Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Discovery)   Five reasons cold fusion is bunk   (news.discovery.com) divider line 12
    More: Sad, cold fusion, reasons cold fusion, nuclear reactions, fusion reactors, superconductivity, nuclear fissions, deuterium, laws of physics  
•       •       •

4139 clicks; posted to Geek » on 28 May 2013 at 9:20 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2013-05-28 10:01:58 AM  
2 votes:

Mytch: Should be 5 reasons why the E-Cat is bunk, considering that's all they're talking about.


Some of that's the E-Cat, some of it's cold fusion itself.

Cold fusion isn't possible by physics as we know it. This doesn't make it impossible: its discovery would upend our understanding of physics, but that has happened before. It could happen again, though it seems unlikely.

But if it ever does happen, it's certainly not going to be because of the E-Cat. That thing is bunk.
2013-05-28 09:29:16 AM  
2 votes:
Should be 5 reasons why the E-Cat is bunk, considering that's all they're talking about.
2013-05-28 03:01:26 PM  
1 votes:

pkellmey: Probably the very far future, but none of the reasons given are things that will forever prove to be impossible to overcome with enough effort or ingenuity.


media.tumblr.com

That is not how science works. Science is not research + time = anything you want.
2013-05-28 02:34:37 PM  
1 votes:
I will just leave this here:

The Gamow Factor or Gamow-Sommerfeld Factor, named after its discoverer George Gamow, is a probability factor for two nuclear particles' chance of overcoming the Coulomb barrier in order to undergo nuclear reactions, for example in nuclear fusion. By classical physics, there is almost no possibility for protons to fuse by crossing each other's Coulomb barrier, but when George Gamow instead applied quantum mechanics to the problem, he found that there was a significant chance for the fusion due to tunneling.
This probability increases rapidly with increasing particle energy, but at a given temperature the probability of a particle having a high energy falls off rapidly, following the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution. Gamow found that, taken together, these effects mean that for any given temperature, the particles that actually fuse are mostly in a (temperature-dependent) narrow range of energies known as the Gamow window.
2013-05-28 11:15:48 AM  
1 votes:
Has there been a discussion of the 'cold fusion' bomb at the beginning of Star Trek to neutralize a volcano?

I may have missed the exact wording (perhaps it' a volcano neutralizer that just happens to be cold fusion powered).  Had to explain to my wife that cold fusion is not an endothermic bomb.  Actually, they should have just called it an endothermic bomb without explaining how it works.  It would have been just as 'sciency' sounding as 'turbo lasers' without the head asplosion by anyone who isn't science illiterate.
2013-05-28 10:21:22 AM  
1 votes:

Tommy Moo: Hell, this doesn't even need a hidden DC power source. All it needs is an exothermic, non-nuclear chemical reaction to take place. I opened a vacuum sealed package of nanoparticulate cobalt a couple of months ago and I was astounded by how hot it became just from absorbing oxygen and/or water vapor from the air. I had to set it in a hood for a couple of hours before I could pick the jar back up with my bare hands.


Didn't that kind of ruin the contents?

Also, I'm pretty sure you'd have a hard time coming up with a purely chemical reaction that would generate this much heat over a period of days or weeks with such a small quantity of material. That's the point the "investigators" were making in the "paper" (such as it is).

To get the kind of results described in the paper, you need something more than a simple chemical reaction. You need to cheat. It looks like readers have come up with a number of possibilities that are a lot more likely than cold fusion.

/would love to be wrong
//willing to gamble exactly $0.00 on this particular horse, though
2013-05-28 10:12:08 AM  
1 votes:
The reaction in the universe that makes copper requires a neutron, a star that has collapsed and become extremely dense. The only place they are found in abundance on Earth is near nuclear reactors or in radioactive materials.

I read these sentence several times and couldn't figure out what the fark the writer was saying. And then, I realized that the writer had confused neutrons (particles used in fission reactions) with neutron stars (large celestial bodies made up mostly of neutrons). Neutron stars have NOTHING to do with the reaction the writer refers to.

I'm no physicist, but when I see errors like that, I have to question the author's credentials as a science writer.  If you want to examine the idea of cold fusion, there are better explanations of why it won't work that are written by actual scientists.
2013-05-28 10:09:39 AM  
1 votes:
Hell, this doesn't even need a hidden DC power source. All it needs is an exothermic, non-nuclear chemical reaction to take place. I opened a vacuum sealed package of nanoparticulate cobalt a couple of months ago and I was astounded by how hot it became just from absorbing oxygen and/or water vapor from the air. I had to set it in a hood for a couple of hours before I could pick the jar back up with my bare hands.
2013-05-28 09:52:28 AM  
1 votes:
Here are five reasons that cold fusion probably can't work

You know, that would have been a better farking headline, you jackasses.
2013-05-28 09:52:00 AM  
1 votes:
Got the text for the slide ready, Johnson? Good, and just in time. We go to press in a minute.

Fusion reactions create heavier elements out of lighter ones -- but not just any heavy element.

Good start.

The evidence of real fusion is in the kinds of elements that come out of any machine. Rossi initially claimed to be making copper out of nickel.

Not bad... Throw in some science.

But the addition of a proton to nickel to make copper requires so much energy that not even dying stars that are collapsing into themselves, aka supernovas, can do it.

Great. Now take it home.

The reaction in the universe that makes copper requires a neutron, a star that has collapsed and become extremely dense.

... uh, that's not right. Damn. Too late to fix it. Quick, finish it.

The only place they are found in abundance on Earth is near nuclear reactors or in radioactive materials.

Think anyone will notice?
2013-05-28 09:35:27 AM  
1 votes:
2013-05-28 09:29:51 AM  
1 votes:
I really really hate when people unequivocal finalized statements like this. It's like a dare.
Humans are the premiere creatures of figuring out ways to mess with the universe. Just about the time someone puts something like "can't be done" into print is the time that someone else makes the discovery it can be done.
 
Displayed 12 of 12 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report