Return to the clickable list of items
69) International conspiracy?
Ludwik Kowalski (May 30, 2003)
Department of Mathematical Sciences
Montclair State University, Upper Montclair, NJ, 07043
The item 68 ended with a quote from two electrochemists from Texas A&M, Bush and Lagowski. Their 1998 paper can be downloaded from the library at www.lenr-canr.org web site. Let me also quote from a paper of M. McKubre, F. Tanzella, P. Tripodi and P. Hagelstein. Their paper can also be downloaded from the above web site; its title is “The Emergence of a Coherent Explanation for Anomalies Observed in D/Pd and H/Pd System: Evidence for 4He and 3He Production.” The paper was presented at the 8th International Conference on Cold Fusion (Italy, 2000); the first three authors are from Stanford Research Institute, the last is from MIT.
After describing the apparatus used, and after showing several convincing graphs, the authors concluded: “There exists a strong time correlation between the rates of heat and helium production measured using on-line high-resolution mass spectrometry. In experiments performed using three different metal sealed cells, three different calorimetric methods, by electrochemical and gas loading means and with 4He analyses made at three different institutional laboratories, there is observed a quantitative or near-quantitative correlation between heat and 4He production consistent with the reaction:
d + d - -> 4He + 24 MeV (lattice)
Evidence for near-surface retention of 4He in the lattice can be used to accommodate the discrepancy between measured and expected yields of 4He. Evidence was obtained for excess heat production in the electrolysis of D2O using “double structured” cathodes, supporting original claims by Arata and Zhang (6). Associated with this result, although not quantitatively correlated to it, is the production of a significant amount of 3He within the cathode void volume, suggesting the presence of a second nuclear reaction. The origins of this 3He and its theoretical implications are being explored.”
Why are these authors accused of being voodoo scientists? Are they trying to deceive us by presenting fraudulent data? I do not think so. Their papers are not different from those published by mainstream scientists. The instruments they use are highly specialized and not available to typical teachers. That is why a panel of experts should be appointed to evaluate major cold fusion claims.