5 ms·
I agree with the general sentiment wrt this article, but I can address your first objection: quantum tunneling. Just like in those old (and real, even though en
by RBerenguel 13y ago
I agree with the general sentiment wrt this article, but I can address your first objection: quantum tunneling. Just like in those old (and real, even though energetically deficient) muon-catalysed cold fusion devices
- apsec112 13y agoQuantum tunneling increases the rate of energetically favorable reactions, but it can't create energy from nowhere. Eg. in the muon catalysis case, the reaction (D + T -> He4 + H) produced a huge amount of energy as soon as nuclei could "tunnel through" the barrier. In this case (p + e -> n + v), no energy is produced even after the barrier is overcome; the energy used to overcome the Coulomb barrier goes into the mass of the neutron. Hence, that energy still must come from somewhere.
- RBerenguel 13y agoYes, I realised this a while after answering. A pity muons are so expensive to generate, since at method is theoretically and effectively beautiful. Hope is the last thing you lose, but it's pretty clear this particular case of "cold fusion" is (as the debunking article linked above) shenanigans.