I suppose could be termed incompetence. I never expected Bush to change it. As Jed pointed out the Clinton administration ignored this too.
Re: CF Suppression?
Once again I have no idea what Swartz is talking about. If CF is at the engineering stage, I know of no evidence this is true. Swartz needs to give the basis for this claim. In addition, I do not believe anything I have said on Vortex can be used by the Patent office to reject a claim. I have written 5 reviews that have been published, in which my opinions of the evidence are presented, all very positive. I would expect these publications to be used by the Patent office, not my semiprivate comments about the subjects being discussed on Vortex. Either Swartz is wrong or the Patent Office has completely lost its common sense. I agree, CF is at the basic research state. Normally, such basic work is supported at Universities where it is openly discussed and examined by students. Or it is supported by the government, also with an open approach. Unfortunately, CF is not supported by these agencies. Instead, private money is being used, which demands confidentially and patent protection. As a result, open discussion is reduced and understanding grows very slowly. Suppression is not required when the basic nature of the system is designed to ignore new ideas that challenge established industries. Fortunately, this design flaw is not so powerful in other countries, where I predict the effect will be developed first. Ed Mitchell Swartz wrote: At 11:51 AM 9/13/2005, Jed Rothwell wrote: John Coviello wrote: My answer would be that cold fusion is still in the basic research stage, just starting to enter commercialization stage, so it hasn't really caught the attention of the venture capitalists yet . . . Right. I would go even further. At this stage it may be inappropriate to consider commercialization. Cold fusion is still at the very basic research level, making it the sort of thing that cannot be patented. Plus, of course, the patent office itself is blocking progress. It also appears to be the sort of thing that is best researched using the fully open academic model, rather than secret or semisecret corporate RD. Cold fusion is now at the engineering stage, well beyond the basic research stage. And as such, several devices and modifications of cold fusion can, and will be, patented. What is even more interesting is that in the years 2003 through 2005, the Patent Office frequently has cited the ramblings of Jed Rothwell and Ed Storms on vortex (along with the plethora of usual anti-cold fusion suspects) to block American cold fusion patents applications. In that light, what is also interesting is that many of their comments are not accurate. For example, neither (nor the usual suspects) attended the recent MIT Cold Fusion Colloquium where several individuals presented and did describe their reproducible cold fusion systems. Those attendees that were there discovered that cold fusion is well beyond the basic research level; and is now in engineering-phase. Dr. Mitchell Swartz Cold Fusion Timeshttp://world.std.com/~mica/cft.html The journal of the scientific aspects of loading isotopic fuels into materials ISSN# 1072-2874 JET Thermal Products http://world.std.com/~mica/jet.html Working for Safe and More Efficient Heat Products to Serve You
Re: CF Suppression?
From: Mike Carrell ... There is something much more obvious that that. Transmutation is **known** not to happen except under high energy conditions. Some government money was invested in a method --very conventional physics -- which showed remediation of specific isotopes using high energy processes. Even the LENR processes are specific to certain isotopes. The problem the government has is the remediation of a whole soup of different radioisotopes that are dangerous to handle. Consider the consequences of a failure of some system for remediation that spills half-processes radioactive soup all over the place. Butiding a safe plant to do this is itself a very expensive task even if you had a perfrect process, which is nowhere in sight. If you were a president or government administrator would you stake your reputation on sponsoring such a project on your watch? The easy way out is to bury the problem and let some future generation take care of it. So until there is a sea change of opinion among all the best and brightest of government technocrats so that in-depth research is done on LENR processes, it ain't going to happen. There is no point flailing at Bush, Clinton or whoever your favorite god/devil is. The technical base for doing this on an industrial scale does not exist. That doesn't say that seed money should not be spent on investigations. There have been hints of this in the past, which bore no fruit under close inspection. Mike Carrell Assuming in the not too distant future we do discover a reasonably energy efficient way to transmute radioactive isotopes the question then becomes where do we do it? Yucca Mountain? It seems reasonable for me to speculate that the actual engineering may turn out to be a gigantic enterprise, one that perhaps only a government would have the resources to tackle - not only for economical reasons but, more importantly, for security reasons. Hypothetically speaking, if running the proposed transmutation program means the creation of many employment opportunities the economical considerations might outweigh the radioactive dangers involved and senators could eventually end up courting it for their home state. Come yuck it up at Yucca Mountain! Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com
Re: CF Suppression?
All very true, Mike. However, we have two kinds of waste, the spent rods that are stored whole and the soup that is rotting the tanks at Hanford. The spent rods can stay as they are or can be buried whole. The soup in the tanks is another matter. Sooner or later, the radioactive soup will get loose. At that point, government officials will wish they had explored other options, no matter how expensive or politically unpopular. This will be rather like the present situation in New Orleans. After the disaster, any moron can see that something should have been done earlier. It takes intelligence and wisdom to do something before the disaster. Granted Clinton did little to solve some of the serious problems and Bush has done even less - even making some worse. My point is that the criteria to be elected president needs to be changed. Being conservative or liberal, Republican or Democrat is not working. We need people who are competent. Of course, the general public can not be expected to pick the person on this basis, but the people who put up the candidate in the first place can. Also the media can. A candidate should have to go through the same process that is used to pick a Supreme Court Judge. This would have weeded out the likes of Bush. Ed Mike Carrell wrote: - Original Message - From: thomas malloy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: CF Suppression? Ed Storms posted; For this reason, the government should have a big incentive to embrace transmutation, if for no other reason to get rid of radioactive waste. Yet, the government shows no interest. Therefore, rational self-interest does not play a role in the government's approach. This leaves only ignorance and incompetence as an explanation. I hope people who voted for Bush are getting what they want, because the rest of us are not. IMHO, there is a third explanation, a blind adherence to the status quo, which I suppose could be termed incompetence. I never expected Bush to change it. As Jed pointed out the Clinton administration ignored this too. --- There is something much more obvious that that. Transmutation is **known** not to happen except under high energy conditions. Some government money was invested in a method --very conventional physics -- which showed remediation of specific isotopes using high energy processes. Even the LENR processes are specific to certain isotopes. The problem the government has is the remediation of a whole soup of different radioisotopes that are dangerous to handle. Consider the consequences of a failure of some system for remediation that spills half-processes radioactive soup all over the place. Butiding a safe plant to do this is itself a very expensive task even if you had a perfrect process, which is nowhere in sight. If you were a president or government administrator would you stake your reputation on sponsoring such a project on your watch? The easy way out is to bury the problem and let some future generation take care of it. So until there is a sea change of opinion among all the best and brightest of government technocrats so that in-depth research is done on LENR processes, it ain't going to happen. There is no point flailing at Bush, Clinton or whoever your favorite god/devil is. The technical base for doing this on an industrial scale does not exist. That doesn't say that seed money should not be spent on investigations. There have been hints of this in the past, which bore no fruit under close inspection. Mike Carrell
Re: CF Suppression?
From: Mitchell Swartz [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cold fusion is now at the engineering stage, well beyond the basic research stage. And as such, several devices and modifications of cold fusion can, and will be, patented. What is even more interesting is that in the years 2003 through 2005, the Patent Office frequently has cited the ramblings of Jed Rothwell and Ed Storms on vortex (along with the plethora of usual anti-cold fusion suspects) to block American cold fusion patents applications. You can't seriously think that the patent office is blocking cold fusion patents because of anything said on Vortex by Jed and Ed? They've been blocking cold fusion patents for over 16 years now, well before this forum existed. Somebody has to get a European patent or Asian patent and market a cold fusion device. This controversy could end quickly if that happens.
Re: CF Suppression?
At 06:41 PM 9/13/2005, you wrote: From: Mitchell Swartz [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cold fusion is now at the engineering stage, well beyond the basic research stage. And as such, several devices and modifications of cold fusion can, and will be, patented. What is even more interesting is that in the years 2003 through 2005, the Patent Office frequently has cited the ramblings of Jed Rothwell and Ed Storms on vortex (along with the plethora of usual anti-cold fusion suspects) to block American cold fusion patents applications. You can't seriously think that the patent office is blocking cold fusion patents because of anything said on Vortex by Jed and Ed? They've been blocking cold fusion patents for over 16 years now, well before this forum existed. Somebody has to get a European patent or Asian patent and market a cold fusion device. This controversy could end quickly if that happens. John: I said cited which has a clear meaning. In fact, by relying on such cherry pickings and the rants of the other 'usual suspects', it also demonstrates that the Patent Office has deliberately ignored open demonstrations of cold fusion by Prof. John Dash, by Dennis Cravens, and by my group, JET Thermal Products, which demonstrate conclusively that they have no foundation for their egregious behavior. As Jed Rothwell has correctly stated, It shows how desperate they [the Patent Office] are to find justification for their views. [ FWIW and corroborating my post, Jed Rothwell several years ago previously acted quite responsibly and wrote a letter which utterly contradicted the Patent Office's use of his posting on Vortex, which was used by the Patent Office in one of their unfounded rejections. ] Dr. Mitchell Swartz Cold Fusion Timeshttp://world.std.com/~mica/cft.html The journal of the scientific aspects of loading isotopic fuels into materials ISSN# 1072-2874 JET Thermal Products http://world.std.com/~mica/jet.html Working for Safe and More Efficient Heat Products to Serve You
Re: CF Suppression?
At 05:17 PM 9/13/2005, Edmund Storms wrote: Once again I have no idea what Swartz is talking about. If CF is at the engineering stage, I know of no evidence this is true. Only those with narrow minds fail to see that the definition of Impossible is 'Lack of imagination and incentive'. -- Serena Butler = This is known as science by politics -- it is disgusting. Storms doesn't have leg to stand on and he knows it. Dr. Eugene F. Mallove Subject: Storms' censorship
Re: CF Suppression?
- Original Message - From: Mitchell Swartz [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: John Coviello [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2005 7:06 PM Subject: Re: CF Suppression? At 06:41 PM 9/13/2005, you wrote: From: Mitchell Swartz [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cold fusion is now at the engineering stage, well beyond the basic research stage. And as such, several devices and modifications of cold fusion can, and will be, patented. What is even more interesting is that in the years 2003 through 2005, the Patent Office frequently has cited the ramblings of Jed Rothwell and Ed Storms on vortex (along with the plethora of usual anti-cold fusion suspects) to block American cold fusion patents applications. You can't seriously think that the patent office is blocking cold fusion patents because of anything said on Vortex by Jed and Ed? They've been blocking cold fusion patents for over 16 years now, well before this forum existed. Somebody has to get a European patent or Asian patent and market a cold fusion device. This controversy could end quickly if that happens. John: I said cited which has a clear meaning. In fact, by relying on such cherry pickings and the rants of the other 'usual suspects', it also demonstrates that the Patent Office has deliberately ignored open demonstrations of cold fusion by Prof. John Dash, by Dennis Cravens, and by my group, JET Thermal Products, which demonstrate conclusively that they have no foundation for their egregious behavior. In all due respect, that definitely seems like the onus is on the Patent Office not Jed or Ed (in other words it's the Patent Office's problem). Jed and Ed are doing their best to promote their views on cold fusion. If the Patent Office choses to focus on their views to justify their policies and ignore other evidence, such as actual demonstrations of cold fusion, it seems as if it's the Patent Office who isn't doing their job properly and burying their heads in the sand. The question is: Is this deliberate (i.e. suppression)? Anyone who thinks cold fusion suppression is too far out to even consider. Remember the people who control our government are the same band of Robber Barrons who have taken our nation into a very questionable war in the Middle East for oil These people will stop at nothing to protect their pet industry, the most profitable industry in human history, the oil industry. If they're willing to drag the nation into war and kill thousands for oil, what makes anyone actually think they wouldn't also use the Patent Office as a convient blocking mechanism to keep cold fusion from progession too quickly? It is up to cold fusion proponents to make an overwhelming case of cold fusion that can no longer be ignored.
Re: CF Suppression?
- Original Message - From: Edmund Storms [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: CF Suppression? All very true, Mike. However, we have two kinds of waste, the spent rods that are stored whole and the soup that is rotting the tanks at Hanford. The spent rods can stay as they are or can be buried whole. The soup in the tanks is another matter. Sooner or later, the radioactive soup will get loose. snip A while back I had occasion to look into the Hanford radwaste situation in the context of remediation and containment using chemically activated fly ash, which can form a strong porous barrier which sequesters a wide range of contaminants. At thet time I read that Hanford was pumping liquid waste from below ground tanks into double walled above ground tanks with provision for sampling any leakage from the inner to outer shell. This is an expensive stopgap. It happens that the activated fly ash can make a suitable and cheap containment for locally stored rods and liquid waste, far better than the metal and portland cement containment design postulated for Yucca Mountain. The basic chemistry comes from Dr. Daviovits, a Frenchman, but getting the proper governmental attention, or even research grants, runs into the usual thicket familiar to CF. The Great Pyramids were built with limestone concrete using a related chemistry, but that is another story. Mike Carrell
Re: CF Suppression?
More on my vast left or right wing conspiracy theory of cold fusion suppression. On the subject of my possible low budget Pb207 isotope separation I wrote: I couldn't get any uranium because the nuclear section was more or less off limits to me, and besides the melting point is too high for the equipment I had available. To make a long story short, I was apparently able to get significant concentration of Pb207 from the natural isotope mix using the molten metal and a simple electromagnetic technique. I will definitely not give the details here for fear of another MIB visit. Ed completely skirts the issue of isotope separation and writes: Lead is very toxic. I can understand why someone might not want you messing with it. Golly gee, Ed, I thought it was a food additive. This was 1962. No one anywhere was worried about anything toxic, or anything nuclear, for that matter. There was a student operated nuclear reactor not a hundred yards from where I worked at the Bureau of Mines. You could have walked in there at night and yanked all the control rods and it would maybe have set off an alarm. I didn't want to flesh out this narrative for fear of sounding like an old geezer yakking about old times at the U.S. Bureau of Mines, but well here it is anyway. In any case, get a load of my actual job there, as opposed to my isotope separation hobby. I was in charge of electroplating manganese salts into mercury cathodes and then boiling off the mercury in an iron still to recover the manganese. I had to keep plating until the amalgam was just a sludge. The mercury was boiled off in a creaky old mercury still made for the purpose. You had to purge the manganese with nitrogen before removal and then slowly expose it to air, as it was a fine black powder and highly pyrophoric. A lot of times the manganese lit off anyway and there was a hell of a fireworks display. You can just imagine how much residual mercury was in it. I did in fact contract mercury poisoning from doing this. My point here is that no one was worried about my messing with anything toxic. Clearly, what they were worried about was any inexpensive isotope separation scheme. BTW, Ed that lead acetate makes a hell of a low-cal sweetner. Used to be call sugar of lead, y'know. Thins you right out. M. ___ Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com The most personalized portal on the Web!
CF Suppression?
Is cold fusion being actively suppressed? Although I'm not a fan of conspiracy theories, I believe it is. Is it the big oil companies? Nah, they couldn't possibly be more bored with the idea. Besides, any company that size usually moves and makes decisions with the speed of a glacier. If CF becomes a viable energy source, they'll just be caught with their pants down. I think there might be cold fusion suppression activity among government scientists doing nuclear research of various types. You have those scientists who are simply arrogant and lazy enough to believe it just can't be true, because it goes against the tenets of their standard model religion. No amount of experimental evidence will convince them. That's not what I'm talking about. What I mean is active suppression of LENR research and information for fear of its being used to make fissionable material by nuclear transmutation. I came to suspect this possiblity for a number of reasons. I was already a little suspicious about this when I read recently about cluster impact fusion (CIF) a few months ago. At first, it seemed that credible scientists were, in effect, going to make a case for LENR. Papers were being published in mainstream scientific journals. CIF seemed to be an established fact. Nuclear transmutation was happening on the metal targets of the charged heavy water clusters. Suddenly, a whole bunch of scientists made a joint state- ment to the effect that the data were flawed and it couldn't possibly be working. End of episode. Did anyone else find this a little funny? You know,just a little..funny. Another thing that makes me wonder is the fact that individuals can no longer buy heavy water or deuterium. I mean, what do they think we're going to do, use a 100gm of heavy water as a neutron moderator in our teeny tiny nuclear reactors? I was rather upset when Jed told us about that retired scientist who couldn't buy any heavy water to do some CF research. And finally, I had a personal experience a long, long time ago that confirms that anything that smacks of cheap isotope separation is not smiled upon. I had a student job at the U.S. Bureau of Mines when I was in college. Working there was a much better education on a number of subjects than any of my college classes could have been. My job was sort of general lab assistant and was mostly a sinecure. I had a lot of free time to mess around and there were a lot equipment and materials. I had a nutty idea about isotope separation. No expensive uranium hexafluoride centrifuging and diffusion for me. I'm a cheap guy. So I asked my boss if I could do a little experimenting on the side with this idea. He said it was OK with him as long as it didn't interfere with what he wanted done. I couldn't get any uranium because the nuclear section was more or less off limits to me, and besides the melting point is too high for the equipment I had available. To make a long story short, I was apparently able to get significant concentration of Pb207 from the natural isotope mix using the molten metal and a simple electromagnetic technique. I will definitely not give the details here for fear of another MIB visit. Word spread about my little science fair project. I came in one day and my entire setup was gone. I was called to the office of the head of the facility whose title I can't recall... director? He told me I was not to waste taxpayer time and money on my personal projects. I thought that was kind of funny since most of the scientists spent a lot of time asleep at their lab benches. There were a couple of men in his office. They didn't work there. They didn't actually have black suits and sunglasses, but they really looked out of place and unfriendly. I was prepared to take this order at face value until the director told me not to discuss what I had done with anyone. The two MIB said nothing and just sort of glared at me. A good argument against my little conspiracy theory would be that Claytor, et. al., continue with their research. I know there are quite a few lurkers on this list who work or have worked at government nuclear research facilities. I've had a number of off-list emails from some of them. I'm sure others on the list have as well. Now couldn't one of you lurkers give us just a little bitty hint about this? M. ___ Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com The most personalized portal on the Web!
Re: CF Suppression?
Michael Foster wrote: I think there might be cold fusion suppression activity among government scientists doing nuclear research of various types. You have those scientists who are simply arrogant and lazy enough to believe it just can't be true, because it goes against the tenets of their standard model religion. No amount of experimental evidence will convince them. That's not what I'm talking about. There is no doubt such people are suppressing the field. They make no secret of their activity. On the contrary, like Park and Zimmerman, they brag about how they suppressed CF. What I mean is active suppression of LENR research and information for fear of its being used to make fissionable material by nuclear transmutation. This possibility does worry many people, including me, although I have no idea whether anyone in the government is suppressing CF because of it. I get the impression that most people in the government are not well informed, to say the least. If they are trying to suppress it, they are not doing a very good job, since information is widely available, and I distribute 3,000 papers every week, and I have a mirror web site in Beijing. Before cold fusion went public, Martin Fleischmann asked the U.S. government to classify it, and conduct secretly funded research. He was worried that it had weapons applications. He still is. I am glad he failed, but if in the future cold fusion leads to cheap, widely available weapons of mass destruction . . . I guess I will change my mind and regret that it was discovered and made public. You can then taunt me, saying: See? You told yourself so. - Jed
Re: CF Suppression?
Michael, Suddenly, a whole bunch of scientists made a joint state- ment to the effect that the data were flawed and it couldn't possibly be working. End of episode. Did anyone else find this a little funny? You know,just a little..funny. Yes. The whole episode from '89-95 expecially, is extremely suspicious and there are many other related inconsistencies than the circle-the-wagons mentality. Over past years, myself and others have posted numerous times on the illogic and inconsistencies in the official stance and the very distinct liklihood that it all relates back to non-proliferation and black-project issues... although exactly how it relates is unclear. I wonder if Brian Josephson knows the answer: http://www.tcm.phy.cam.ac.uk/~bdj10/ At his level he should have access to the relevant information (on the UK side of the Atlantic, anyway). I hope that he has carefully weighed the risk-vs-reward equation, and has made the determination that the initial fears are overblown. I think he is one person who can be trusted to do that fairly. I tried to get into escribe to find some of the old posts, but as usual it is down... or is it permanently down? Jones
Re: CF Suppression?
Michael Foster wrote: Is cold fusion being actively suppressed? Although I'm not a fan of conspiracy theories, I believe it is. Is it the big oil companies? Nah, they couldn't possibly be more bored with the idea. Besides, any company that size usually moves and makes decisions with the speed of a glacier. If CF becomes a viable energy source, they'll just be caught with their pants down. Personally, I don't think CF is being suppressed. This would require an intent and effort to accomplish. In contrast, I think it is simply ignored because most people think it is not real. A myth has taken hold in the human mind, which is the basis for most beliefs in all subjects, and this myth directs the approach being take. I think there might be cold fusion suppression activity among government scientists doing nuclear research of various types. You have those scientists who are simply arrogant and lazy enough to believe it just can't be true, because it goes against the tenets of their standard model religion. No amount of experimental evidence will convince them. That's not what I'm talking about. These people are in the minority, although they started the myth that is directing other people's thoughts. Once the myth is in place, nothing more needs to be done. Society goes the way the myth dictates automatically. What I mean is active suppression of LENR research and information for fear of its being used to make fissionable material by nuclear transmutation. I came to suspect this possiblity for a number of reasons. I was already a little suspicious about this when I read recently about cluster impact fusion (CIF) a few months ago. At first, it seemed that credible scientists were, in effect, going to make a case for LENR. Papers were being published in mainstream scientific journals. CIF seemed to be an established fact. Nuclear transmutation was happening on the metal targets of the charged heavy water clusters. Suddenly, a whole bunch of scientists made a joint state- ment to the effect that the data were flawed and it couldn't possibly be working. End of episode. Did anyone else find this a little funny? You know,just a little..funny. In this case, the myth started to break down so that it required a little additional effort to get it back in place. Now all is well. Another thing that makes me wonder is the fact that individuals can no longer buy heavy water or deuterium. This is not true, a proper person can buy heavy-water. The issue is liability. D2O is a poison. Therefore, like all such chemicals, it is sold only to businesses. I mean, what do they think we're going to do, use a 100gm of heavy water as a neutron moderator in our teeny tiny nuclear reactors? I was rather upset when Jed told us about that retired scientist who couldn't buy any heavy water to do some CF research. And finally, I had a personal experience a long, long time ago that confirms that anything that smacks of cheap isotope separation is not smiled upon. I had a student job at the U.S. Bureau of Mines when I was in college. Working there was a much better education on a number of subjects than any of my college classes could have been. My job was sort of general lab assistant and was mostly a sinecure. I had a lot of free time to mess around and there were a lot equipment and materials. I had a nutty idea about isotope separation. No expensive uranium hexafluoride centrifuging and diffusion for me. I'm a cheap guy. So I asked my boss if I could do a little experimenting on the side with this idea. He said it was OK with him as long as it didn't interfere with what he wanted done. I couldn't get any uranium because the nuclear section was more or less off limits to me, and besides the melting point is too high for the equipment I had available. To make a long story short, I was apparently able to get significant concentration of Pb207 from the natural isotope mix using the molten metal and a simple electromagnetic technique. I will definitely not give the details here for fear of another MIB visit. Lead is very toxic. I can understand why someone might not want you messing with it. Word spread about my little science fair project. I came in one day and my entire setup was gone. I was called to the office of the head of the facility whose title I can't recall... director? He told me I was not to waste taxpayer time and money on my personal projects. I thought that was kind of funny since most of the scientists spent a lot of time asleep at their lab benches. There were a couple of men in his office. They didn't work there. They didn't actually have black suits and sunglasses, but they really looked out of place and unfriendly. I was prepared to take this order at face value until the director told me not to discuss what I had done with anyone. The two MIB said nothing and just sort of glared at me. A good argument against my little
Re: CF Suppression?
Ed, Personally, I don't think CF is being suppressed. This would require an intent and effort to accomplish. In contrast, I think it is simply ignored because most people think it is not real. Lets dispense with the term CF for a moment ... you would agree, would you not, that if the electrolytic loading of D2 into cathodes of U metal were able to transmute some significant percentage of the 238 into fissionable material, then there is a huge non-proliferation risk, no? That is, IMHO, where the prior official initial attempts at suppression may have arisen. However, I doubt that this kind of transmutation can take place in anything over trace amounts (Dash et al). Certainly with thorium, which has been better investigated, the evidence indicates that transmutation has the effect of converting fertile material to harmless material - which is the opposite of what a terrorist would want. I suspect that people who have looked at the corresponding situation with U have come to the similar conclusion - that: just as with thorium, there is no added proliferation risk from heavy water electrolysis of uranium. Jones
Re: CF Suppression?
At 02:47 PM 9/12/2005, Michael Foster wrote: Is cold fusion being actively suppressed? Simply put, yes. This is often discussed in detail in the Cold Fusion Times (such as in volume 12, number 2 which is in part at http://world.std.com/~mica/cft.html [click on the picture for a larger picture of the front page and more information]. Dr. Mitchell Swartz = Cold Fusion Timeshttp://world.std.com/~mica/cft.html The journal of the scientific aspects of loading isotopic fuels into materials ISSN# 1072-2874 JET Thermal Products http://world.std.com/~mica/jet.html Working for Safe and More Efficient Heat Products to Serve You
Re: CF Suppression?
Edmund Storms wrote: In contrast, I think it is simply ignored because most people think it is not real. That seems to be the case. For example, in a paper that I am preparing at this moment, Lautzenhiser Phelps (Amoco) wrote: Cold fusion burst upon the scene with great fanfare and little hard information with a press conference in March 1989, when Pons and Fleichmann (1) announced they had found anomalous energy associated with an electrochemical cell. Before there were any actual reports in the literature, circulation of the preprints was commonplace. There were several claims of confirmation over the following few months from diverse groups located worldwide (2-9). At the same time there were many statements that cold fusion, at best, was the result of experimental error (10-19). Since many experts have come out saying that there is nothing to cold fusion, the public perception at this time is that cold fusion has mostly faded away. I think that is what happened. While I do not find it strange that these self-styled experts claimed there is nothing to it, I find it exceedingly strange that so many large companies (later including Amoco) dropped the subject just because of what these bozos claimed. You'd think the big companies would take the subject more seriously. Apparently major decision makers at huge corporations are swayed by public opinion, fad and fashion more than we realize -- and probably more than they themselves realize. As Gene Mallove used to say, these people read the newspapers. (Just as the Supreme Court follows the election returns, as Mr. Dooley put it.) Even though these companies stood to earn trillions of dollars from this discovery, they lost interest and dropped the subject, the way a two-year-old who needs a nap will drop a toy, and they did this only because a few people condemned the subject. Based on my conversations with such people, my impression is that they themselves do not have a firm technical grasp of what was claimed, and they simply took other people's word without doing their homework. Cold fusion faded away just as LP said. Looking back at history, many other critical breakthroughs also almost faded away because powerful people were not interested in them, or never noticed them. When the ENIAC computer was in the early stages of development, it was considered so far out and unlikely to succeed it attracted little funding and no interest. None of the big gun scientists in 1944 knew about it because no one bothered to tell them -- because the people who knew had already written it off. Von Neumann learned about it by accident during a casual conversation on a railroad platform. He became interested, then he joined the project, and from that point on the project gained credibility and importance. If he had not, I suppose it might have been canceled at the end of the war, along with thousands of other incomplete projects. In 1860, the Transcontinental Railroad was stalled because its supporters could not raise money from the San Francisco gold rush millionaires. These millionaires would sometimes throw away $50,000 a night gambling, but they would not risk investing $10 million in a railroad that a decade later became the most profitable enterprise in history. A myth has taken hold in the human mind, which is the basis for most beliefs in all subjects, and this myth directs the approach being take. On the other hand many counter-myths have circulated about cold fusion. Hal Fax told me years ago he was sure that Toyota has already perfected cold fusion engines and they use them in their forklifts. Science-fiction movies, cheap television dramas and other popular culture often makes references to cold fusion. The screenwriters seem to assume that it is real, and it has been suppressed. - Jed
Re: CF Suppression?
I wrote: Before cold fusion went public, Martin Fleischmann asked the U.S. government to classify it, and conduct secretly funded research. He was worried that it had weapons applications. By the way, he is worried about other aspects of it, not transmutation and the production of fissionable materials. The 1985 explosion gave him the willies. - Jed
Re: CF Suppression?
Jones Beene wrote: I wonder if Brian Josephson knows the answer: I doubt he knows more than you or I. He is a smart cookie but he does not seem to have any inside knowledge. Of course I do not have any inside knowledge either, but I based on conversations with Josephson, I do not get the impression he is keeping any secrets about cold fusion. In general, my impression is that inside information and secret government knowledge seldom amounts to much. I suppose specific tactical information is probably often good, but big picture analyses and judgments of the future are no better than you or I could write, and often much worse. I will not bore the audience here with stories I have probably already told, but my parents were involved in low-level espionage during the Second World War and in the opening stages of the Cold War, and they said the State Department and the CIA never knew anything more than you can read in the New York Times. I have seen the CIA's semisecret and declassified papers about Japan. If I had written stuff like that as an undergraduate, I would have gotten an F. - Jed
Re: CF Suppression?
I don't believe CF is being suppressed. It is due to most large international corporation and government indiffrence. CEO's are selected for their ability to keep their stock in play. The government is a crap shoot between soliciting campaign funds and playing off lobbyists. As Jesse Unrah once stated.. if a politician can't take money from all 3 sides and" stiff" them all, he ain't no politician. Planning a suppression of CF would take dedicated co-ordination, something they lack. Perhaps the correct assumption is that CF is in somebody'sinbox or outbox. Giving government credit for conspiracy planningmay be a stretch considering their presentperformance level. Even the ultimate brain of Karl Rove missed advising the Prez it would be wise to scoot over to nawlins pronto. When the politicos miss a shot this easy wez in real trouble. CF is way down the list of importance..like invisible. I continue to bank on the notion that notice will come after serious applications of "near" CF and adjunct applications emerge. There is an increase in research in related technology that have benefitted from CF regardless of the drama. Cumulative progress will reach a surge level and what appeared to be suppression will be recognized for what it is.. indifference.. the "who cares" crowd are simply not interested in listening to anyone mentioning peak oil or new energy while on the way to play golf, driving their new Hummer the government just handed them via a tax break. Nobody ever went wrong overestimating the incompetence of government. Richard
Re: CF Suppression?
The whole issue of suppression would be put to rest if someone actually built a commercial cold fusion technology. How can you suppress something that is being sold at WalMart? I think it's a matter of cold fusion being a laboratory curiosity at the moment, a rather abstract one at that to most people, about as interesting as molecular biology or particle physics. Even if cold fusion can be observed at minute levels, as many of us in this forum believe it can, it makes no difference to the general public or most of the government for that matter. I'd chalk it up to more or less government incompetence and disinterest, with a sprinkle of suppression thrown in. Certainly the U.S. government hasn't been promoting cold fusion research or developments (as we all know they have closed the patent office to cold fusion and haven't provided an official avenue for funding), so we can't say they are promoting cold fusion in any way. We know they have some interest in cold fusion because the U.S. Navy has been researching cold fusion and there have been questions raised about national security and cold fusion. I wouldn't be at all surprised if someday it is revealed that there has been a black budget cold fusion project of some sort in the U.S. Government. In fact, that is highly likely as these energy barons and national security parnoidiacs certainly would want to see what cold fusion is really about for their own purposes. I'd say, that the U.S. government's disinterest in cold fusion is part of a broader policy of promoting the interests of big oil over all other competing energy technologies. We could almost as easily argue that the government is suppressing electric vehicles that could essentially put big oil out of business, as they show no interest in developing electric vehicles either. It will be up to the private sector and more likely enthusiasts and concerned citizens to bring cold fusion and electric vehicles to the market. David and Goliath. - Original Message - From: OrionWorks [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 5:21 PM Subject: Re: CF Suppression? I find myself more in sympathy with Ed's skeptical point of view on the matter of whether the government has actively conspired to suppress CF knowledge as compared to tantalizing questions of inconsistencies suggested by the esteemed Mr. Beene. Granted, I could be wrong. Maybe there really is a conspiracy or two lurking behind the walls, but my gut feeling says no. I've spent a considerable amount of time smoozing with all sorts of folks who hang out in the highly contentious UFO community. Over there, a new conspiracy seems to be born every other day. Without fail most of the UFO related conspiracies have one thing in common: The Government doesn't want us to know what's really going on. You know, Dogs and Cat's marrying each other, which, in turn, would cause society to unravel at the seams. I can only suggest that it is important not to underestimate the power of IGNORANCE, and its partner DENIAL, to act as the proxy behind what is perceived as conspiracies to suppress information attributed to the government. This is not to say nor do I mean imply that the government is not above suppressing information it deems as not suitable for public consumption, particularly if it is considered an issue of national security or an embarrassment. (Sometimes it's hard to tell the difference.) A good example of someone who obviously has stumbled across some truly extraordinary physical effects, see the Hutchison effect. There are some updated files out at American Antigravity. See: http://www.americanantigravity.com/articles/214/1/Hutchison-Materials-Effects-Photos or http://tinyurl.com/8cjla There are new downloadable photos in ZIP format showing bizarre effects done to solid metal bars produced in Hutchison's lab. How could the government not be aware of what Hutchison has managed to do to solid metal. However, due to Hutchison's apparent lack of being able to follow anything close to what might be considered a linear scientific approach he has no idea how to reproduce his unique effects on a consistent basis. I'm sure this is precisely how the government would like to keep things, too. I understand he has had on occasion government personnel dropping by to observe the effects, and then they go away. I doubt Hutchison has received any support and/or encouragement from government sources to continue his research. Whenever possible it's best to simply ignore the troublesome individual rather than risking the possibility of making him disappear and all the unwanted questions and publicity that might generate. Meanwhile, since his results remain spurious (just like! many original CF claims) most scientists will never take Hutchison Effect seriously, leaving the government free to discreetly tinker away
Re: CF Suppression? [Copy 2?]
John Coviello writes: This is supposed to be a capitalist society, so where are the corporations? Protecting their interests and markets. We live under crony capitialism in the U.S. Let's face it, there probably is a lot more money to be made in fossil fuel fuels and nuclear fusion than cold fusion, so the corporations go where the money is. No doubt that is true, but I think you miss the point. Exxon may indeed be protecting its interests. And I am sure there is more money in fossil fuel than in cold fusion -- at least measured in dollars per MJ. Although CF it will be obscenely profitable for the first 30 years or so, like computers in the golden age of IBM, before the hardware become a commodity. But the thing is, take someone like Bill Gates. He is not making any money in energy. If he were to take a risk and fund a start-up to develop CF, he could take away all of Exxon's business. Hundreds of billions of dollars would fall into his lap, for practically no effort. Most revolutionary technology is developed by start-up companies, but these companies are often funded by wealthy people. So I should be asking, where are the start up companies that want to eat Exxon's lunch? Perhaps there are no start ups because this is crony capitalism, as Coviello says, but it hard for me to believe that cronies would be so loyal to one another. In the late 19th century it was legal for manufacturers to get together and set prices. Later, this was banned by anti-trust laws. However, back when it was okay, people said that after the price-fixing meeting broke up, the prices would hold for the length of time it took the negotiators to reach a telegraph office and secretly underbid their competition. There was no loyalty! In Japan, price fixing is rampant, and it is featured in scandals on the nightly news, but if Mitsubishi or some other company finds a way to bankrupt the oil companies by taking their business away with cold fusion, I have no doubt they will do it . . . Unless overlapping directorships or stockholders prevent them. Surely there is enough unattached capital (money not beholden to anyone) to develop CF. A few hundred million would suffice, I ! think. - Jed
