infinite energy
new energy foundation
who are we?
apply for grants
donate to nef
infinite energy magazine
  about the magazine
subscribe
subscribe
subscribe
back issues
read ie
author instructions
change of address
contact us
advertising
gene mallove collection
biography
publications
photographs
video
resources
  lenr-canr magazine index in the news
in the news
links
research
  mit and cold fusion report technical references
key experimental data
new energy faq
youtube

 

 

infinite energy
 
Issue


Issue 85
May/June 2009
Infinite Energy Magazine

Summary of Cold Fusion Sessions at American Physical Society and American Chemical Society Meetings

Scott Chubb

Important results associated with Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR) were presented at two key scientific society meetings in March. The American Physical Society (APS) March Meeting “Session B16: Cold Fusion” was held on March 16, 2009 in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. The “Symposium on New Energy Technology” was held from March 22-24 as part of the 237th American Chemical Society (ACS) Meeting & Exposition in Salt Lake City, Utah.

The APS session was rather low-profile, since it was occurring just days before the start of the ACS meeting. However, from my personal perspective, what happened in both the APS and ACS meetings was historic. But my perspective about this probably reflects my personal bias: I have been organizing the APS sessions for more than a decade, as a result of a long-standing tradition that began when the APS’ cold fusion naysayer Robert Park suggested to me that I should take the necessary steps to raise the tenor of debate (and lack of debate) about cold fusion in an open forum at the March Meeting of the APS. This year’s session included eight contributed papers which were presented over a relatively short (90 minute) period of time (the length of each paper was required to be less than 12 minutes).

The APS session began at 11:15 on Monday, March 16. The following papers were on the agenda: “Electrodynamic Component of Pd Electrical Conductivity,” Mitchell Swartz; “Study of the Palladium Hydrogen-Deuterium System,” Jan Marwan; “Investigation of the Cold Fusion Phenomenon in the Surface Region of Hydrogen Non-occlusive Metal Catalysts; W, Pt, and Au,” Hideo Kozima and Tadahiko Mizuno; “Sonofusion: Squeezed Deuteron Clusters, with Small Size, High Energy Density but No High Energy Particles,” Roger Stringham; “Time-Dependent Changes in Morphology and Composition of Solid Particles Collected from Heavy Water Electrolyte After Electrolysis with a Palladium Cathode,” John Dash and Q. Wang; “Study of Methods to Increase Cluster/Dislocation Loop Densities in Electrodes,” Xiaoling Yang and George Miley; “Metal Catalyzed Fusion: Nuclear Active Environment vs. Process,” Scott Chubb; “Potential Role of Energy Band Theory in Finite Solids and in Resonant Phenomena Involving Metal-Induced Fusion and the Fleischmann-Pons Effect,” Talbot Chubb; “Wave Nature of the Deuterium Flux Permeating Palladium Thin Film,” Xing Z. Li, Bin Liu and Qing Wei; “Isomorphic Properties of Atoms, Molecules, Water, DNA, Crystals, Earth, Solar System and Galaxies,” F.A. Gareev, G.F. Gareeva and I.E. Zhidkova.

Only John Dash, George Miley and myself were in attendance. The twenty or so scientists present in the audience did respond in a positive way, in comparison to how they have responded in the past. This is a good sign and suggests that progress is being made in communicating to mainstream physicists that cold fusion/LENR experimental science actually involves real phenomena.

Heightened interest in the cold fusion field occurred in late March mainly as a result of the ACS meeting. The 20-year anniversary certainly would have generated some press coverage on its own, but in a karmic turn of events, it happened that the ACS scheduled their meeting in Salt Lake City during the exact week that cold fusion made its mark on the world 20 years earlier in the same location. ACS cold fusion session organizer Jan Marwan was surely thrilled at the opportunity to hold the new energy session during this historic week in March. Initially, they had hoped to aim for a session on March 23 (the exact date of the Pons-Fleischmann announcement in 1989) but the sheer number of abstracts submitted allowed for a broadening of the session into three days, including March 23.

Google Alerts and searches for cold fusion were probably at an all-time high in March. At one of the press briefings held at the ACS meeting, representatives of the field spoke about the symposium and the relevant scientific discoveries that have been made since the 1989 announcement. The press briefing was moderated by Judah Ginsberg; fielding questions were John Dash, Mahadeva Srinivasan, Jan Marwan, Steve Krivit, Pamela Mosier-Boss and Antonella De Ninno. Local press were present and questions were also taken from participants on Ustream.

Mosier-Boss almost overnight appeared on the radar screen of most scientists (and laypeople) around the country. She reported that she had been involved with an effort (with Stanislaw Szpak and Frank Gordon) which obtained significant evidence associated with the conventional nuclear fusion process (involving the kinds of cold fusion experiments developed by Pons and Fleischmann). The fact that a representative from a well-established laboratory (sanctioned through funding from the Department of Defense) made such claims certainly led to increased interest and press coverage.

During the ACS symposium, one of the big bugaboos (which has blocked funding for cold fusion and also has been a source of confusion) about the possible nuclear nature of the associated effects was likely laid to rest: results were reported that show that neutrons, associated with conventional fusion are created at the right energies, and that more exotic forms of higher energy particle emission are also taking place.

The ramifications of the press briefing (which included a clip on a local NBC affiliated news show and much national print/web press) suggest that the long-lived embargo on reports about positive results is ending. How long it will take to have the embargo completely eliminated is an open question. I suspect that the recent events will have a positive impact. Pamela Mosier-Boss and her mentor, Stanislaw Szpak, not only have made important scientific discoveries that have helped the field to move forward, but through their outright persistence and scientific integrity, they have made what is potentially a more lasting scientific contribution. Great science often progresses a little bit at a time. Mosier-Boss, Szpak and Gordon have bitten off many little bits, and what they have done is making a big difference.

The talks at the ACS meeting were significantly more substantive than the APS presentations. Not only was each of them allotted a significantly longer period of time (25 minutes, as opposed to 12 minutes at the APS) but, effectively, each of them was an invited talk (which means greater publicity was involved in how they were presented to participants). As a consequence, scientific exchanges were able to take place before, during and after each session. Hence, the resulting scientific discourse was much more meaningful. As opposed to the mandatory, almost ritualistic format that is required for contributed talks at APS sessions, the ACS symposium has a considerably more dynamic format. Also, because of the efforts of Jan Marwan and Steven Krivit, a refereed proceedings will be published through the ACS as has been done for the past two sessions in 2007 and 2008. It is also worthwhile to point out that many of the presenters at the ACS symposium received funding from the New Energy Institute (managed by Krivit) to cover travel expenses; important scientific participation took place involving individuals from Europe and Asia which likely could not have taken place without this funding. It is important that Marwan and Krivit continue to organize these sessions at the ACS meeting, as it is a national stage to present the significant work being done. Approximately 10,000 scientists attend this meeting each year, so it is safe to assume that some will not only take notice of the session but possibly attend and exchange ideas.

Over 40 presentations were scheduled over a three-day period at the ACS meeting. Only three talks were not presented due to the author(s) not being able to attend. Readers of Infinite Energy are aware of the remarkable results that the group from the Space Warfare Systems Center, San Diego (SPAWAR) have obtained, as well as the wonderful work by Miles, the group at SRI, Arata and Zhang, Cravens and Letts, Iwamura, Kasagi, Takahashi and others. Most individuals attending these national meetings are not aware of any of the associated experimental results. For this reason, during the initial session and in two talks on the following day, a number of presentations were given that provided not only an overview of the field but also served as a form of tutorial about key results.

I will provide the list of papers for each session, followed by more in-depth discussion of some of the presentations. It is my understanding that many of the presentations from the symposium will be posted at:

www.newenergytimes.com/v2/conferences/2009/ACS/ACS-2009-Schedule-Abstracts.shtml

The Sunday morning session (“Low Energy Nuclear Reactions: Introduction and Overview”) included: “Introducing Low Energy Nuclear Reactions,” Jan Marwan; “Low-Energy Nuclear Reaction Research: 2009 ACS Update,” Steven Krivit; “Condensed Matter Nuclear Science Discoveries,” Scott Chubb, Sr. and Talbot Chubb; “From Cold Fusion to Condensed Matter Nuclear Science: 20 Years of Research,” Michael McKubre, presented by Francis Tanzella; “Twenty Year History of LENR Research Using Pd/D Codeposition,” Frank Gordon, Stanislaw Szpak, Pamela Mosier-Boss, Melvin Miles and Lawrence Forsley; “From the Proof of Principle to a Working Prototype,” Antonella De Ninno; and a last paper not presented, “Practical Use of Nuclear Quadrupole and Internal Magnetic Field Augmented LENR,” Dennis Cravens, Rod Gimpel and Vince Golubic.

Jan Marwan opened the meeting with an overview of what would be presented at the session and its significance, in the context of more general problems associated with our use of fossil fuels. In fact, significant evidence exists that cold fusion releases an entirely clean, benign form of energy that could revolutionize how energy is produced and consumed. For example, in one gallon of ordinary sea water, there is a sufficient (although quite small ~0.0002 gallon) amount of heavy water that can be used in cold fusion reactions to provide an automobile the necessary energy to allow it to travel approximately 5,000 miles. In one gallon of heavy water, the associated energy content is approximately 5,000 times greater (which, in principle, could provide a sufficient amount of energy to allow automobiles to travel 25 million miles). Marwan emphasized the complexity of the process and pointed out that in spite of the problem of communicating the science to the public, progress is being made and information about the associated phenomena is now appearing in peer-reviewed literature.

Steven Krivit provided a more detailed history of the field and emphasized that major problems have taken place in disseminating information about cold fusion. He pointed out that after many years, it appears that the negative stigma attached to the field finally seems to be disappearing. He cited the fact that valid information in new encyclopedias, published by Elsevier and John Wiley, is now beginning to appear. He also pointed out that although the most important physics journals (Nature, Science, and Physical Review) still maintain an embargo on their coverage of the field, other peer-reviewed journals are beginning to publish articles that are associated with cold fusion research. Krivit noted that one of the more prominent and vocal skeptics of the field, Robert Park, has been softening his criticism. (In fact, on the Friday following the ACS symposium, Park appeared to change his view when he referred to what had transpired during the ACS symposium as “real science” in his “What’s New” column.) Krivit spoke about some of the early history of the field and the fact that premature, inconclusive results presented by CalTech, MIT and the British laboratory Harwell during a session of the APS that took place on May 1, 1989, had seriously discredited the field, despite the fact that subsequently detailed analyses were performed that revealed flaws in these results.

Francis Tanzella, who presented on behalf of Michael McKubre, summarized some of the history of the effort at SRI to reproduce, understand and improve the excess heat measurements in the F-P effect and to correlate the excess heat effects with the appearance of helium-4, outside and near the surfaces of heat-producing Pd electrodes. From the outset, they assumed that there was a correlation between achieving sufficient loading and the creation of excess heat. In fact, during ICCF4, they provided evidence not only that achieving sufficient loading is necessary, but they correlated the excess power Pxs associated with the effect, in an empirical expression, for a 1 mm Pd electrode wire, to the square (x-xo)2 of the difference (x-xo), between the loading value x=ratio of deuterium (D) atoms to palladium (Pd) atoms, an effective minimum value xo=D/Pd~.875, and the difference, (i-i°), between the applied current density (i) and a minimal current density (i°~50-400mA cm-2) : Pxs = M (x-x°)2 (i-i°) |iD|, where iD~2-20 mA cm-2 is associated with the initial current density. Tanzella discussed a number of experiments they have conducted which showed correlation of excess heat with helium-4. These are summarized in the report that Hagelstein, McKubre, Nagel, Chubb and Hekman prepared for the re-review of cold fusion that occurred in 2004 (printed in the Proceedings of ICCF11 and online at www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/Hagelsteinnewphysica.pdf).

Frank Gordon summarized the work that has been done at SPAWAR for 20 years. In 1989, Stanislaw Szpak suggested the idea of electrolytically depositing Pd and D onto a silver (Ag) substrate simultaneously from a PdCl2/LiCl/D2O solution.  Over the years, they have published 23 papers in peer-reviewed journals. Key effects they have observed include: anomalous hot spots; anomalous X-rays; remarkable changes in surface morphology that are correlated with anomalous changes in the distributions of elements (potentially associated with transmutations), and, when externally applied magnetic or electric fields are present, the appearance of high energy particles (alpha particles, gamma rays, and neutrons) in tracks in plastic (CR39) films and in gamma ray detectors, located outside their electrolytic cells.

Antonella DeNinno summarized some of the early ideas involving a collaboration between Giuliano Preparata, Emilio DelGuidice and Martin Fleischmann. Preparata and DelGuidice suggested that a very different formalism, Quantum Electrodynamics (QED), might be relevant to cold fusion, while Fleischmann was aware that subtleties involving the role of electrodynamics can explain anomalies in chemistry (especially when surface effects are involved). De Ninno pointed out a number of the subtle, motivating factors associated with anomalies in the PdD and PdH systems that potentially could be related to subtleties involving QED. She provided additional details about the logic that Preparata used to develop a potentially important prediction, involving long wires that are “extremely” narrow. The arguments that have provided justification for this prediction have resulted from criticism that is primarily based on the “non-standard” language that Preparata invoked. At a fundamental level, what he proposed involved important effects associated with boundaries and the importance of finite size.

The Sunday afternoon session (“Low Energy Nuclear Transmutation”) included: “Composition of Particles in Heavy Water Electrolyte After Electrolysis,” John Dash and Qiongshu Wang; “Transmutation with Glow Discharge,” Irina Savvatimova and John Dash; “Reproducible Generation of Nuclear Particles During Electrolysis,” Richard Oriani; “Nuclear Transmutation of Isotopes in Biological Systems: History, Models, Experiments and Perspectives,” Vladimir Vysotskii and Alla Kornilova; “Nanonuclear Reactions in Condensed Matter,” Lawrence Forsley, Frank Gordon and Pamela Mosier-Boss; “Isotopic Changes of Elements Caused by Various Conditions of Electrolysis,” Tadahiko Mizuno; “Characterization of Distinctive Materials with Which to Generate Nuclear Transmutation,” Hideo Kozima; “Effect of Hydrogen Stoichiometry (X) on the Lattice Expansion in Metal-Hx Systems,” Nicolas Armanet; and “Understanding the Palladium-Hydrogen (Deuterium) Electrochemistry as Crucial Step to Approach Low Energy Nuclear Reactions,” Jan Marwan.

Lawrence Forsley provided a detailed analysis of the data that substantiated the claim that Pamela Boss made, concerning the evidence that 2.45 MeV neutrons are being created. This is based on an analysis that Forsley used, the studies of the CR39 films that they have performed and the manner in which they have inferred that neutrons are being produced and their energies. An important point is that to detect and measure the energies, and bound the values of these measurements most effectively, the CR39 films are required to be placed as close to the cathodes (where the co-deposited materials are located) as possible. But because this involves placing these films immediately above the associated Ag substrates (for example), these films are being placed in an environment where unusual forms of chemical reactions might take place. The tested potential errors associated with the detection of high energy particles in this new environment. To further monitor the accuracy of the measurements, CR39 films were also placed outside the electrolytic cells. Gamma ray detectors were also used to monitor Gamma ray emission outside the cells.

Forsley presented new results on the detection of gamma rays, and an analysis of a remarkable finding: the presence of charged particle tracks in regions (on the backsides of the CR39 films) that would require extremely energetic (greater than 30 MeV) particles potentially created from indirect interactions involving neutrons, through “knock-on” forms of reaction, in which incident neutrons associated with some form of interaction within each cell collide with nuclei within the CR39, leading to emission of charged particles. From this initial observation, and through a detailed analysis of the associated dynamics, Forsley was able to provide estimates of the associated neutron energies. This analysis is the basis of the inference that Pamela Boss alluded to: that 2.45 MeV neutrons are being created through the processes initiated through the SPAWAR protocol.

The Monday morning session (“Tritium, Neutron Production and Bubble Fusion”) included: “Characterization of Neutrons Emitted During Pd/D Co-deposition,” Pamela Mosier-Boss, Stanislaw Szpak, Frank Gordon and Lawrence Forsley; “Field–assisted Electroplating,” Julie Yurkovic, Stefanie Zakskorn, Neil Robertson and Hiroaki Saito; “Anomalous Tritium Production in CMNS,” Xing Z. Li; “Advances in Acoustic Inertial Confinement Bubble Nuclear Fusion,” Robert Block, Richard Lahey, Robert Nigmatulin and Rusi P Taleyarkhan; “When Bubble Cavitation Becomes Sonofusion,” Roger Stringham; “Observation of High Multiplicity Neutron Emission Events from Deuterated Pd and Ti Samples at BARC: A Review,” Mahadeva Srinivasan; “Observation of Neutrons and Tritium in a Wide Variety of LENR Configurations: BARC Results Revisited,” Mahadeva Srinivasan; “Discovery of Erzion Nuclear Reaction Tracks in the Space,” Yuri Bazhutov (not presented).

Mahadeva Srinivasan provided an important overview of some of the interesting results of experiments that took place in the Bhabha Atomic Research Center between 1989 and the mid-1990s (http://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/?page_id=463). Twelve separate teams, involving approximately 50 people, were involved. Srinivasan and his colleagues were already equipped to do relevant experiments because they had just purchased an electrolytic cell to make H2 gas (for a different experiment). Expertise at BARC involves nuclear measurements (tritium, neutrons, X-rays, and gamma rays). For this reason, the initial emphasis in their work involved detecting these kinds of decay products. Excess heat measurements were not done. Unique measurements were conducted, associated with detecting tritium, in electrolysis experiments in Pd. Autoradiographic techniques were also used in experiments involving gas-loaded titanium (Ti). A correlation between damaged regions and autoradiograph signals was observed. Following the kinds of protocols that were used at Frascati, they observed neutrons in experiments involving Ti chips that were heated after being dropped into liquid nitrogen. A remarkable “hysterisis” effect was observed two years after the initial experiments when neutron bursts were observed from a Ti sample.

Rusi Taleyarkhan explained many results of his work involving bubble fusion that, although not directly related to LENR, are quite significant.

The most important evidence that a nuclear effect related to conventional nuclear fusion is taking place was presented by Pamela Mosier-Boss. She summarized work conducted with Stan Szpak, Frank Gordon, and Lawrence Forsley. Although indirect, evidence does exist that supports the idea that 2.45 MeV neutron tracks are present in the CR39 films that they have used to detect energetic particles. An important point involves the required subtleties of the measurements and the fact that a detailed analysis of these films, which implicitly involves monitoring the time history of potential nuclear reactions based on a calibrated study of the associated tracks, is necessary. Within this context, significant evidence that the key signature of thermonuclear fusion involving the emission of 2.45 MeV neutrons does exist. But this particular reaction is triggered only when particular conditions are met. In fact, important evidence exists, associated with their work, that many more complicated higher energy particle emission effects probably are taking place. Considerable refinements in detecting all of these kinds of events are required before most mainstream physicists will accept them. In fact, a serious problem has resulted from the inherent biases associated with how nuclear effects have been detected in the past, based on the assumption that for a nuclear effect to take place, high energy particles are required to be emitted.

The Monday afternoon session (“Excess Heat Production”) included: “Reports of Anomalous Self-heating Events,” Steven Krivit; “Twenty Year Review of Isoperibolic Calorimetric Measurements of the Fleischmann-Pons Effect,” Melvin Miles and Martin Fleischmann; “‘Hot’ Deuteron Generation and Charged Particle Emission During Excitation of the Deuterium Subsystem in Metal Deuterides,” Andrei Lipson, Ivan Chernov, Alexei Roussetski, Aslan Tsivadze, Boris Lyakhov, Yuri Cherdantsev, Michael Melich and Eugeny Saunin; “Gas-loading Experiments for Self-sustaining Heat in CMNS,” Xing Z. Li; “Excess Heat and Electrical Characteristics of Type ‘B’ Anode-plate at Low Energy Nuclear Reactions,” Mitchell Swartz; “Anomalous Heat Generation During Hydrogenation of Carbon Hydride,” Tadahiko Mizuno; “Dual Laser Stimulation of Optical Phonons in Palladium Deuteride,” Dennis Letts, Dennis Cravens and Peter Hagelstein; “Deuterium Gas Charging Experiments with Pd Powders for Excess Heat Evolution,” Akira Kitamura, Takayoshi Nohmi, Yu Sasaki, Tatsuya Yamaguchi, Akira Taniike, Akito Takahashi, Reiko Seto and Yushi Fujita.

Peter Hagelstein gave an important talk summarizing novel work inspired by his ideas which involved experiments that Dennis Letts and Dennis Cravens conducted. The experiments included inducing precisely tuned IR-induced phonon transitions to trigger potential forms of excess heat; the excess heat is suggested by the possibility that the associated transitions (involving localized phonons) potentially can induce cold fusion reactions. A key aspect of these experiments involves precisely exciting particular transitions that might induce the associated effect, using a simple, well-defined procedure. It is difficult to induce IR transitions in these kinds of experiments because of the many forms of IR adsorption and transmission. The novel idea that Hagelstein suggested is that by effectively “beating” (causing interference between) the signals from two lasers on the surface of the electrodes that are used in these experiments, the associated forms of IR transitions can be induced. A key point is that each laser used in the “beating process” can be tuned to a frequency that effectively can freely propagate within the cell environment, and the “beating” phenomenon can take place in an effectively elastic form. In these experiments, a novel, interesting correlation was found between the particular transitions that Hagelstein’s theory suggested might trigger excess heat and what was observed. Further investigation of the correlation, possibly quantified by theoretical suggestions for additional correlations, appears to be warranted.

Akito Takahashi presented information about an experiment (associated with replicating the excess heat effects that have been observed by Arata and Zhang, A-Z) when D2 gas is loaded into powders, containing Pd or Pd embedded in ZrO2. Pedagogically, in the long term, the associated experiment might prove to be more important than the SPAWAR experiments, as well as most of the other cold fusion experiments that have been conducted since 1989. The reason is that the demonstration of the A-Z gas-loading effect by this group, after such a short period of time, suggests that the experiment is relatively easy to replicate. Also, the fact that the effort involved a multi-institutional collaboration indirectly suggests a similar conclusion.

In my opinion, the most important paper (and associated research) was presented by Mitchell Swartz. He has pioneered a very different approach, unlike the classic electrolytic experiments that Pons and Fleischmann conducted. One major difference is that Swartz uses well-defined deuteron transport “flow” equations which model the flow of electrical charge, the flux of deuterons through the materials (including the loaded Pd), and in particular changes in the associated fluxes at the boundaries of the electrodes. The equations have indicated that Swartz minimizes gas evolution for optimal cold fusion performance. Swartz performs his experiments using “pure” D2O (99.99%, without the salts such as LiOD). Because “pure” water does not readily conduct electricity, very high “impedances/resistances” result  in his approach. They make relatively low currents (milliamps) and high voltages (hundred of volts). An important point is that when this alternative form of cold fusion is used, effects associated with minor changes in voltage and current can be carefully monitored.

In the more classic and common approaches to the field which are associated with electrolysis, the product effects associated with input power are not as precisely correlated because the competing electrical conduction processes vary greatly by amount and type of salt and the interaction with its anions and cations at the surfaces of the electrodes. By contrast, in the “pure” water systems that Swartz employs, as a consequence of the absence of competing conduction and polarization processes, input power (input voltage * input current) in these kinds of experiments can be more directly correlated with cold fusion response. Swartz has identified what he refers to as “optimal operating points” (OOPs), which show a narrow correlation between product output, either excess heat or helium produced, and electrical input power.

In Swartz’s low-current electrolysis experiments, he has previously reported on precise calorimetry with noise measurement, the use of dual control calorimetry (using a complete second calorimetry cell connected in electrical series), methods of monitoring and driving effects associated with highly non-equilibrium forms of chemistry (commonly referred to as “heat after death”), and anomalous cold fusion surface effects (such as the non-thermal IR emissions which he reported at ICCF14). Swartz has also developed a novel idea, creating “metamaterials” from PdD and other materials. These metamaterial are shaped structures called “PHUSORS” that impact the output beyond the normal observed material properties (other metamaterials can also change the index of refraction of light that it can actually become negative). The PHUSOR-type cathodes work by having their shape actually change what the normal distribution of the applied electric field intensity would be.

Swartz provided an overview of a new set of experiments involving the interplay between Pd deuteron loading (through externally applied electric fields from the solution) and internal Pd electrical conductivity (observed by 4-terminal measurements at 1 Hertz), and its association with successful cold fusion. His 6-terminal Type “B” PHUSOR devices were driven at their OOP by two electrical current sources, to drive loading and flux, and to interrogate the Pd metal. With an excess heat of ~175% (1.99 watts), this was followed optically, in the near-IR, by calorimetry and by heat flow measurement. By observing at fast rates, Swartz has found two temporal components to palladium 4-terminal electrical conductivity. He showed one with a time constant less than 5 seconds, unlikely to be loading, and more likely to be a second effect, electrodynamic, or an ordering of the lattice.

The Tuesday morning session (“Low Energy Nuclear Reactions: Theoretical Approach”) included: “Energetics of Condensed Matter Cluster Reactions in Nanostructured Palladium,” George Miley, Xiaoling Yang, Nie Luo and Heinz Hora; “Texas A&M University: Early Days in Cold Fusion,” John Bockris (presented by Jan Marwan); “Overcoming the Coulomb Barrier and Related Effects Through Resonant Electromagnetic Dynamics and Quantum Mechanics in the Fleischmann-Pons Effect,” Scott Chubb, Sr.; “Simulating Anomalies in Metal Deuterides,” Peter Hagelstein and Irfan Chaudhary; “Understanding Low Energy Nuclear Reactions,” Antonella De Ninno; “Basics of Deuteron-cluster Dynamics by Langevin Equation,” Akito Takahashi; “Cold Nuclear Fusion Mechanism at Crack Tip Spearhead Located Deep Under the Ground,” Anatoly Shestopalov (not presented).

The final afternoon session on Tuesday (“General”) included: “Physical Model and Direct Experimental Observation of Water Memory and Biophysical Activity of Magnetic-activated Water,” Vladimir Vysotskii and Alla Kornilova; “Kinetics in a Unique Sodium Borohydride Regenerative Fuel Cell,” George Miley, Nie Luo, Xiaoling Yang, Kyu-Jung Kim and Grant Kopec; “Catching CO2 in a Bowl,” John Tossell; “Photoelectrochemical Characterization of Semiconductor Materials for Solar Water Splitting,” Todd Deutsch and John Turner.

This was an historic meeting on many levels. For the first time, reproducible evidence of neutrons possessing the energy associated with conventional fusion was presented. Although the number of neutrons produced in these experiments is significantly smaller than the number that is required to produce the excess heat, the fact that they are being produced demonstrates that low-levels of conventional fusion reactions are taking place. It is also significant that the gas-loading experiments of Arata and Zhang have been replicated, independently. And, Mitchell Swartz has developed not only a reproducible procedure for creating excess heat, but a procedure for studying the effect systematically in a time-dependent fashion that has allowed him to identify new phenomena associated with anomalous changes in conduction that precede the onset of excess heat. Finally, the press briefing and ensuing coverage was very important. This was the first time that such extensive press coverage of a cold fusion event has taken place since 1989.



Copyright © 2014-2015. All rights reserved. E-mail: staff@infinite-energy.com