3 ms·

> ""cold fusion", "infinite energy machines"" I don't think it's fair to lump those two together. I think we all accept the energy potential in fusion is there

> ""cold fusion", "infinite energy machines"" I don't think it's fair to lump those two together. I think we all accept the energy potential in fusion is there, and it also seems possible that the most efficient way to tap that energy is one we have yet to fully understand. The most efficient method could be found under the 'cold fusion' umbrella, and even if these methods turn out to be a different process than fusion, we still may end up learning something new anyway. For example, sonoluminescence has been linked to fusion before, but even if the processes involved end up being different to fusion, it's still an interesting process: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJolILUbdNw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJolILUbdNw https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonoluminescence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonoluminescence The point is, it doesn't serve us to dismiss fields of scientific research that have some chance of bringing us a new understanding of the science involved, even if we end up scrambling around in the dark for a long time.

grogers 11y ago
Sonofusion was also fraudulent: http://www.nature.com/news/2009/091123/full/news.2009.1103.html http://www.nature.com/news/2009/091123/full/news.2009.1103.h...
- ZenoArrow 11y ago
  You missed the point. I said even if the process turns out to be something other than fusion, interesting phenomena like sonoluminescence are still worthy of study anyway. Same with this E-Cat stuff, clearly there's something we haven't formally explained yet going on, and the experiment has been shown to be reproducible, sounds worthy of study to me, even if it turns out to be a different process than fusion, and even if it turns out it can be explained without changing our scientific models.
rdtsc 11y ago
I lumped them together because those are common area where scammers concentrate on. It is sort of a sweet spot of "sounds sciency" not too hard to grasp. Because the fusion is "cold" don't have to build a Tokamak so just a few millins for some hoses and voltmeters, and other such things sounds plausable. In general I was talking about scammers in such instances. I think in this particular case this guy is a scammer. Yes fusion and energy research is a very worthwhile thing to study, but it is very doubtful this is happening with this guy.
mahranch 11y ago
> I don't think it's fair to lump those two together. Heh, I disagree. I hold almost the exact opposite view and believe it is perfectly fair to lump those two together. Cold fusion requires overcoming the Coulomb barrier at room temperature. Do you have any idea how impossible that is? It's just as impossible as accelerating an object faster than light, or me spontaneously quantum tunneling through my floor into my basement. So yes, perpetual motion machines, unicorns and cold fusion all belong to the same area of science and deserved to be lumped together. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coulomb_barrier https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coulomb_barrier
- ZenoArrow 11y ago
  You mentioned the Coulomb barrier makes this impossible. Can you comment on this story about Edward Teller? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10780632 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10780632 Seems to me it's not proven beyond doubt that it's impossible. Furthermore, even if it does prove to be impossible it could turn out to be a 'useful mistake' if new science needs to be developed to explain the phenomena that were once labelled as 'cold fusion', that's what interests me more, I don't really mind what it's called.
  - mahranch 11y ago
    > Can you comment on this story about Edward Teller? It's an anecdote of an anecdote. It's literally third person hearsay, with Teller saying "Oh, it "might" be possible". We don't even know he said that. Even on the off-chance he did, it means practically nothing. There are similar wordings and phrasing done about breaking light speed from respected physicists. You could probably get one to say "might" as well. It doesn't mean there's any validity behind it. The point and facts still stand - you're not going to break the Coulomb barrier at room temp. It's an impossibility.

grogers 11y ago

Sonofusion was also fraudulent: http://www.nature.com/news/2009/091123/full/news.2009.1103.html http://www.nature.com/news/2009/091123/full/news.2009.1103.h...

ZenoArrow 11y ago
You missed the point. I said even if the process turns out to be something other than fusion, interesting phenomena like sonoluminescence are still worthy of study anyway. Same with this E-Cat stuff, clearly there's something we haven't formally explained yet going on, and the experiment has been shown to be reproducible, sounds worthy of study to me, even if it turns out to be a different process than fusion, and even if it turns out it can be explained without changing our scientific models.

rdtsc 11y ago

I lumped them together because those are common area where scammers concentrate on. It is sort of a sweet spot of "sounds sciency" not too hard to grasp. Because the fusion is "cold" don't have to build a Tokamak so just a few millins for some hoses and voltmeters, and other such things sounds plausable. In general I was talking about scammers in such instances. I think in this particular case this guy is a scammer. Yes fusion and energy research is a very worthwhile thing to study, but it is very doubtful this is happening with this guy.

mahranch 11y ago

> I don't think it's fair to lump those two together. Heh, I disagree. I hold almost the exact opposite view and believe it is perfectly fair to lump those two together. Cold fusion requires overcoming the Coulomb barrier at room temperature. Do you have any idea how impossible that is? It's just as impossible as accelerating an object faster than light, or me spontaneously quantum tunneling through my floor into my basement. So yes, perpetual motion machines, unicorns and cold fusion all belong to the same area of science and deserved to be lumped together. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coulomb_barrier https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coulomb_barrier

ZenoArrow 11y ago
You mentioned the Coulomb barrier makes this impossible. Can you comment on this story about Edward Teller? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10780632 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10780632 Seems to me it's not proven beyond doubt that it's impossible. Furthermore, even if it does prove to be impossible it could turn out to be a 'useful mistake' if new science needs to be developed to explain the phenomena that were once labelled as 'cold fusion', that's what interests me more, I don't really mind what it's called.
- mahranch 11y ago
  > Can you comment on this story about Edward Teller? It's an anecdote of an anecdote. It's literally third person hearsay, with Teller saying "Oh, it "might" be possible". We don't even know he said that. Even on the off-chance he did, it means practically nothing. There are similar wordings and phrasing done about breaking light speed from respected physicists. You could probably get one to say "might" as well. It doesn't mean there's any validity behind it. The point and facts still stand - you're not going to break the Coulomb barrier at room temp. It's an impossibility.