Re: Cold fusion redux

From: Mike Lorrey (mlorrey@datamann.com)
Date: Mon Mar 04 2002 - 19:02:29 MST


One thing I've noticed with those who 'could not repeat the experiment'
always seem to doctor it in some way, hoping to discover their own way
to produce the same effect... or so they claim.
Keep in mind also that Oak Ridge has a vested interest in disproving
experiments like this, because they presage cheap, easy to access fusion
energy, which is totally anathema to multi-billion dollar science and
engineering R&D budgets.
Note the last paragraph of the story, that the Oak Ridge people likely
had their instruments improperly calibrated.

Ken Clements wrote:
>
> I saw this announced, but I also saw that Oak Ridge could not repeat the
> experiment.
>
> see: http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/science/03/04/science.fusion.reut/index.html
>
> Anyone out there have the inside story?
>
> -Ken
>
> hal@finney.org wrote:
>
> > Coming soon to a front page near you:
> >
> > Science magazine, the premiere American scientific journal published by
> > the American Association for the Advancement of Science, will publish
> > Friday an article reporting on apparent nuclear fusion in a tabletop
> > glass of liquid.
> >
> > http://www.sciencemag.org/feature/data/hottopics/bubble/index.shtml
> >



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:12:45 MST