January 13, 2005 Vortex,
Snail mail being what it is, I received the January issue (Volume 58 issue One) of Physics Today yesterday. There is a short column in the 'Issues and Events' listed in the Table of Contents titled "Cold Fusion gets a chilly Encore", by Toni Feder. The article goes over the brief history of the Pons & Fleischmann's CF claims and DOE's original study of them (Huizenga's committee). What the DoE seems to find, after review of 14 selected revirewer's varied, uneven comments on the status of CF since 1989 was that, in sum, CF was not a repeatable science, not well documented, and the magnitude of the effect if it exists, is not of any greater magnitude since 1989, The DoE is taking the side of the negative. The positive conclusions in the minority review, the DoE found not sufficient to fund as a general area of research. However DoE left the door open for future specific research proposal fundng as passed upon by the 'peer review and relevance'. What this means for actual funding approvals to come across, I don'y know. It looks more like an escape hatch for the DoE position rather than a door of opportunity for CF reasearcher. Yet the proponents fo the re-review process seems to be happy with the scraps. They have found a measure of scientific respectability and a huge increase in (I presume private) funding inquiries, as per McKubre and Hagelstein. There are web links available to access DoE's CF review release and also the individual reviewer's comments. These have been availbla in Steven Krivt's New Energy Times website and Jed Rothwell's LENR/CANR website much earlier than now. -ak-
