Pg_1 [This back statement employs an HTML anchor and returns to the top of the page.] go to page number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Chapter 1 "Cold Fusion"

An Historic Overview



[This is a paintbrush drawing.]

In 1989 Pons, Fleischmann, and Hawkins reported that their "cold fusion" electrochemical experiment had produced excess energy. This report created an international sensation. The NBC nightly news reported that "The energy crisis is over!"

Pons and Fleischmann's work is currently being continued at ENECO in Salt Lake City USA. Dr. Edmund Storms, formerly a Director at ENECO, reported that many of his heavy water cells do generate a few watts of anomalous power.1



[GIF picture.  ] Historic picture. Pick the icon to view Dr. Edmund Storms' historic first cold fusion cell. Dr. Storms has found that the energy originates at tiny hot spots on the palladium cathodes. The process depends greatly on small unknown variations within the palladium.

[ Dr. Storms speaks at COFE #1 ] Pick the ICON right to view and hear some historic comments by Dr. Edmond Storm's 4/99.



Many other reputable laboratories, however, were not able to duplicate the results. Contemporary theories of fusion describe the following three reactions.

D + D --> H + T

(deuterium + deuterium --> hydrogen & tritium)

D + D ---> n + 3He

(deuterium + deuterium --> neutron & helium 3)

D + D ---> 4He + g

(deuterium + deuterium --> helium 4 & 24 a MeV gamma ray).


[GIF picture Historic picture. Pick the icon to view a heavy water cold fusion cell at ENECO. The scale and the gas capture tubes are used to measure the energy lost in the electrolysis process. This loss is know as recombination.


At the Fourth International Conference on Cold Fusion, M. Rabinowitz of the Electric Power Research Institute, Y.E. Kime of Purdue, and V.A. Chechin and V.A. Tsarev of the Russian Academy of Sciences reported that four miracles were required if the process of cold fusion to progressed by known reactions.

Pg_2 UP

The four miracles are:

1. "The Fusion Rate Miracle" From their study of the conditions within the cold fusion electrode they concluded that the fusion rate must be vanishingly low. There appears to be no mechanism to overcome the electrical forces that keep nucleons apart.

2. "The Branching Ratio Miracle" Gamma and X-rays are a signature of a fusion reaction. Gamma radiation commensurate with the liberated energy has not been detected. The only known nuclear process that is sensitive to pressure or chemical effects is electron capture. The process of electron capture produces known emission signatures. These signatures have not been detected.

3. "The No Nuclear Products Miracle" Helium is a by-product of a heavy water nuclear reaction. Helium commensurate with the energy liberated has not been detected. Helium-4 exists naturally in the atmosphere at a concentration of about 5 parts per million. The experiments that reported the detection of Helium may have been contaminated by an in leakage of air.

4. "No Neutrons miracle." Neutrons are a signature of a fusion reaction. None have been detected.

The process of cold fusion did not fit into any theoretical model, and most of the national laboratories were not able to replicate the results. Cold fusion fell into disfavor. Many major scientific publications refused, and still refuse, even to publish articles related to cold fusion.

An ever increasing number of labs, however, continued to publish reports of unexplained excess energy. The prestigious Electric Power Research Institute was one of them. In August ,1994, EPRI released its final report #TR-104195. EPRI concluded,

"The excess heat generated in electrochemical cells with palladium cathodes and heavy water electrolyte appears to be far too large to result from chemical or metallurgical transformation. The evidence implies that the heat source is a nuclear reaction of some as yet undetermined nature.....This work confirms the claims of Fleischmann, Pons, and Hawkins ........Tritium, neutrons, or gamma rays are not quantitatively correlated with the excess power production observed."


[ McKubre Nov 2000.] [WAVE audio file Michael McKurbe (left) comments on his work with SRI and EPRI. The comment was made at The American Nuclear Society's meeting in Washington 2000. File type wave. November 2000






[Case picture Historic picture. Pick the icon to view & hear Dr. Les Case. Dr. Case is experimenting with deuterium gas, palladium cathode cold fusion cells. The lecture was given in Concord N.H. on October 12th 1998. Dr. Case is a chemical engineer with four degrees from MIT.



The "cold fusion" process was producing real energy; however, it was becoming clear that the process is not one of conventional nuclear fusion. Dr. Hal Puthoff's (Director of the Institute for Advanced Study in Austin) zero point energy theory may offer some answers to this mystery.


Pg_3 UP


The CETI Cell

On October 1st through the 5th of 1995, The Institute of Electrical Engineers and the American Nuclear Society held their 16th Biannual Symposium on Fusion Engineering (SOFE 1995) at the University of Illinois. This meeting revealed a bombshell of a breakthrough. Jim Patterson and his Clean Energy Technology organization demonstrated a light water cold fusion cell.2 This cell produced five watts of continuous power with an input of only 60 milliwatts, a power gain of 80. These results were confirmed by George Miley's group at the University of Illinois. Clean Energy Technology's "Patterson" cell performs much better than the cells tested by McKubre at EPRI. The EPRI cells required weeks to trigger the reaction and obtained a maximum of 2 watts of energy from a cathode that weighed 2.5 grams. Clean Energy Technology's "Patterson Cell" requires only a few hours to start the reaction and produces 5 watts of continuous power from a cathode that weighs only 40 micro-grams. 3

Michael J Williams of the University of Illinois stated in response to an inquiry from this author.
"We had a cell in operation for a week prior the SOFE conference and it was running at about 5 watts of excess power with a .25 watt input...So far no substantial radiation products have been detected."

[GIF drawing Pick the icon to view the Patterson power cell. The image was taken from the public patent document.



Jed Rothwell writes:

"Five watts is a significant, macroscopic power level. When output is 80 times greater than input, and the output is macroscopic, this eliminates any possibility that the effect is due to instrument error."

[ Dan Chicea picture Historic picture. Pick the icon to view the sputtering machine at the University of Illinois. This machine was used to make Dr. Miley's 'cold fusion' beads. September 1999

In December of 1995 at the prestigious international Power Gen conference in Anaheim California CETI demonstrated a one kilo watt cold fusion cell. This cell produced one kilo watt of thermal energy with only one quarter of electrical power flowing into the cell.



[GIF picture Pick the icon to view a picture a taken of Jim Patterson at the historic Power Gen conference in December of 1995.



[ The CETI cell as displayed at POWERGEN 1995 ] Historic video. Pick the icon to view a video taken in the public lobby at the Power Gen conference in December of 1995. The private demo cannot be shown. If prompted pick "run from the current location". Closing the file before stopping the video may produce system errors.



How can the CETI cell produce fusion power with light water?

The probability of two heavy water molecules coming together in a light water cell is very small. Ordinary water contains only a small amount of heavy water (1 part in 7,000). The only possible explanation was that light water fusing with heavy water.

H + D ---> 3He

The product of this reactions is helium 3. Helium 3 exists in extremely small quantities in the atmosphere. It would be relatively simple to detect its production. No helium-3 has been detected.

In September of 1996 George Miley released his report on the CETI device, "Nuclear Transmutations in Thin-Film Nickel Coatings Undergoing Electrolysis."

George Miley reported:

"...chemically-assisted nuclear reactions are not widely accepted by the scientific community. The present results not only confront that disbelief, but add a new dimension to the issue by reporting copious light and heavy element reaction products that seem to imply multi-body reactions due to the formation of heavier elements such as Cu and Ag from Ni.....chemically assisted nuclear reactions opens the way to a whole new field of science."4

[ George Miley speaks at COFE #1] Historic video. Pick the icon to view a video taken of Dr. Miley's lecture at the First International Conference on Future Energy in Washington DC 4/99.



[GIF picture Historic picture. Miley reports his results at the Wright Patterson Air Force Base.



The force between two nucleons is proportional to the electrical charge on the nucleus. Of all the elements, hydrogen has the smallest electrical charge. Hydrogen is the easiest element to fuse. According to conventional theory, the likelihood that heavier elements (with higher coulombic forces) are fusing together is next to impossible. Many contemporary scientists believe that the energy liberated in the "cold fusion" process is not nuclear.

One theory is that the anomalous energy is produced by a chemical reaction. Pons reported that 294 megajoules of energy were produced from a cathode weighing 3.6 grams.5 No known chemical reaction is able to produce this much energy. The quantity of power produced suggests that the energy production rate is beyond that of any chemical process.


Lev G. Sapogin of the Department of Physics, Technical University in Moscow, Russia writes,

"It is now a well established fact that in Cold Nuclear Fusion only a small portion of heat results from nuclear reactions, the rest being of mysterious origin....."6


[Miles Nov 2000.] [WAVE audio file Melvin H. Miles (left) comments on his cold fusion work at the Navel Weapons Lab in China Lake. File type wave. November 2000








Pg_4 UP


The Potash Cold Fusion Cell

On December 28, 1993 Thermacore Corporation obtained a patent (# 5,273,635) for a cold fusion device. 7

Inventors Gernert; Nelson J. (Elizabethtown, PA); Shaubach; Robert M. (Litiz, PA); Ernst; Donald M. (Leola, PA) demonstrated that an electrolytic cell with a nickel cathode and potash electrolyte appeared to generate anomalous thermal energy.

NASA's Verification

In February of 1996 a group at N.A.S.A. confirmed this report. N.A.S.A. Technical memorandum 107167 states:

"Replication of experiments claiming to demonstrate excess heat production in light water Ni-K2 CO3 (potash electrolyte with nickel cathode) cells was found to produce an apparent excess heat of 11 watts maximum, for 60 watts electrical power into the cell....The light water electrolytic cell on loan from the Hydrocatalysis Power Corporation clearly exhibited the phenomenon of apparent excess heat when tested at 4 selected D.C. currents and one pulse mode current."7



Cold fusion is not the same as hot fusion. The process of cold fusion is very mysterious. The lack of radiation indicates that a force with a range longer than the range of electric force is somehow overcoming the coulombic barrier. The fact that daughter nucleons are always stable is a strong indication that this force involves nuclear spin-orbit interaction. The zero point interaction, as outlined in the remainder of this text, may be the key to the understanding of the nuclear and gravitational processes that are at work in cold fusion.


Pg_5 UP


Cavitational Technologies

At the time of this writing the cold fusion phenomenon has resulted in the investigation of a host of other new energy technologies. 8 Devices which operate on the principle of cavitation are also producing excess energy.9, 10 The Griggs machine has an impeller like a pump. It produces 15% more energy than it consumes. Griggs's machines are running in the 50 HP range.

[GIF drawing Pick the icon to view an the Griggs Pump.



In Moldova, Russia, the Yusmar device which, like the Griggs machine, operates on the principle of cavitation is claimed to produce 2 megawatts of excess electrical energy. 11

[GIF picture Historic picture. Pick the icon to view the test of the Yusmar device at Los Alamos Labs August 1996.


[GIF picture Yury Potapov in Russia. 1997.




[GIF animation.  This animation was make with Alchemy Mindworks Graphics Workshop.  A licensed copy of Graphics Workshop costs about $25. Pick the icon to view an animation of Yury Potapov's Yusmar energy generator.



This author has worked 9/96 working with Yury Potapov (inventor of the Yusmar device) in attempt to bring a commercial cold fusion cell to the market.


Pg_6 UP



Real media audio clip. 200 KB

Historic announcement! Dr. David J. Nagel explains his role in launching the department of enegy study on cold fusion. Recorded at the Naval Weppons Lab in July 2004. Presented with permission.



This chapter ends at the beginning; the beginning to the end of air pollution, the beginning of the end to the rape of the earth for fuel, and the beginning of an age of limitless energy. Thank you for taking the time to read it.






Pg_7 UP


NOTES


  1. "Cold Fusion A Challenge to Modern Science?"
    Edmund Storms, The Journal of Scientific Exploration
    Vol 9, No. 4, pp 585-594, 1995

  2. This device was invented and patented by Dr. Patterson of Sarasota, Florida. Patents: # 5,372,688 and #5,318,675

  3. ABC News ran a Nightline special about the Patterson Cell on February 7, 1996. Copies of the show can be obtained from ABC at 1-800-913-3434

  4. Low level nuclear reactions appear to have been discovered in 1913.
    "On the Appearance of Helium and Neon in Vacuum Tubes, Nature, February 13, 1913.

  5. Proceedings from ICCF6, Page 22

  6. "On One of Energy Generation Mechanism in Unitary Quantum Theory" Lev G. Sapogin, Department of Physics, Technical University Leningradsky prospect 64, A-319, 125829, Moscow

  7. http://164.195.100.11/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=5,273,635.WKU.&OS=PN/5,273,635&RS=PN/5,273,635

  8. "Replication of the Apparent Excess Heat Effect in a Light Water- Potassium Carbonate-Nickel Electrolytic Cell." Janis M. Niedra, Ira T. Myers, Gustave C. Fralick, and Richard S. Baldwin. http://techreports.larc.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/NTRS search for 107167

  9. The relationship between zero point energy and the luminescence observed in the cavitation devices has now reached main stream publications. Nature, 27 June 96, Page 736

  10. " Can Sound Drive Fusion in a Bubble? " SCIENCE, Vol 266, December 1994.

  11. The Yusmar Scientific Co.
    Fabrichnaya St. 4 Kishinev 27700S
    Republic of Moldova


Pg_7 UP


Additional Cold Fusion References

"Latest Cold Fusion Results Fail to Win Over Skeptics"
Chemical & Engineering News Vol 71, No 24, P 38, 6/14/1993

"Japanese Funds Warm a Conference of Cold Fusion Die-Hards in Maui"
The Wall Street Journal, Thursday December 9, 1993

"Cold Fusion Energy Output Can be Tamed, Research Says"
Electric Light and Power, November 1992

"Some Scientists Press Search for Cold Fusion Despite Failure of 89"
The Wall Street Journal, 7/14/94

"..Cold Fusion is a Nuclear Process.."
Popular Science, August 1993

Randell L. Mills, William R. Good "Fractional Quantum Levels of Hydrogen"
FUSION TECHNOLOGY, Vol. 28 (November 1995), pp. 1697-1719

The American Physical Society and cold fusion see:
http://www.aps.org/meet/MAR02/baps/abs/S7810.html

Scientific American on Sono Fusion:
http://www.sciam.com/explorations/2002/031802fusion/


// end of chapter 1 http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/cgi-bin/chapfwd.pl?chapter2.html=2 .............................................................................