Hot fusion

Email this page to a friend

Want news about Hot fusion and more e-mailed to you? Click here for free email alerts

As cold fusion events demonstrate, modern science is ruled by conformity, not the search for scientific truth Mike Adams, the Health Ranger See article keywords and concepts

If you think back to 1989 and look at the way this issue was suppressed, you realize that the credibility of cold fusion was destroyed by scientists who had career and ego investments in the theories of hot fusion. These were scientists who had published papers or invested their careers in multi-billion dollar experiments trying to generate free electricity from hot fusion. Thus, the idea that two chemists could create cold fusion with a tabletop experiment was viewed as outrageous.

Tabletop fusion breakthroughs are too hot for ideologically entrenched scientists Mike Adams, the Health Ranger See article keywords and concepts

How was he to know that certain areas of interesting results would be considered sacrilegious to the Church of hot fusion? LENR research is welcomed almost everywhere in the world -- Japan, Germany, Canada, Russia -- but not in the U.S. In the United States, the censorship of science has now become routine in areas like global warming and cold fusion, where the only researchers allowed to continue working are those who subscribe to the politics that says pollution does not affect the environment and there's no such thing as low-energy nuclear reactions.

Witness the treatment of Fleishman and Pons, two chemists who demonstrated tabletop fusion in the late 1980's and were immediately attacked, discredited and ostracized by advocates of hot fusion. Yet cold fusion experiments are alive and well today, with verified results being replicated in literally hundreds of labs around the world. Now a new round of attacks is being unleashed against Purdue researcher Rusi Taleyarkhan, who has gone public with his construction of a tabletop nuclear fusion device that's about the size of a coffee maker.

As cold fusion events demonstrate, modern science is ruled by conformity, not the search for scientific truth Mike Adams, the Health Ranger See article keywords and concepts

According to the hot fusion defenders, this was proof enough that cold fusion was a fraud. Of course, it is scientific insanity to suggest that just because something happens three out of ten times, it doesn't exist at all. In my view, three out of ten times is pretty darn good for an emerging science that is experimental in nature and very poorly understood. With refinement and additional experiments, that number could doubtlessly have been increased to six or seven out of ten, and perhaps eventually ten out of ten. Nevertheless, cold fusion was discredited.

These were scientists who had published papers or invested their careers in multi-billion dollar experiments trying to generate free electricity from hot fusion. Thus, the idea that two chemists could create cold fusion with a tabletop experiment was viewed as outrageous. Rather than examining the evidence with an open mind and try to understand and replicate what was going on, they sought to destroy it.

Reinheriting the Earth: Awakening to Sustainable Solutions and Greater Truths Brian O'Leary See book keywords and concepts

Many projects are run that way, including Manhattan and Apollo, and even the Tokamak hot fusion project. Ironically, the fusion project which is still well funded is the one that isn't succeeding, whereas as the one that is blackballed is the one that is succeeding. Meanwhile, the U.S. Government continues to fund the fossil fuel and nuclear programs to the tune of tens of billions of dollars a year. What would it take for a consensus of taxpayers to demand that the Department of Energy (or a replacement agency free of corruption) fund research on the newer options as well?

The funds required to make the necessary advances toward development will probably be a lot less than the billions spent by the hot fusion community, but certainly a lot more than is currently allocated to scattered researchers, which adds up only to a few million dollars cumulatively, except for BlackLight Power. Most of the researchers are retired and self-funded, which means they may not be actively around for much longer. In doing my research for Miracle in the Void, I quickly learned that most people have difficulty understanding the distinction between research and development.

He hypothesizes that, under the right chemical and thermal conditions, the hydrogen atom itself shrinks to a lower energy state with the release of large amounts of energy—yet with none of the many problems of a hot fusion reactor such as the Tokamak down the street from Mills. The process is clean and the only byproduct seems to be an inert form of collapsed hydrogen which he calls a hydrino. At first blush, this sounds like science fiction. Regardless of whether or not the theory is confirmed, the experiments clearly show excess energy.

Respected British new energy researcher Harold Aspden, formerly IBM's European Patent Director, recently put the cold fusion flap this way: "The hot fusion community was beside itself, outraged at the audacity of such a prospect. There was a conflict of interest, tempered by disbelief, and so we have witnessed a chapter in science that is quite shameful, besides being severely detrimental to our quest to find new non-polluting sources of energy..A drastic shake-up is needed to get energy science back on course."8 Hydrogen Gas Cells: The Trump Card Technology?

Since then, we have been struggling to develop hot fusion reactors to generate central-station electricity The problems with this option are technical challenges, high capital costs, continuing grid systems, more centralization than ever, and some pollution and radioactivity. It has only been within the past twelve years that a third set of revolutionary hydrogen technologies have emerged. The new hydrogen energy units of the Post-Modern Age will be small, decentralized, cheap and convenient. They will most likely satisfy both environmental and economic criteria for success in the future.

Department of Energy (DOE) convened a panel comprised mostly of hot fusion scientists, who seemed to nail the lid on the coffin of cold fusion. According to Mallove, the negative DOE report had the following consequences: 1) No special funding by the U.S. Government for further research; 2) Flat denial by the U.S.

FAIR USE NOTICE: The research quoted here is provided under the protection of Fair Use provisions and published by the 501(c)3 non-profit Consumer Wellness Center for the purposes of public comment and education. Authors / publishers may submit books for consideration of inclusion here.

TERMS OF USE: Read full terms of use. Citations of text from NaturalPedia must include: 1) Full credit to the original author and book title. 2) Secondary credit to the Natural News Naturalpedia as a research resource and a link to www.NaturalNews.com/np/index.html

This unique compilation of research is copyright (c) 2008 by the non-profit Consumer Wellness Center.

ABOUT THE CREATOR OF NATURALPEDIA: Mike Adams, the creator of this NaturalNews Naturalpedia, is the editor of NaturalNews.com, the internet's top natural health news site, creator of the Honest Food Guide (www.HonestFoodGuide.org), a free downloadable consumer food guide based on natural health principles, author of Grocery Warning, The 7 Laws of Nutrition, Natural Health Solutions, and many other books available at www.TruthPublishing.com, creator of the earth-friendly EcoLEDs company (www.EcoLEDs.com) that manufactures energy-efficient LED lighting products, founder of Arial Software (www.ArialSoftware.com), a permission e-mail technology company, creator of the CounterThink Cartoon series (www.NaturalNews.com/index-cartoons.html) and author of over 1,500 articles, interviews, special reports and reference guides available at www.NaturalNews.com. Adams' personal philosophy and health statistics are available at www.HealthRanger.org.