>>> Thanks for showing interest in my posting...I am curious as to
>>> how/why you arrived at your conclusion. If you don't mind and if you
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> used to make outrageous claims - and any detractors being branded as
> "part of the conspiracy".
OK. Now I recall the whole picture.
The formal topic is "nuclear fusion" (that which proceeds daily near
the surface of our very dear sun. As you may recall, fusion is now known
to occur when the nucleus of two or more atoms collide with sufficient
force so as to overcome the +><+ repulsion. For stable fused nuclear
pairs which also have a combined stable mass that is less than the sum
of their previous separate masses, the mass loss is that of ejected
particles and any energy release in the form of the kinetic energy of
the ejected particles plus the kinetic energy of the formed heavier
atom. Generally this energy excess occurs from the combination of light
atoms, hydrogen & helium being the most common. Excess Combination
energy can occur for many atom types up through Iron. In the Iron range
of masses, it's a draw. For heavier atoms to combine, energy input is
needed. The only place where such very excess energy is available is in
the cores or reaction layers of large stars. When those very large stars
blow up, the remnants "scatter to the four winds". The lighter atoms
form bodies we commonly see through telescopes, or may not see as they
are cold bodies (e.g. Earth). The heavier atoms agglomerated along with
the lighter gravitate to the center of those bodies. Lacking the
pressure to stabilize the heaviest of atoms, they decay, releasing heat
slowly in the center of said bodies, hence our Earth's hot interior,
volcanism, etc. But I diverge...
The search for means to cause fusion, and most recently cold fusion,
has lead many researchers along many avenues.
One such avenue is to find force mechanisms that are especially capable
of immediately forcing lighter atoms together in processes that proceed
on the atomic scale. One such effect is the implosion cycle of common
cavitation* in water. Water has the necessary light atoms; two hydrogen
atoms. Pushing two molecules of water together with mighty speed and in
huge quantities seems like a logical step toward fusion, especially at
room temperature, or when at high pressures, not very high temperatures.
*[Cavitation was first observed (still occurs daily) on ship propellers
and many high pressure water pumps. Near the tip of a propeller turning
in any liquid, a great negative pressure occurs on the back side of that
tip. As soon as that pressure is more negative than the ambient pressure
plus the vapor pressure of the liquid at that temperature, evaporation
occurs and a bubble forms. The bubbling of boiling water is the same
phenomenon. As the water parcel with bubble moves onward to another
location milliseconds later, the pressure there may no longer be
negative, so the bubble collapses into itself (i.e.., 'implodes'),
emitting a 'smack' sound. It soon became known with ships that this
effect was severely damaging to the propeller blade in the long term.
Chemical etching was occurring that slowly ate away the propeller blade.
Submarine operators hate cavitation because of the noise it makes,
betraying their position, so the operational rules of submarine travel
include strategies to NOT drive their screws into cavitation. But I
diverge again...]
Acousticians encountered the cavitation phenomenon in sound transducers
sending high level sound into water, as there, too, a large negative
pressure occurs on the negative half cycle of oscillation, and at any
audio or ultrasound frequency. Focusing transducers, i.e. the ultrasound
"bowl" type transducer where the wavelength is so short that the bowl
appears like a segment of a parabolic reflector. The sound at moderate
amplitude all converges at the radius of curvature center of the bowl,
causing sound amplitude many times that at the originating surface of
the bowl. Here, profuse cavitation occurs (plus the nonlinear effect of
"acoustic steaming" where water flows in the direction of sound
propagation, causing a curious "fountain" effect). Such cavitation bowls
are often filled with cleaning solvents to clean small items such as
small mechanical parts and watches.
In the 1960's it was demonstrated widely that when such cavitation in
water is viewed in total darkness, one can see by eye that flashes of
light occur, typically of a blue white color. Subsequent study of that
light showed it to be in reality flashes of light not more than some
picoseconds (10^-12 s) in duration. This short time factor easily leads
subsequent scientists to search for the holy grail called 'Cold Fusion'.
I have not read the famous (infamous) reports in detail, but I have
known of the intricacies of cavitation for many years.
This light emission effect clearly demonstrates that the molecules of
water are being dashed together with such force that the hydrogen atoms
are being torn from the associated oxygen atoms. Light pulse emission
occurs while the dissociated hydrogen atoms are resettling in with new
oxygen mates.
Never being idle, experimenters extrapolated on this phenomenon and
speculated that it might be feasible to push cavitation a lot harder,
typically under higher ambient pressures and higher acoustical
amplitudes, to get into the realm of atom-on-atom impacts where the
H+><+H repulsion barrier is penetrated hopefully to result in fusion
(along with energy, aka 'heat', release) occurs.
The indicator of success would be the sudden appearance of more heat in
the cavitating solution that would otherwise occur during normal
cavitation.
The false alarm that occurred some years ago may have only been
mistaking the low-level heat generated by the profusion of general
energy dissipation due to all the physical impacts that occur during the
course of normal "cavitation", or just plain bad calorimetry measurement
procedures. (My opinion.)
Angelo Campanella
Don Pearce - 06 Aug 2007 16:06 GMT
> The search for means to cause fusion, and most recently cold fusion,
>has lead many researchers along many avenues.
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>huge quantities seems like a logical step toward fusion, especially at
>room temperature, or when at high pressures, not very high temperatures.
The big problem here is that hydrogen has no neutrons - hence there
are none to fuse. You need Deuterium, or preferably Tritium as a
minimum for cold fusion. This was the first gotcha that exposed
Fleischmann and Pons. They agreed at a meeting that a control
experiment using ordinary water was needed, and having reported that
it "did not provide the expected baseline" they went quiet, and one by
one everybody else did too.
d

Signature
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com
SB - 11 Aug 2007 02:36 GMT
Hey thanks for the input....I would love to start a thread on this...anyone
have additional information?
Steve
>>>> Thanks for showing interest in my posting...I am curious as to how/why
>>>> you arrived at your conclusion. If you don't mind and if you have
[quoted text clipped - 111 lines]
>
> Angelo Campanella