Cold fusion plant. Cold fusion

Cold fusion- the assumed possibility of carrying out a nuclear fusion reaction in chemical (atomic-molecular) systems without significant heating of the working substance. Known nuclear fusion reactions occur at temperatures of millions of kelvins.

IN foreign literature also known as:

1. low-energy nuclear reactions (LENR, low-energy nuclear reactions)
2. chemically assisted nuclear reactions (CANR)

Many reports and extensive databases about the successful implementation of the experiment subsequently turned out to be either “newspaper ducks” or the result of incorrectly conducted experiments. The leading laboratories in the world were unable to repeat a single similar experiment, and if they did repeat it, it turned out that the authors of the experiment, as narrow specialists, incorrectly interpreted the result obtained or performed the experiment incorrectly, did not carry out the necessary measurements, etc. There is also a version that all development of this direction is deliberately sabotaged by the secret world government. Since the CNF will solve the problem of limited resources and destroy many levers of economic pressure.

History of the emergence of chemical nuclear weapons

The assumption about the possibility of cold nuclear fusion (CNF) has not yet been confirmed and is the subject of constant speculation, but this area of ​​science is still being actively studied.

CNS in the cells of a living organism

The most famous works on "transmutation" by Louis Kervran ( English), published in 1935, 1955 and 1975. However, it later turned out that Louis Kervran did not actually exist (perhaps it was a pseudonym), and the results of his work were not confirmed. Many consider the very personality of Louis Kervran and some of his works to be an April Fool's joke by French physicists. In 2003, a book by Vladimir Ivanovich Vysotsky, head of the department of mathematics and theoretical radiophysics at Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, was published, which claims that new evidence of “biological transmutation” has been found.

CNF in an electrolytic cell

The report by chemists Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons about CNS - the transformation of deuterium into tritium or helium under electrolysis conditions on a palladium electrode, which appeared in March 1989, caused a lot of noise, but also was not confirmed, despite repeated checks.

Experimental details

Cold fusion experiments typically include:

• a catalyst such as nickel or palladium, in the form of thin films, powder or sponge;
• “working fluid” containing tritium and/or deuterium and/or hydrogen in liquid, gaseous or plasma state;
• “excitation” of nuclear transformations of hydrogen isotopes by “pumping” the “working fluid” with energy - through heating, mechanical pressure, exposure to a laser beam(s), acoustic waves, electromagnetic field or electric current.

A fairly popular experimental setup for a cold fusion chamber consists of palladium electrodes immersed in an electrolyte containing heavy or superheavy water. Electrolysis chambers can be open or closed. In open chamber systems, gaseous electrolysis products leave the working volume, which makes it difficult to calculate the balance of energy received/expended. In experiments with closed chambers, electrolysis products are utilized, for example, by catalytic recombination in special parts of the system. Experimenters generally strive to ensure a steady release of heat by a continuous supply of electrolyte. Experiments such as “heat after death” are also carried out, in which excess (due to supposed nuclear fusion) energy release is controlled after turning off the current.

Cold fusion - third attempt

CYAS at the University of Bologna

In January 2011, Andrea Rossi (Bologna, Italy) tested a pilot chemical nuclear reactor installation for converting nickel into copper with the participation of hydrogen, and on October 28, 2011, he demonstrated an industrial installation for 1 MW to journalists from well-known media and a customer from the United States.

International conferences on CNF

see also

Notes

Links

• V. A. Tsarev, Low-temperature nuclear fusion, “Advances in Physical Sciences”, November 1990.
• Kuzmin R.N., Shvilkin B.N. Cold nuclear fusion. - 2nd ed. - M.: Knowledge, 1989. - 64 p.
• documentary about the history of the development of cold fusion technology
• Cold nuclear fusion - scientific sensation or farce?, Membrana, 03/07/2002.
• Cold thermonuclear fusion is still a farce, Membrana, 07/22/2002.
• A fusion reactor in the palm of your hand drives deuterons into the mane, Membrana, 04/28/2005.
• An encouraging experiment on cold nuclear fusion was carried out, Membrana, 05/28/2008.
• Italian physicists are going to demonstrate a finished cold fusion reactor, Eye of the Planet, 01/14/2011.
• Cold fusion was realized in the Apennines. The Italians presented the world with a functioning cold fusion reactor. "Nezavisimaya Gazeta", 01/17/2011.
• Is there an energy paradise ahead? "Noosphere", 08/10/2011. (unavailable link)
• Great October Energy Revolution. "Membrana.ru", 10/29/2011.

Wikimedia Foundation.

Wikipedia Sun natural thermonuclear reactor Controlled thermonuclear fusion (CTF) synthesis of heavier materials atomic nuclei

from lighter ones in order to obtain energy, which, unlike explosive thermonuclear fusion (and ... Wikipedia

This article is about a non-academic area of ​​research. Please edit the article so that this is clear both from its first sentences and from the subsequent text. Details in the article and on the talk page... Wikipedia And falsification scientific research

scientific coordination organization under the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Established in 1998 on the initiative of Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences Vitaly Ginzburg. The commission develops recommendations to the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences... ... Wikipedia Commission for Combating Pseudoscience and Falsification of Scientific Research Scientific coordination organization under the Presidium Russian Academy

Sci. Established in 1998 on the initiative of Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences Vitaly Ginzburg. The commission develops... ... Wikipedia

The Commission to Combat Pseudoscience and Falsification of Scientific Research under the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences was formed in 1998 on the initiative of Academician Vitaly Ginzburg. The commission develops recommendations to the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences on controversial issues... ... Wikipedia

A list of unsolved problems of modern physics is given. Some of these problems are theoretical in nature, which means that existing theories are unable to explain certain observed phenomena or experimental... ... Wikipedia CNF - cold nuclear fusion...

Cold thermonuclear fusion - what is it? Myth or reality? This area of ​​scientific activity appeared in the last century and still excites many scientific minds. Many gossip, rumors, and speculations are associated with this appearance. He has his fans, who greedily believe that one day some scientist will create a device that will save the world not so much from energy costs as from radiation exposure. There are also opponents who ardently insist that back in the second half of the last century, the smartest Soviet man, Ivan Stepanovich Filimonenko, almost created a similar reactor.

Experimental setup

The year 1957 was marked by the fact that Ivan Stepanovich Filimonenko developed a completely different option for creating energy using nuclear fusion from helium deuterium. And already in July of the sixty-second year he patented his work on thermal emission processes and systems. The basic principle of operation: a type of warm where the temperature is 1000 degrees. Eighty organizations and enterprises were allocated to implement this patent. When Kurchatov died, development began to be suppressed, and after Korolev’s death they completely stopped developing thermonuclear fusion (cold).

In 1968, all Filimonenko’s work was stopped, since since 1958 he had been conducting research to determine the radiation hazard at nuclear power plants and thermal power plants, as well as tests nuclear weapons. His forty-six page report helped stop a program that proposed launching a nuclear-powered rocket to Jupiter and the Moon. After all, during any accident or upon the return of the spacecraft, an explosion could occur. It would have six hundred times the power of Hiroshima.

But many did not like this decision, and Filimonenko was persecuted, and after a while he was removed from work. Since he did not stop his research, he was accused of subversion. Ivan Stepanovich received six years in prison.

Cold Fusion and Alchemy

Many years later, in 1989, Martin Fleischman and Stanley Pons, using electrodes, created helium from deuterium, as did Filimonenko. The physicists impressed the entire scientific community and the press, which wrote about bright colors the life that will exist after the installation of a facility allowing thermonuclear fusion (cold). Of course, physicists around the world began to check their results on their own.

At the forefront of testing the theory was the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Its director, Ronald Parker, criticized nuclear fusion. “Cold fusion is a myth,” this person said. Newspapers accused the physicists Pons and Fleischmann of charlatanism and fraud, since they could not test the theory, because it always worked different result. Reports indicated a large amount of heat generated. But in the end, a forgery was made and the data was corrected. And after these events, physicists abandoned the search for a solution to Filimonenko’s “Cold thermonuclear fusion” theory.

Cavitation nuclear fusion

But in 2002, this topic was remembered. American physicists Ruzi Taleyarkhan and Richard Lahey said that they achieved the convergence of nuclei, but used the effect of cavitation. This is when gaseous bubbles form in a liquid cavity. They can appear due to the passage of sound waves through a liquid. When the bubbles burst, a large amount of energy is generated.

Scientists were able to register high-energy neutrons, which produced helium and tritium, which is considered a product of nuclear fusion. After checking this experiment, no falsification was found, but they were not yet going to admit it.

Siegel readings

They take place in Moscow and are named after the astronomer and ufologist Siegel. Such readings are held twice a year. They are more like meetings of scientists in a psychiatric hospital, because here scientists speak with their theories and hypotheses. But since they are associated with ufology, their messages go beyond reason. However, sometimes interesting theories are expressed. For example, Academician A.F. Okhatrin reported his discovery of microleptons. These are very light elementary particles that have new properties that cannot be explained. In practice, its developments can warn of an impending earthquake or help in the search for minerals. Okhatrin developed a method of geological exploration that shows not only oil deposits, but also its chemical component.

Tests in the north

In Surgut, tests of the installation were carried out on an old well. A vibration generator was lowered three kilometers deep. It set in motion the microlepton field of the Earth. After a few minutes, the amount of paraffin and bitumen in the oil decreased, and the viscosity also became less. Quality has risen from six to eighteen percent. Foreign companies became interested in this technology. But Russian geologists still do not use these developments. The government of the country only took them into account, but the matter did not progress further than that.

Therefore, Okhatrin has to work for foreign organizations. IN Lately The academician is more involved in research of a different nature: how the dome affects a person. Many claim that he has a fragment of a UFO that fell in 1977 in Latvia.

Student of Academician Akimov

Anatoly Evgenievich Akimov heads the interdisciplinary scientific center “Vent”. His developments are as interesting as Okhatrin’s. He tried to attract the government's attention to his work, but this only made more enemies. His research was also classified as pseudoscience. An entire commission was created to combat falsification. A draft law on the protection of the human psychosphere was even presented for review. Some deputies are confident that there is a generator that can act on the psyche.

Scientist Ivan Stepanovich Filimonenko and his discoveries

So the discoveries of our physicist were not continued in science. Everyone knows him as the inventor of a vehicle that moves using magnetic propulsion. And they say that an apparatus was created that could lift five tons. But some argue that the saucer does not fly. Filimonenko created a device that reduces the radioactivity of some objects. Its installations use the energy of cold thermonuclear fusion. They inactivate radio emissions and also produce energy. The waste from such installations is hydrogen and oxygen, as well as high-pressure steam. A cold thermonuclear fusion generator can provide an entire village with energy, as well as cleanse the lake on the shore of which it will be located.

Of course, his work was supported by Korolev and Kurchatov, so the experiments were carried out. But bring it to logical conclusion they failed. Installing cold thermonuclear fusion would allow saving about two hundred billion rubles every year. The academician's activities were resumed only in the eighties. In 1989, prototypes began to be produced. A cold fusion arc reactor was created to suppress radiation. Also, several installations were designed in the Chelyabinsk region, but they were not operational. Even in Chernobyl they did not use a thermonuclear fusion (cold) installation. And the scientist was fired from his job again.

Life at home

In our country there was no intention of developing the discoveries of the scientist Filimonenko. Cold fusion, the installation of which was completed, could be sold abroad. They said that in the seventies, someone took documents on Filimonenko’s installations to Europe. But scientists abroad did not succeed, because Ivan Stepanovich specifically did not complete the data on which it was possible to create a reactor using cold thermonuclear fusion.

They made him lucrative offers, but he is a patriot. It would be better to live in poverty, but in your own country. Filimonenko has his own vegetable garden, which produces crops four times a year, as the physicist uses film that he himself created. However, no one is putting it into production.

Avramenko's hypothesis

This ufologist scientist dedicated his life to the study of plasma. Avramenko Rimliy Fedorovich wanted to create a plasma generator as an alternative to modern energy sources. In 1991, he conducted experiments in the laboratory on the formation of ball lightning. And the plasma that was fired from it consumed much more energy. The scientist proposed using this plasmoid for defense against missiles.

The tests were carried out at a military training ground. The action of such a plasmoid could help in the fight against asteroids that threaten disaster. Avramenko’s development also did not continue, and no one knows why.

Life's battle with radiation

More than forty years ago there was a secret organization “Red Star”, led by I. S. Filimonenko. He and his group developed a life support complex for flights to Mars. He developed thermonuclear fusion (cold) for his installation. The latter, in turn, was supposed to become an engine for spaceships. But when the cold fusion reactor was verified, it became clear that it could also help on Earth. With this discovery, it is possible to neutralize isotopes and avoid

But created cold thermonuclear Do-it-yourself nuclear synthesis Ivan Stepanovich Filimonenko refused to install in underground cities of refuge for the country’s party leaders. The crisis in the Caribbean shows that the USSR and America were ready to get involved in a nuclear war. But they were held back by the fact that there was no such installation that could protect against the effects of radiation.

At that time, cold thermonuclear fusion was firmly associated with the name Filimonenko. The reactor generated clean energy, which would protect the party leadership from radiation contamination. By refusing to hand over his developments to the authorities, the scientist did not give the country’s leadership a “trump card” in the event that without his installation, underground bunkers would have protected senior party leaders from a nuclear strike, but sooner or later they would have been exposed to radiation. Thus, Ivan Stepanovich protected the world from global nuclear war.

Oblivion of a scientist

After the scientist’s refusal, he had to endure more than one negotiation regarding his developments. As a result, Filimonenko was fired from his job and stripped of all titles and regalia. And for thirty years now, a physicist who could develop cold thermonuclear fusion in an ordinary mug has been living in the country with his family. All of Filimonenko’s discoveries could make a great contribution to the development of science. But, as happens in our country, his cold thermonuclear fusion, the reactor of which was created and tested in practice, was forgotten.

Ecology and its problems

Today Ivan Stepanovich is dealing with environmental problems; he is concerned that a catastrophe is approaching the Earth. He believes that the main reason deterioration of the environmental situation - this is smoke major cities airspace. In addition to exhaust gases, many objects emit harmful substances for humans: radon and krypton. But they have not yet learned how to dispose of the latter. And cold fusion, the principle of which is to absorb radiation, would help protect the environment.

In addition, the peculiarities of the action of cold thermonuclear fusion, according to the scientist, could save people from many diseases, prolong human life many times over, eliminating all sources of radiation. And, as Ivan Stepanovich claims, there are a lot of them. They are found literally at every step and even at home. According to the scientist, in ancient times people lived for centuries, and all because there was no radiation. Its installation could eliminate it, but, apparently, this will not happen soon.

Conclusion

Thus, the question of what cold thermonuclear fusion is and when it will come to the defense of humanity is quite relevant. And if this is not a myth, but reality, then it is necessary to direct all efforts and resources to study this area of ​​nuclear physics. After all, ultimately, an installation that could produce such a reaction would be useful to everyone.

Cold fusion is known as one of the biggest scientific hoaxes XX century. For a long time, most physicists refused to discuss even the possibility of such a reaction. However, two Italian scientists recently presented to the public a device that, according to them, easily implements it. Is this synthesis really possible?

At the beginning of this year, interest in cold thermonuclear fusion, or, as domestic physicists call it, cold thermonuclear fusion, flared up again in the world of science. The reason for this excitement was the demonstration by Italian scientists Sergio Focardi and Andrea Rossi from the University of Bologna of an unusual installation in which, according to its developers, this synthesis is carried out quite easily.

In general terms, this device works like this. Nickel nanopowder and an ordinary hydrogen isotope are placed in a metal tube with an electric heater. Next, a pressure of about 80 atmospheres is built up. When initially heated to a high temperature (hundreds of degrees), as scientists say, some of the H 2 molecules are divided into atomic hydrogen, which then enters into a nuclear reaction with nickel.

As a result of this reaction, a copper isotope is generated, as well as a large amount of thermal energy. Andrea Rossi explained that when they first tested the device, they received about 10-12 kilowatts of output from it, while the system required an average of 600-700 watts of input (meaning the electricity that enters the device when it is plugged in). . It turned out that the energy production in this case was many times higher than the costs, but this was precisely the effect that was once expected from cold thermonuclear fusion.

However, according to the developers, not all hydrogen and nickel react in this device, but only a very small fraction of them. However, scientists are confident that what is happening inside is precisely nuclear reactions. They consider the proof of this: the appearance of copper in more, what could constitute an impurity in the original “fuel” (that is, nickel); the absence of a large (that is, measurable) consumption of hydrogen (since it could act as fuel in a chemical reaction); generated thermal radiation; and, of course, the energy balance itself.

So, did Italian physicists really manage to achieve thermonuclear fusion at low temperatures (hundreds of degrees Celsius are nothing for such reactions, which usually occur at millions of degrees Kelvin!)? It is difficult to say, since so far all peer-reviewed scientific journals have even rejected the articles of its authors. The skepticism of many scientists is quite understandable - for many years the words “cold fusion” have caused physicists to smile and associate them with perpetual motion. In addition, the authors of the device themselves honestly admit that the subtle details of its operation still remain beyond their understanding.

What is this elusive cold thermonuclear fusion, the possibility of which many scientists have been trying to prove for decades? In order to understand the essence of this reaction, as well as the prospects of such research, let's first talk about what thermonuclear fusion is in general. This term refers to the process in which the synthesis of heavier atomic nuclei from lighter ones occurs. In this case, a huge amount of energy is released, much more than during nuclear reactions of the decay of radioactive elements.

Similar processes constantly occur on the Sun and other stars, which is why they can emit both light and heat. For example, every second our Sun emits space energy equivalent to four million tons of mass. This energy is created by the fusion of four hydrogen nuclei (in other words, protons) into a helium nucleus. At the same time, as a result of the transformation of one gram of protons, 20 million times more energy is released than during the combustion of a gram of coal. Agree, this is very impressive.

But can't people create a reactor like the Sun in order to produce large amounts of energy for their needs? Theoretically, of course, they can, since a direct ban on such a device is not established by any of the laws of physics. However, this is quite difficult to do, and here's why: this synthesis requires very high temperatures and the same unrealistically high pressure. Therefore, the creation of a classical thermonuclear reactor turns out to be economically unprofitable - in order to launch it, it will be necessary to spend much more energy than it can produce over the next few years of operation.

That is why many scientists throughout the 20th century tried to carry out a thermonuclear fusion reaction at low temperatures and normal pressure, that is, that same cold thermonuclear fusion. The first report that this was possible appeared on March 23, 1989, when Professor Martin Fleischmann and his colleague Stanley Pons held a press conference at their University of Utah, where they reported how they, by almost simply passing a current through an electrolyte, obtained a positive energy output in the form of heat and recorded gamma radiation coming from the electrolyte. That is, they carried out a cold thermonuclear fusion reaction.

In June of the same year, scientists sent an article with the results of the experiment to Nature, but soon a real scandal erupted around their discovery. The fact is that researchers from leading research centers in the United States, the California and Massachusetts Institutes of Technology, repeated this experiment in detail and did not find anything similar. True, then two confirmations followed, made by scientists from the University of Texas A&M and the Georgia Institute of Technological Research. However, there was an embarrassment with them too.

When conducting control experiments, it turned out that electrochemists from Texas misinterpreted the results of the experiment - in their experiment, the increased heat generation was caused by the electrolysis of water, since the thermometer served as a second electrode (cathode)! In Georgia, neutron counters turned out to be so sensitive that they responded to the heat of a hand. This is exactly how the “emission of neutrons” was recorded, which the researchers considered to be the result of a thermonuclear fusion reaction.

As a result of all this, many physicists were filled with confidence that there was and could not be any cold thermonuclear, and Fleischmann and Pons simply cheated. However, others (and they are, unfortunately, a clear minority) do not believe that the scientists were fraudulent or even that there was simply a mistake, and hope that a clean and practically inexhaustible source of energy can be constructed.

Among the latter is the Japanese scientist Yoshiaki Arata, who spent several years researching the problem of cold thermonuclear fusion and in 2008 conducted a public experiment at Osaka University that showed the possibility of thermonuclear fusion occurring at low temperatures. He and his colleagues used special structures made of nanoparticles.

These were specially prepared clusters consisting of several hundred palladium atoms. Their main feature was that they had vast voids inside into which deuterium atoms (an isotope of hydrogen) could be pumped to a very high concentration. And when this concentration exceeded a certain limit, these particles got so close to each other that they began to merge, resulting in a real thermonuclear reaction. It involved the fusion of two deuterium atoms into a lithium-4 atom, releasing heat.

Proof of this was the fact that when Professor Arata began to add deuterium gas to the mixture containing the mentioned nanoparticles, its temperature rose to 70 degrees Celsius. After the gas was turned off, the temperature in the cell remained elevated for more than 50 hours, and the energy released exceeded the energy expended. According to the scientist, this could only be explained by the fact that nuclear fusion had occurred.

True, so far Arata’s experiment has also not been repeated in any laboratory. Therefore, many physicists continue to consider cold thermonuclear fusion a hoax and quackery. However, Arata himself denies such accusations, reproaching his opponents for not knowing how to work with nanoparticles, which is why they fail.

• Translation

This field is now called low-energy nuclear reactions, and it may be where real results are achieved - or it may turn out to be stubborn junk science

Dr. Martin Fleischman (right), an electrochemist, and Stanley Pons, chairman of the chemistry department at the University of Utah, answer questions from the Science and Technology Committee about their controversial work in cold fusion, April 26, 1989.

Howard J. Wilk is a chemist, a specialist in synthetic organics, who has not worked in his specialty for a long time and lives in Philadelphia. Like many other pharmaceutical researchers, he fell victim to the drug industry's R&D cuts in recent years and now takes part-time jobs unrelated to science. Possessing free time, Wilk tracks the progress of New Jersey-based company Brilliant Light Power (BLP).

This is one of those companies that is developing processes that can be generally referred to as new energy extraction technologies. The movement is largely a resurrection of cold fusion, a short-lived 1980s phenomenon involving producing nuclear fusion in a simple benchtop electrolytic device that scientists quickly dismissed.

In 1991, BLP founder, Randall L. Mills, announced at a press conference in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, the development of a theory in which an electron in hydrogen could transition from a normal, ground energy state to a previously unknown, more stable, lower energy state. , with the release of huge amounts of energy. Mills named this strange new type of compressed hydrogen, " ", and has since been working to develop a commercial device that harvests this energy.

Wilk studied Mills' theory, read papers and patents, and did his own calculations for hydrinos. Wilk even attended a demonstration at BLP grounds in Cranbury, New Jersey, where he discussed hydrino with Mills. After this, Wilk still can't decide whether Mills is a unrealistic genius, a raving scientist, or something in between.

The story begins in 1989, when electrochemists Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons made the astonishing announcement at a University of Utah press conference that they had tamed the energy of nuclear fusion in an electrolytic cell.

When the researchers applied an electric current to the cell, they believed that deuterium atoms from the heavy water that penetrated the palladium cathode underwent a fusion reaction and generated helium atoms. The excess energy of the process was converted into heat. Fleischmann and Pons argued that this process could not be the result of any known chemical reaction, and added the term “cold fusion” to it.

After many months of investigation into their mysterious observations, however, the scientific community agreed that the effect was unstable or non-existent and that errors were made in the experiment. The research was scrapped, and cold fusion became synonymous with junk science.

Cold fusion and hydrino production are the holy grail for producing endless, cheap, and clean energy. Cold fusion has disappointed scientists. They wanted to believe in him, but their collective mind decided that it was a mistake. Part of the problem was the lack of a generally accepted theory to explain the proposed phenomenon - as physicists say, you cannot trust an experiment until it is confirmed by a theory.

Mills has his own theory, but many scientists don't believe it and consider hydrinos unlikely. The community rejected cold fusion and ignored Mills and his work. Mills did the same, trying not to fall into the shadow of cold fusion.

Meanwhile, the field of cold fusion changed its name to low-energy nuclear reactions (LENR) and continues to exist. Some scientists continue to try to explain the Fleischmann-Pons effect. Others have rejected nuclear fusion but are exploring other possible processes that could explain the excess heat. Like Mills, they were attracted by the potential for commercial applications. They are mainly interested in energy production for industrial needs, households and transport.

The small number of companies created to try to bring new energy technologies to market have business models similar to those of any technology startup: identify new technology, try to patent the idea, generate investor interest, obtain funding, build prototypes, conduct demonstrations, announce dates for workers devices for sale. But in the new energy world, missing deadlines is the norm. No one has yet taken the final step of demonstrating a working device.

New theory

It is generally accepted that a single electron of hydrogen darts around its nucleus, located in the most suitable orbit of the ground state. It is simply impossible to move a hydrogen electron closer to the nucleus. But Mills says it's possible.

Now a researcher at Airbus Defense & Space, he says he has not monitored Mills' activities since 2007 because the experiments did not show clear signs of excess energy. "I doubt that any of the later experiments were scientifically selected," Rathke said.

“I think it is generally accepted that Dr. Mills's theory as the basis for his claims is controversial and not predictive,” Rathke continues. – One might ask, “Could we have so fortunately stumbled upon an energy source that simply works by following the wrong theoretical approach?" ».

In the 1990s, several researchers, including a team from the Lewis Research Center, independently reported replicating Mills' approach and generating excess heat. The NASA team wrote in the report that “the results are far from convincing” and did not say anything about hydrino.

Researchers have proposed possible electrochemical processes to explain the heat, including irregularities in the electrochemical cell, unknown exothermic chemical reactions, and recombination of separated hydrogen and oxygen atoms in water. The same arguments were made by critics of the Fleischmann-Pons experiments. But the NASA team clarified that researchers shouldn't discount the phenomenon, just in case Mills was onto something.

Mills speaks very quickly and can go on and on about technical details. In addition to predicting hydrinos, Mills claims that his theory can perfectly predict the location of any electron in a molecule using special molecular modeling software, and even in complex molecules such as DNA. Using standard quantum theory, scientists have a hard time predicting the exact behavior of anything more complex than a hydrogen atom. Mills also claims that his theory explains the phenomenon of the expansion of the Universe with acceleration, which cosmologists have not yet fully understood.

In addition, Mills says that hydrinos are created by the burning of hydrogen in stars such as our Sun, and that they can be detected in the spectrum of starlight. Hydrogen is considered the most abundant element in the universe, but Mills argues that hydrino is dark matter, which cannot be found in the universe. Astrophysicists are surprised by such suggestions: "I've never heard of hydrinos," says Edward W. (Rocky) Kolb of the University of Chicago, an expert on the dark universe.

Mills reported successful isolation and characterization of hydrinos using standard spectroscopic techniques such as infrared, Raman, and nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy. In addition, he said, hydrinos can undergo reactions that lead to the emergence of new types of materials with “amazing properties.” This includes conductors, which Mills says will revolutionize the world of electronic devices and batteries.

And although his statements contradict public opinion, Mills' ideas seem less exotic compared to other unusual components of the universe. For example, muonium is a known short-lived exotic entity consisting of an antimuon (a positively charged particle similar to an electron) and an electron. Chemically, muonium behaves like an isotope of hydrogen, but is nine times lighter.

SunCell, hydrin fuel cell

BLP's approach to creating hydrinos has manifested itself in a variety of ways. In early prototypes, Mills and his team used tungsten or nickel electrodes with an electrolytic solution of lithium or potassium. The supplied current split the water into hydrogen and oxygen, and under the right conditions, lithium or potassium acted as a catalyst to absorb energy and collapse the electron orbit of hydrogen. The energy created by the transition from the ground atomic state to a lower energy state was released in the form of bright, high-temperature plasma. The associated heat was then used to create steam and power an electric generator.

BLP is currently testing a device called SunCell, which feeds hydrogen (from water) and an oxide catalyst into a spherical carbon reactor with two streams of molten silver. An electrical current applied to the silver triggers a plasma reaction to form hydrinos. The reactor's energy is captured by carbon, which acts as a "black body radiator." When it heats up to thousands of degrees, it emits energy in the form visible light, captured by photovoltaic cells that convert light into electricity.

When it comes to commercial developments, Mills sometimes comes across as paranoid and at other times like a practical businessman. He registered the trademark "Hydrino". And because its patents claim the invention of hydrino, BLP claims intellectual property for hydrino research. Because of this, the BLP prohibits other experimenters from conducting even basic research on hydrinos that could confirm or disprove their existence without first signing an intellectual property agreement. "We invite researchers, we want others to do this," Mills says. “But we need to protect our technology.”

Instead, Mills appointed authorized validators who claim to be able to confirm the functionality of BLP inventions. One of them is Bucknell University electrical engineer Professor Peter M. Jansson, who is paid to evaluate BLP technology through his consulting company, Integrated Systems. Jenson maintains that compensation for his time “does not in any way affect my conclusions as an independent investigator of scientific discoveries.” He adds that he has "disproved most of the findings" he has studied.

“BLP scientists are doing real science, and so far I have not found any errors in their methods and approaches,” says Jenson. – Over the years, I have seen many devices in BLP that are clearly capable of producing excess energy in meaningful quantities. I think it will take some time for the scientific community to accept and digest the possibility of the existence of low-energy states of hydrogen. In my opinion, Dr. Mills' work is undeniable." Jenson adds that BLP faces challenges in commercializing the technology, but the obstacles are business rather than scientific.

In the meantime, BLP has held several demonstrations of its new prototypes for investors since 2014, and published videos on its website. But these events do not provide clear evidence that SunCell actually works.

In July, following one of its demonstrations, the company announced that the estimated cost of energy from SunCell is so low—1% to 10% of any other known form of energy—that the company "is going to provide self-contained, custom power supplies for virtually all desktop and mobile applications, not tied to the grid or fuel energy sources.” In other words, the company plans to build and lease SunCells or other devices to consumers, charging a daily fee, allowing them to go off the grid and stop buying gasoline or solar power while spending a fraction of the money.

“This is the end of the era of fire, the internal combustion engine and centralized systems energy supply,” says Mills. “Our technology will make all other forms of energy technology obsolete. Climate change problems will be solved." He adds that it appears BLP could begin production, to begin with MW plants, by the end of 2017.

What's in a name?

Many of these scientists and engineers, often self-funded, were interested less in commercial opportunities than in science: electrochemistry, metallurgy, calorimetry, mass spectrometry, and nuclear diagnostics. They continued to run experiments that produced excess heat, defined as the amount of energy produced by a system relative to the energy required to operate it. In some cases, nuclear anomalies were reported, such as the appearance of neutrinos, alpha particles (helium nuclei), isotopes of atoms and transmutations of some elements to others.

But ultimately, most researchers are looking for an explanation for what's happening, and would be happy if even a modest amount of heat were useful.

"LENRs are in an experimental phase and are not yet understood theoretically," says David J. Nagel, professor of electrical engineering and computer science at the University of Washington. George Washington, and former research manager at the Naval Research Laboratory. “Some results are simply inexplicable. Call it cold fusion, low-energy nuclear reactions, or whatever - there are plenty of names - we still don't know anything about it. But there is no doubt that nuclear reactions can be started using chemical energy.”

Nagel prefers to call the LENR phenomenon “lattice nuclear reactions,” since the phenomenon occurs in the crystal lattices of the electrode. An initial offshoot of this field focuses on introducing deuterium into a palladium electrode by applying high energy, Nagel explains. Researchers have reported that such electrochemical systems can produce up to 25 times more energy than they consume.

The other main offshoot of the field uses combinations of nickel and hydrogen, which produces up to 400 times more energy than it consumes. Nagel likes to compare these LENR technologies to the experimental international fusion reactor, based on well-known physics - the fusion of deuterium and tritium - which is being built in the south of France. The 20-year project costs $20 billion and aims to produce 10 times the energy consumed.

Nagel says the field of LENR is growing everywhere, and the main obstacles are a lack of funding and inconsistent results. For example, some researchers report that a certain threshold must be reached to trigger the reaction. It may require a minimal amount of deuterium or hydrogen to start, or the electrodes must be prepared with crystallographic orientation and surface morphology. The last requirement is common for heterogeneous catalysts used in gasoline purification and petrochemical production.

Nagel acknowledges that the commercial side of LENR also has problems. The prototypes being developed are, he says, “pretty crude,” and there has yet to be a company that has demonstrated a working prototype or made money from it.

E-Cat from Russia

Rossi claims that his E-Cat undergoes a self-sustaining process in which an incoming electrical current triggers the synthesis of hydrogen and lithium in the presence of a powder mixture of nickel, lithium and lithium aluminum hydride, resulting in an isotope of beryllium. Short-lived beryllium decays into two alpha particles, and the excess energy is released as heat. Some of the nickel turns into copper. Rossi talks about the absence of both waste and radiation outside the device.

Rossi's announcement gave scientists the same unpleasant feeling as cold fusion. Rossi is mistrusted by many people due to his controversial past. In Italy he was accused of fraud due to his previous business dealings. Rossi says the allegations are in the past and doesn't want to discuss them. He also once had a contract to create thermal systems for the US military, but the devices he supplied did not work to specifications.

In 2012, Rossi announced the creation of a 1 MW system suitable for heating large buildings. He also envisioned that by 2013 he would have a factory producing a million laptop-sized 10kW units annually for home use. But neither the factory nor these devices ever happened.

In 2014, Rossi licensed the technology to Industrial Heat, Cherokee's public investment firm that buys real estate and clears old industrial sites for new development. In 2015, Cherokee CEO Tom Darden, a lawyer and environmental scientist by training, called Industrial Heat "a source of funding for LENR inventors."

Darden says Cherokee launched Industrial Heat because the investment firm believes the LENR technology is worthy of research. "We were willing to be wrong, we were willing to invest time and resources to see if this area could be useful in our mission to prevent [environmental] pollution," he says.

Meanwhile, Industrial Heat and Leonardo had a fight and are now suing each other over violations of the agreement. Rossi would receive $100 million if a one-year test of his 1 MW system was successful. Rossi says the test is complete, but Industrial Heat doesn't think so and fears the device isn't working.

Nagel says E-Cat has brought enthusiasm and hope to the NLNR field. He argued in 2012 that he believed Rossi was not a fraud, "but I don't like some of his approaches to testing." Nagel believed that Rossi should have acted more carefully and transparently. But at that time, Nagel himself believed that devices based on the LENR principle would appear on sale by 2013.

Rossi continues his research and has announced the development of other prototypes. But he doesn't say much about his work. He says 1 MW units are already in production and he has received the “necessary certifications” to sell them. Home devices, he said, are still awaiting certification.

Nagel says that after the elation surrounding Rossi's announcements subsided, the status quo has returned to NLNR. The availability of commercial LENR generators has been delayed by several years. And even if the device survives reproducibility issues and is useful, its developers face a tough battle with regulators and user acceptance.

But he remains optimistic. “LENR may become commercially available before it is fully understood, just like X-rays were,” he says. He has already equipped a laboratory at the University. George Washington for new experiments with nickel and hydrogen.

Scientific heritage

“It was unfortunate when cold fusion was first published in 1989 as a new source of fusion energy, rather than just some new scientific curiosity,” says electrochemist Melvin Miles. “Perhaps the research could proceed as usual, with more careful and precise study.”

A former researcher at the China Lake Air and Maritime Research Center, Miles sometimes worked with Fleischman, who died in 2012. Miles believes Fleischman and Pons were right. But to this day he does not know how to make a commercial energy source for a system of palladium and deuterium, despite many experiments in which excess heat was obtained that correlated with the production of helium.

“Why would anyone continue to research or be interested in a topic that was declared a mistake 27 years ago? – asks Miles. “I am convinced that cold fusion will one day be recognized as another important discovery that has been long accepted, and that a theoretical platform will emerge to explain the experimental results.”

Nuclear physicist Ludwik Kowalski, professor emeritus from Montclair state university agrees that cold fusion was the victim of a bad start. "I'm old enough to remember the effect the first announcement had on the scientific community and the public," Kowalski says. At times he collaborated with NLNR researchers, “but my three attempts to confirm the sensational claims were unsuccessful.”

Kowalski believes that the initial disgrace earned by the research resulted in bigger problem unsuitable for the scientific method. Whether the LENR researchers are fair or not, Kowalski still believes it is worth getting to the bottom of a clear yes or no verdict. But it won't be found as long as cold fusion researchers are considered "eccentric pseudoscientists," Kowalski says. “Progress is impossible and no one benefits when the results of honest research are not published and independently verified by other laboratories.”

Time will show

Take Sun Catalytix for example. The company emerged from MIT with the backing of solid science, but fell victim to commercial attacks before it hit the market. It was created to commercialize artificial photosynthesis, developed by chemist Daniel G. Nocera, now at Harvard, to efficiently convert water into hydrogen fuel using sunlight and an inexpensive catalyst.

Nocera dreamed that the hydrogen produced in this way could power simple fuel cells and power homes and villages in underserved regions of the world without access to the grid, allowing them to enjoy modern conveniences that improve their standard of living. But it took a lot to develop more money and time than it seemed at first. After four years, Sun Catalytix gave up trying to commercialize the technology, started making flow batteries, and then in 2014 it was bought by Lockheed Martin.

It is unknown whether the same obstacles hinder the development of companies involved in LENR. For example, Wilk, an organic chemist who has been following Mills' progress, is concerned about whether attempts to commercialize BLP are based on something real. He just needs to know if hydrino exists.

In 2014, Wilk asked Mills if he had isolated hydrino, and although Mills had already written in papers and patents that he had succeeded, he replied that such a thing had not yet been done and that it would be “a very big task.” But Wilk thinks differently. If the process creates liters of hydrin gas, it should be obvious. “Show us the hydrino!” Wilk demands.

Wilk says that Mills' world, and with it the world of other people involved in LENR, reminds him of one of Zeno's paradoxes, which speaks of the illusory nature of movement. “Every year they get halfway to commercialization, but will they ever get there?” Wilk came up with four explanations for the BLP: Mills' calculations are correct; This is a fraud; This is bad science; this is pathological science, as he called it Nobel laureate in physics Irving Langmuir.

Langmuir invented the term more than 50 years ago to describe psychological process, in which the scientist subconsciously distances himself from scientific method and becomes so immersed in his occupation that he develops the inability to look at things objectively and see what is real and what is not. Pathological science is “the science of things not being what they seem,” said Langmuir. In some cases, it develops in areas such as cold fusion/LENR, and does not give up, despite the fact that it is recognized as false by the majority of scientists.

"I hope they're right," Wilk says of Mills and the BLP. "Indeed. I don’t want to refute them, I’m just looking for the truth.” But if "pigs could fly," as Wilkes says, he would accept their data, theory, and other predictions that follow from it. But he was never a believer. “I think if hydrinos existed, they would have been discovered in other laboratories or in nature many years ago.”

All discussions of cold fusion and LENR end exactly like this: they always come to the conclusion that no one has brought a working device to the market, and none of the prototypes can be commercialized in the near future. So time will be the final judge.

Tags:

• cold fusion
• nayar
• low energy nuclear reactions
• suncell
• Russia
• e-cat

10:00 — REGNUM

Editorial Preface

Any fundamental discovery can be used for good or bad. Sooner or later, a scientist is faced with the need to answer the question: to open or not to open “Pandora’s box”, to publish or not to publish a potentially destructive discovery. But this is far from the only moral problem that their authors have to face.

For the authors of major discoveries, there are also more mundane, but no less difficult to overcome, obstacles on the path to universal recognition related to the corporate ethics of the scientific community - unwritten rules of behavior, violation of which is severely punished, including expulsion. Moreover, these rules are often used as a reason to put pressure on scientists who have advanced “too far” in their research and encroached on the postulates of the modern scientific picture of the world. First, their work is refused to be published, then they are accused of violating the rules, then they are labeled as pseudoscience.

I found out the scientist's answer.

What is not for you is not there.

What didn't fall into your hands -

Contrary to the truths of science.

What the scientist could not count -

That is a delusion and a forgery.

Of those who endure and win, they later say: “They were too ahead of their time.”

It was in this situation that Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons found themselves, who discovered the occurrence of nuclear reactions during the “conventional” electrolysis of a solution of deuterated lithium hydroxide in heavy water with a palladium cathode. Their discovery, called "cold nuclear fusion", has been exciting the scientific community for 30 years now, which is divided into supporters and opponents of cold thermonuclear fusion. In the memorable year of 1989, after a press conference by M. Fleischmann and S. Pons, the reaction was swift and harsh: they violated scientific ethics by publishing unreliable results that were not even peer-reviewed in a scientific journal .

Behind the fuss raised by the newspapermen, no one paid attention to the fact that by the time of the press conference the scientific article by M. Fleischmann and S. Pons had been reviewed and accepted for publication in the American scientific journal The Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry. Sergei Tsvetkov draws attention to this circumstance, which has strangely fallen out of sight of the world scientific community, in the article published below.

But no less mysterious is the fact that Fleischmann and Pons themselves, as far as we know, never protested about their “slander” in violating scientific ethics. Why? Specific details are unknown, but the conclusion is that cold fusion research was clumsily kept secret.

Fleischman and Pons are not the only scientists who have been given cover under the guise of pseudoscience. For example, a similar biography “tainted” by cold fusion was invented for one of the world’s highest-rated physicists from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Peter Hagelstein (see), the creator of the American X-ray laser as part of the SDI program.

It is in this area that the real scientific and technological race of the century is unfolding. We are convinced that it is in the field of research into cold nuclear fusion (CNF) and low-energy nuclear reactions (LENR) that new technologies will be created, which are destined to either transform the world or open “Pandora’s box.”

What is known is of no use,

One unknown is needed.

I. Goethe. "Faust".

Introduction

The history of the beginning and development of cold fusion research is tragic and instructive in its own way, and, like any story, it is unlike anything else and relates rather to the experience of future generations. I would formulate my attitude towards cold nuclear fusion as follows: if cold fusion didn't exist, it would have been worth inventing it.

As a direct participant in many of the events described below, I must state a fact: the more time passes since the birth of cold nuclear fusion, the more money is available mass media and the Internet reveals fantasies, myths, distortions of facts, deliberate forgeries and mockery of the authors of an outstanding discovery. Sometimes it comes to outright lies. We need to do something about this! I stand for the restoration of historical justice and the establishment of truth, because isn’t the search and preservation of truth the main task of science? History usually saves several descriptions important event made by its direct participants and external observers. Each of the descriptions has its own shortcomings: some do not see the forest for the trees, others are too superficial and tendentious, some are made winners, others defeated. My description is an inside look at a story that is far from over.

Fresh examples of “misconceptions” about CNF – nothing new!

Let's look at a few examples of claims about cold fusion made in recent years in the Russian media. In red italics they contain lies, and bold red italic — an obvious lie.

"M.I.T. Staff tried to reproduce the experiments M. Fleishman and S. Pons, but again to no avail . Therefore, it should not be surprising that the bid for a great discovery suffered a crushing defeat at the American Physical Society (APS) conference, which took place in Baltimore on May 1 of that year » .

2. Evgeniy Tsygankov in the article “”, published on December 8, 2016 on the website Russian branch American social movement The Brights, uniting "people with a naturalistic worldview", who are fighting against religious and supernatural ideas, gives the following version of events:

“Cold fusion? Let's go back a little to history.

The birth date of cold fusion can be considered 1989. Then the information was published in the English-language press about a report by Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons, in which nuclear fusion was announced in the following setup: on palladium electrodes , immersed in heavy water (with two deuterium atoms instead of hydrogen, D 2 O), a current passes, causing one of the electrodes to melt . Fleishman and Pons give such an interpretation of what is happening: the electrode melts due to the release of too much energy , the source of which is the fusion reaction of deuterium nuclei . Nuclear fusion is thus supposedly occurs at room temperature . Journalists called the phenomenon cold fusion, in the Russian version Cold fusion has somehow become "cold thermonuclear" , although the phrase contains an obvious internal contradiction. And if in some media newly minted cold fusion could be greeted warmly , then in the scientific community to the statement of Fleischmann and Pons reacted quite cool . At the held in less than a month there is an international meeting , to which Martin Fleischmann was also invited, the application was critically reviewed. The simplest considerations pointed to the impossibility of nuclear fusion occurring in such a facility. . For example, in case of reaction d + d → 3 He + n for powers , which were discussed in the installation of Pons and Fleischmann, there would be a flow of neutrons, providing the experimenter with a lethal dose of radiation within an hour. The presence of Martin Fleischmann himself at the meeting directly indicated falsification of the results. Nevertheless In a number of laboratories similar experiments were carried out, as a result of which no nuclear fusion reaction products were found . This, however, did not prevent one sensation from giving birth to a whole community of cold fusion adherents, which functions according to its own rules to this day ».

3. On the TV channel “Russia K” in the program “Meanwhile” with Alexander Arkhangelsky at the end of October 2016, the issue “” said:

“The Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences approved new line-up Commission to combat pseudoscience and falsification of scientific research. Now it consists of 59 scientists, including physicists, biologists, astronomers, mathematicians, chemists, representatives of humanities and agricultural specialists. When academician Vitaly Ginzburg took the initiative to create a commission in 1998, pseudoscientific concepts especially annoyed physicists and engineers. Fantasies about new sources of energy and overcoming basic physical laws were popular then. The commission consistently crushed the teachings of torsion fields, cold nuclear fusion and antigravity . The most high-profile case was the exposure in 2010 of Victor Petrik’s invention of nanofilters for purifying radioactive water.”

4. Doctor of Chemical Sciences, Professor Alexey Kapustin in the television program of the NTV channel " We and science, science and us: Controlled thermonuclear reaction» September 26, 2016 stated:

« Enormous damage to thermonuclear fusion is caused by constantly appearing reports of so-called cold nuclear fusion , i.e. synthesis, which takes place not at millions of degrees, but, say, at room temperature on the laboratory table. Message from 1989 about what was produced during electrolysis new elements on palladium catalysts what happened fusion of hydrogen atoms into helium atoms - it was like a kind of information explosion. Yes, opening "opening" in quotes these scientists nothing has been confirmed . This damages the reputation of thermonuclear fusion also because business easily responds to these strange scandalous requests, hoping for quick, easy profits, it subsidizes startups, dedicated to cold fusion. None of them were confirmed. This is absolute pseudoscience, but, unfortunately, it is very harmful to the development of real thermonuclear fusion ».

5. Denis Strigun in an article whose title itself is misinformation - “Thermonuclear fusion: a miracle that happens”, in the chapter “Cold Nuclear Fusion” he writes:

“No matter how tiny it may be, the chance to hit the jackpot is « thermonuclear» lottery excited everyone, not just physicists. In March 1989, two fairly well-known chemist, American Stanley Pons and Briton Martin Fleishman, collected journalists to show the world "cold" nuclear fusion. He worked like this. In solution with deuterium and lithium fit palladium electrode, and a direct current was passed through it. Deuterium And lithium was absorbed palladium And, colliding, Sometimes "coupled" into tritium and helium-4, all of a sudden sharp heating the solution. And this is at room temperature and normal atmospheric pressure.

First, details of the experiment appeared in The Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry and Interfacial Electrochemistry only in April a month later after the press conference. This was against scientific etiquette..

Secondly, from nuclear physics specialists to Fleishman and Pons a lot of questions arose . For example, why in their reactor the collision of two deuterons produces tritium and helium-4 , When should produce tritium and proton or neutron and helium-3? Moreover, it was easy to check: provided that nuclear fusion occurred in the palladium electrode, from isotopes "flew away" would be neutrons with a previously known kinetic energy. But neither neutron sensors, nor playback experiments by other scientists did not lead to such results. And due to a lack of data, already in May the sensation of chemists was recognized as a “duck” .

Classification of lies

Let's try to systematize the claims on which the scientific community's refusal to recognize the discovery of the phenomenon of cold nuclear fusion by Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons is based. The above are just a few examples of typical statements about cold fusion, repeated in hundreds of publications around the world. Moreover, note that we are talking specifically about claims, and not about scientific arguments and evidence refuting this phenomenon. Such claims are replicated by so-called experts who have never themselves been involved in repeating and testing the phenomenon of cold nuclear fusion.

Typical claim No. 1. The press conference took place before the publication of the article in a scientific journal. How indecent - this is a violation of scientific ethics!

Typical claim No. 2. What are you talking about? This can't be! We have been struggling with thermonuclear fusion for decades and cannot get any excess heat at hundreds of millions of degrees in the plasma, and here you are telling us about room temperature and MegaJoules of heat in excess of the invested energy? Nonsense!

Typical claim No. 3. If this were possible, then all of you (cold fusion researchers) would have been in the cemetery long ago!

Typical claim No. 4. It doesn’t work out at CalTech (Caltech) and MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology). You're lying!

Typical claim No. 5. Do they also want to ask for money to continue this work? Who will take this money from?

Model claim No. 6. This will not happen while we are alive! Drive the “fraudster” Stanley Pons out of the university and the USA!

It must be said that they tried to repeat the same scenario in the early 2000s with Purdue University professor Ruzi Taleyarkhan for his bubble “thermonoxide”, but the case went to court, and the professor was reinstated in his rights and position.

Here we cannot fail to mention the activities of the unique Commission for Combating Pseudoscience and Falsification of Scientific Research under the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences. The Commission on Pseudoscience has already managed to “reward itself” “for the consistent defeat of torsion fields, cold nuclear fusion and antigravity”, apparently considering that the repeatedly repeated demands not to give budget money to ignoramuses and adventurers from cold fusion (see, for example, the section Conferences and symposia of the journal “Uspekhi Fizicheskikh Nauk” Vol. 169 No. 6 for 1999) is the defeat of cold nuclear fusion? Agree, this is a strange way of conducting a scientific discussion, especially in combination with the distribution of instructions to the editors of Russian scientific journals prohibiting the publication of scientific articles that even once mention the words “cold nuclear fusion.”

The author has sad experience of trying to publish the results of his research in at least two Russian academic journals. Let's hope that the new leadership of the Russian Academy of Sciences will finally gather the last remnants of the brains flowing to the West and reconsider its attitude towards science as the basis for development, and not the degradation of society, and finally eliminate the disgraceful Russian science and RAS Commission on Pseudoscience.

A note about the issue price

Before dealing with these claims, let's try to evaluate the advantages of nuclear fusion over other methods of producing energy known at the moment. Let's take the amount of energy released per gram of the reacting substance. It is the reacting substance, and not the material in which these reactions occur.

First, let's look at the table of the amount of energy released per gram of reactant when in various ways obtaining energy and perform simple arithmetic operations, comparing these amounts of energy.

This data can be obtained from and presented in the form of a table:

It turns out that when burning oil or high-quality coal, 42 kJ/g of thermal energy can be obtained. The fission of uranium-235 already releases 82.4 GJ/g of heat, the synthesis of hydrogen nuclei will release 423 GJ/g, and according to theory, 1 gram of any substance can give, with complete release of energy, up to 104.4 TJ/g (k is kilo = 10 3, G - Giga = 10 9, T - Tera = 10 12).

And immediately the question of whether it is necessary to extract energy from water disappears for any sane person. There is a strong suspicion that, having mastered the method of obtaining energy from the fusion of hydrogen nuclei, we will only have one step left until the complete release of the energy of the substance according to the famous formula E = m c 2!

Italian Andrea Rossi showed that for cold nuclear fusion it is possible to use simple hydrogen, which is available in inexhaustible quantities on planet Earth and in space. This opens up even more opportunities for energy, and the words become prophetic Jules Verne in his "Mysterious Island", published back in 1874:

“...I think that water will someday be used as fuel, and that the hydrogen and oxygen that are part of it will be used together or separately and will be an inexhaustible source of light and heat, much more intense than coal. ...I think that when coal deposits are depleted, humanity will be heated and warmed by water. Water is the coal of the future.”

I'll give it three exclamation point great science fiction writer!!!

It is worth noting that by extracting hydrogen for cold nuclear fusion from water, humanity will receive the oxygen necessary for life as a bonus.

A list of unsolved problems of modern physics is given. Some of these problems are theoretical in nature, which means that existing theories are unable to explain certain observed phenomena or experimental... ... WikipediaorNNR? ColdFusion or LENR?

At the end of the 90s, the defeated remnants of scientists, who, out of their own curiosity, quietly continued to repeat the experiments of M. Fleischmann and S. Pons, decided to hide from the fierce attacks of the “tocamafia” and the Commission for Combating Pseudoscience created in Russia in the Russian Academy of Sciences and took up low-energy nuclear reactions.

Renaming cold fusion to low-energy nuclear reactions is, of course, a weakness. This is an attempt to hide so as not to be killed, this is a manifestation of the instinct of self-preservation. All this shows the seriousness of the threat not only to the profession, but also to life itself.

Andrea Rossi realizes that his activities to promote his energy catalyst (E-cat) pose a threat to his life. Therefore, his actions seem illogical to many. But this is how he protects himself. For the first and, perhaps, only time, I saw in Zurich in 2012 how a person who is developing and implementing new energy technology entered a meeting of scientists and engineers, accompanied by a bodyguard dressed in a bulletproof vest.

The pressure from academic groups in science is so strong and aggressive that only completely independent people, for example, retirees, can now engage in cold fusion. The rest of those interested are simply squeezed out of laboratories and universities. This trend is clearly visible in world science to this day.

Opening details

Anyway. Let's return to our electrochemists. I would like to briefly recall the contents of a scientific article by M. Fleischmann and S. Pons in a peer-reviewed journal with specific results. This information is taken from the abstract journal of the All-Union Institute of Scientific and Technical Information (RZH VINITI) of the USSR Academy of Sciences, published since 1952, a periodical scientific information publication that publishes abstracts, annotations and bibliographic descriptions of domestic and foreign publications in the field of natural, precise and technical sciences, economics and medicine. Specifically - RZH 18V Nuclear Physics. — 1989.-6.-ref.6B1.

“Electro-chemically induced nuclear fusion of deuterium. Electrоchemicalу induced nuclear fusion of deuterium / FleisсhmannМartin, Рons Stanleу // J. of Elecroanal. Chem. - 1989. - Vol.261. - No.2a. - pp. 301−308. - English

An experiment was carried out at the University of Utah (USA) aimed at

detection of the occurrence of nuclear reactions

under conditions where deuterium is embedded in the metal lattice of palladium, which means “an effective increase in the pressure bringing the deuterons together due to chemical forces,” which increases the probability of quantum mechanical tunneling of deuterons through the Coulomb barrier of the DD pair in the interstices of the palladium lattice. The electrolyte is a solution of 0.1 mol LiOD in water with the composition 99.5% D 2 O + 0.5% H 2 O. Palladium (Pd) rods with a diameter of 1¸8 mm and a length of 10 cm, wrapped in platinum wire ( Pt anode). The current density was varied within 0.001÷1 A/cm 2 at a voltage on the electrodes of 12 V. Neutrons were recorded in the experiment in two ways. Firstly, a scintillation detector, including a dosimeter with boron BF 3 counters (efficiency 2×10 -4 for neutrons of energy 2.5 MeV). Secondly, by the method of recording gamma quanta that are formed when a neutron is captured by a hydrogen nucleus of ordinary water surrounding an electrolytic cell, according to the reaction:

The detector was an NaI (Tl) crystal, and the recorder was an ND-6 multichannel amplitude analyzer. Background correction was performed by subtracting the spectrum obtained at a distance of 10 m from the water bath. Tritons (T) were extracted from the electrolyte using a special type of absorber (Parafilm film), and then their b-decay was recorded on a Beckman scintillation counter (45% efficiency). The best results were achieved on a Pd cathode with a diameter of 4 mm and a length of 10 cm at a current density through the electrolyzer of 0.064 A/cm 2 . Neutron radiation with an intensity of 4×10 4 neutron/s was detected, which is 3 times higher than the background. The presence of a maximum in the gamma spectrum in the energy region of 2.2 MeV was established, and the counting rate of gamma rays was 2.1×10 4 s -1 . The presence of tritium was detected with a formation rate of 2×10 4 atoms/s. During the electrolysis process, a fourfold excess of the released energy over the total expended (electrical and chemical) energy was recorded. It reached 4 MJ/cm 3 cathode during 120 hours of experiment. In the case of a bulk Pd cathode 1*1*1 cm, its partial melting was observed (Tm = 1554°C). Based on experimental data on tritium nuclei and gamma rays, the probability of a fusion reaction was found by the authors to be equal to 10 -19 s -1 per DD pair. At the same time, the authors note that if nuclear reactions involving deuterons are considered the main reason for the increased energy yield, then the neutron yield would be significantly higher (by 11–14 orders of magnitude). According to the authors, in the case of electrolysis of a D 2 O + DTO + T 2 O solution, the heat release can increase to 10 kW/cm 3 cathode.”

A few words about scientific ethics, the violation of which Fleischmann and Pons are accused of violating. As is clear from the original article, it was received by the journal's editors on March 13, 1989, accepted for publication on March 22, 1989, and published on April 10, 1989. That is, the conference on March 23, 1989 was held upon the acceptance of this article for publication. And where is the violation of ethics, and most importantly by whom?

From this description it is clear and unambiguous that an incredibly huge amount of excess heat was obtained, several times greater than the energy expended in electrolysis and the possible chemical energy that could be released during the simple chemical decomposition of water into individual atoms. The tritium and neutrons registered in this case clearly indicate the process of nuclear fusion. Moreover, neutrons were recorded by two independent methods and different instruments.

In 1990, the following article was published in the same journal by Fleischmann, M., et al., Calorimetry of the palladium-deuterium-heavy water system. J. Electroanal. Chem., 1990, 287, p. 293, specifically relating to heat release during these studies, from which Figure 8A shows that intense heat release, and therefore the effect itself, begins only on the 66th day (~5.65´10 6 sec) continuous operation of the electrolytic cell and continues for five days. That is, in order to get the result and fix it, you need to spend seventy-one days for carrying out measurements, not counting the time for preparing and manufacturing the experimental setup. For example, it took us all of April to manufacture the first installation, launch it and carry out various calibrations, and only in mid-May 1989 did we receive the first results.

The onset of heat release during electrolysis with a large delay was subsequently confirmed by D. Gozzi, F. Cellucci, P.L. Cignini, G. Gigli, M. Tomellini, E. Cisbani, S. Frullani, G.M. Urciuoli, J. Electroanalyt. Chem. 452, p. 254, (1998). The beginning of noticeable release of excess heat was recorded here after 210 hours, which corresponds to 8.75 days.

And also Michael C. H. McKubre, director of the Energy Research Center of the Stanford Research Institute, USA (Energy Research Center SRI International, Menlo Park, California, USA), who presented his results at the 10th International conference on Cold Fusion (ICCF-10) August 25, 2003. The beginning of the release of excess heat is 520 hours, which corresponds to 21.67 days.

In their 1996 work presented at the 6th International Conference on Cold Fusion (ICCF-6), T. Roulette, J. Roulette, and S. Pons. Results of ICARUS 9 Experiments Runat IMRA Europe. IMRA Europe, S.A., Center Scientifique Sophia Antipolis, 06560 Valbonne, FRANCE, Stanley Pons demonstrated two things. First and perhaps most importantly, having moved from the United States in 1992 to the south of France, in a new location after a significant period of time in a different country, he was able not only to reproduce the experiment in Salt Lake City, conducted in 1989, but also get an increase in heat results! What kind of irreproducibility can we talk about here? See:

Second, according to these data, noticeable heat release begins on the 71st day of electrolysis! The change in heat release continues for more than 40 days and then remains constant at the level of 310 MJ for up to 160 days!

Therefore, how can one talk a little over a month later about the irreproducibility of the experiments of M. Fleischmann and S. Pons in a single laboratory, which carried out the test not even on a scientific article and without involving and consulting the authors? Selfish motives and fear of the possibility of responsibility for unsuccessful experiments with thermonuclear fusion are clearly visible. With this statement in May 1989, the American Physical Society (APS) put itself in an unpleasant position, replacing science with ordinary business, and closed official research in the field of cold nuclear fusion for many years. Members of this society, firstly, behaved contrary to all scientific ethics in the sense of refuting the results of scientific work with publication in a scientific journal, and entrusted this to the New York Times, where in May 1989 a devastating article appeared regarding M. Fleishman and S. Ponsa. Although they accused M. Fleischman and S. Pons of violating this ethics in terms of announcing the results of their scientific research at a press conference before the publication of a scientific article in a scientific journal.

There is not a single scientific article in peer-reviewed journals that scientifically substantiates the impossibility of cold nuclear fusion.

There is no such. There are only interviews and statements in the media by scientists who have never worked on cold nuclear fusion, but have been involved in such fundamental and capital-intensive areas of physics as thermonuclear fusion, stellar physics, the Big Bang theory, the emergence of the Universe, and the Large Hadron Collider.

Even at the institute, during the course of lectures “Measurement of physical parameters”, we were taught that the verification of measuring instruments physical quantities It must be carried out with a device that has an accuracy class higher than the device being verified. This same rule has exactly the same relation to the verification of phenomena! Therefore, the heat tests at MIT and Caltech, which they like to refer to regarding the viability of cold fusion, are not really tests at all. Compare the accuracies and errors in temperature and power measurements with the experimental data of Fleischmann and Pons, which are presented in his report by Melvin H. Miles. The Fleischmann-Pons Calorimetric Methods And Equations. Satellite Symposium of the 20th International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science SS ICCF 20 Xiamen, China September 28−30, 2016).

They differ tens and a thousand times!

Now regarding the statement that “if nuclear reactions involving deuterons are considered the main reason for the increased energy yield, then the neutron yield would be significantly higher (by 11–14 orders of magnitude).” Here the calculation is simple: with the release of 4 MJ of excess heat per cm 3 of the cathode, a minimum of 4.29·10 18 neutrons should be produced. If at least one neutron leaves the reaction zone and does not give up its energy inside the cell from 2.45 MeV to room temperature, then there is no way to register so much excess heat. And if emitted neutrons are recorded at the same time, then the number of fusion reactions occurring in this case should be much greater than the minimum of neutrons, and more tritium will be formed. Plus, knowing that the cross section for the interaction of neutrons and helium-3 is incomparably higher than the cross sections of other possible reactions of d+d fusion reaction products (by about two orders of magnitude)

then it becomes clear that no one will be irradiated by neutrons, and it is clear that such a ratio of the amount of registered tritium to the number of registered neutrons appears and where helium-4 subsequently comes from. It appears as a result of a cascade of reactions for the synthesis of d+d reaction products, but this has already become clear from the experiments of other researchers about helium-4. Fleischmann and Pons have not a word about this.

“Experts” also lie about neutron irradiation. With such amounts of excess heat released, they should all turn into heat, transfer their energy to the materials and water of the electrolyte in the cell, and not carry away 75% of the energy from the reaction zone outside the reactor and irradiate the experimenters. Therefore, M. Fleischmann and S. Pons recorded only a small part of neutrons - heavy water, as is known, is a good neutron moderator.

From a scientific point of view, there is only one mistake in this article - this is the reduction of the amount of excess energy released to the volume of the palladium electrode used. In this case, the consumable component and source of energy is deuterium, and it would be logical to attribute the excess amount of energy released to the amount of deuterium absorbed by palladium and compare with the estimated heat during nuclear fusion as a result of the d+d reaction, but, as stated above, the energy balance of this the process should not be limited to the products of these reactions.

Magic terms sound fascinating from the lips of thermonuclear physicists: Coulomb barrier, thermonuclear fusion, plasma. But I would like to ask them: what do temperatures above 1000 °C and the fourth state of matter - plasma - have to do with the process of electrolysis by Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons? Plasma is an ionized gas. The ionization of hydrogen begins at 3,000 degrees Kelvin, and by 10,000 degrees Kelvin, hydrogen is completely ionized, that is, this is approximately 2727 °C - the beginning of ionization, and by 9727 °C - fully ionized hydrogen - plasma. Question: how can the description of the fourth state of matter be applied to an ordinary gas? It's like comparing warm and transparent. You can, of course, try to measure the distance to the Moon by determining the amount of dew that has fallen in the Sahara Desert, but what will be the result? Likewise, the results of cold nuclear fusion cannot be described in terms of thermonuclear fusion. In this way, one can achieve only the denial of the possibility of the coldest nuclear fusion and strengthen doubts about the possibility of realizing nuclear fusion reactions under such thermodynamic parameters. But nuclear physics does not say a word about the zero probability of such reactions occurring at temperatures close to room temperature. This only means that these probabilities begin to increase as the temperature rises to 1000 °C.

A logical question arises: cui prodest- who benefits from this? Of course, the one who first starts shouting: “Stop the thief!” I don’t want to point fingers at anyone, but they were the first to shout: “This can’t be!” - physicists involved in thermonuclear fusion, who immediately composed fairy tales and horror stories about plasma, neutrons and how incomprehensible it all is for the common mind. It is they who, having spent the next couple of decades and several tens of billions of dollars, will once again, like Achilles catching up with the tortoise, once again find themselves one step away from realizing humanity’s age-old dream of obtaining endless, “free” and “clean” energy.

The most big mistake cold nuclear fusion, which was “slipped” to us by thermonuclear scientists, is the impossibility of overcoming the Coulomb barrier by equally charged hydrogen nuclei at low temperatures. However, I must also disappoint them and the “theorists” who came running to cold nuclear fusion with their “astrolabes” and are trying to come up with something exotic to overcome this barrier like hydrino, dineutrino-dineutronium, etc. To explain the detected products of cold nuclear fusion, the physical laws and phenomena from the institute physics course are quite sufficient.

We must understand that cold nuclear fusion is a natural process that created and synthesized the entire world around us, and this process occurs both in the depths of the Sun and inside the Earth. It can't be any other way. And we will all be absolute idiots if we fail to take advantage of this discovery of two electrochemists!

Cold fusion is not pseudoscience. The label of pseudoscience was invented to protect the “thermonuclear scientists” and “large collider scientists” who have reached a dead end and are afraid of responsibility, who have turned modern physics into a profitable business for a narrow circle of people, and who only call themselves scientists.

The discovery of M. Fleischmann and S. Pons planted a “big pig” on physicists who were comfortably located at the forefront of science. This is not the first time that the physical “avant-garde of humanity” has recklessly skipped past a small area of ​​research, not noticing the emerging opportunities for implementing nuclear fusion reactions at low energies and low financial costs, and is now in great confusion.

How much more time do we need to recognize the obvious fact that thermonuclear fusion is a dead end, and the Sun is not a thermonuclear reactor? Billions of dollars will not plug the hole in the sinking thermonuclear Titanic, while large-scale research into cold nuclear fusion and the creation of working power plants capable of solving the main global problems of mankind will require only a small fraction of the thermonuclear budget! So, long live cold fusion!