1995.07.27 / Gary Steckly /  Re: MIT cold fusion patent?
     
Originally-From: gsteckly@clark.dgim.doc.ca (Gary Steckly)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: MIT cold fusion patent?
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 95 16:23:40 GMT
Organization: Industry Canada

In article <3v54bb$92e@murphy.servtech.com> cjc@esi.roc.servtech.com
(Chris Costello) writes:
>From: cjc@esi.roc.servtech.com (Chris Costello)
>Subject: Re: MIT cold fusion patent?
>Date: 26 Jul 1995 10:10:51 GMT

>In article <3v4g34$899@otis.netspace.net.au>, rvanspaa@netspace.net.au
(Robin van Spaandonk) says:
>>
>>On 23 Jul 95 21:48:22 MDT, ivie@cc.usu.edu (Roger Ivie) wrote:
>>
>>>In Saturday's Deseret News (out of Salt Lake City) there's a front-page
>>>story claiming MIT has patented a "cold-fusionlike device". The inventers

>Robin - U.S. Patent No. 05411654, "Method of maximizng anharmonic oscillations
>in deuterated alloys", may be what you are looking for.

>Good Luck,

You can get this patent (minus the diagrams) from 
http://town.hall.org/patent/patent.html

For those without WWW browsers, here is the first part of the 
patent (and who was it who said the US government wasn't into cold fusion 
research?)

--excerpt begins----------------

WKU     Patent Number:                          05411654
SRC     Series Code:                            8
APN     Application Number:                     0868213
APT     Application Type:                       1
ART     Art Unit:                               112
APD     Application Filing Date:                19930702
TTL     Title of Invention:                     Method of maximizing
anharmonic oscillations in deuterated alloys
ISD     Issue Date:                             19950502
NCL     Number of Claims:                       16
ECL     Exemplary Claim Number:                 1
EXP     Primary Examiner:                       Valentine; Donald R.
NDR     Number of Drawings Sheets:              12
NFG     Number of Figures:                      22

INVT  Inventor Information
NAM     Inventor Name:                          Ahern; Brian S.
CTY     Inventor City:                          Boxboro
STA     Inventor State:                         MA

INVT  Inventor Information
NAM     Inventor Name:                          Johnson; Keith H.
CTY     Inventor City:                          Cambridge
STA     Inventor State:                         MA

INVT  Inventor Information
NAM     Inventor Name:                          Clark, Jr.; Harry R.
CTY     Inventor City:                          Townsend
STA     Inventor State:                         MA

ASSG  Assignee Information
NAM     Assignee Name:                          Massachusetts Institute of Technology
CTY     Assignee City:                          Cambridge
STA     Assignee State:                         MA
COD     Assignee Type Code:                     02

CLAS  Classification
OCL     Original U.S. Classification:                   204242
XCL     Cross Reference Classification:                 204292
XCL     Cross Reference Classification:                 204293
XCL     Cross Reference Classification:                 204290R
EDF     International Classification Edition Field:     6
ICL     International Classification:                   C25B  900
ICL     International Classification:                   C25B 1108
ICL     International Classification:                   C25C  700
ICL     International Classification:                   C25C  702
FSC     Field of Search Class:                          156
FSS     Field of Search Subclass:                       656
FSC     Field of Search Class:                          204
FSS     Field of Search Subclass:                       129.1;129.55;140
129.35;224 M;129.43;DIG. 9;129.35;129.7;242;292;293;290 R

UREF  U.S. Patent Reference
PNO     Patent Number:                                  3219481
ISD     Issue Date:                                     19651100
NAM     Patentee Name:                                  Chodosh et al.
XCL     Cross Reference to U.S. Classification:         204140

UREF  U.S. Patent Reference
PNO     Patent Number:                                  3620844
ISD     Issue Date:                                     19711100
NAM     Patentee Name:                                  Wicke et al.
OCL     Original U.S. Classification:                   429 44

UREF  U.S. Patent Reference
PNO     Patent Number:                                  4222900
ISD     Issue Date:                                     19800900
NAM     Patentee Name:                                  Bohl
XCL     Cross Reference to U.S. Classification:         156656

UREF  U.S. Patent Reference
PNO     Patent Number:                                  4284482
ISD     Issue Date:                                     19810800
NAM     Patentee Name:                                  Yahalom
OCL     Original U.S. Classification:                   204140

UREF  U.S. Patent Reference
PNO     Patent Number:                                  4925538
ISD     Issue Date:                                     19900500
NAM     Patentee Name:                                  Matsumoto et al.
XCL     Cross Reference to U.S. Classification:         204140

UREF  U.S. Patent Reference
PNO     Patent Number:                                  5078834
ISD     Issue Date:                                     19920100
NAM     Patentee Name:                                  Witte
OCL     Original U.S. Classification:                   156656

OREF  Other Reference

Clerjaud and Gelineau, "Strong spin-lattice coupling of Kramers doublets",
Phys. Rev. B, vol. 16, No. 1, Jul. 1977, 82-85.

Singh et al., "Effect of anharmonicity on superconducting metal-hydrogen
systems," Phys. Rev. B, vol. 18, No. 7, Oct. 1978, 3271-74.

Huberman et al., "Chaotic States of Anharmonic Systems in Periodic Fields,"
Phys. Rev. Let., vol. 43, No. 23 Dec. 1979 1743-47.

Kohara et al., "NMR Study of Size Effects in . . . ," Jnl. Phys. Soc. Jap.,
vol. 54, No. 4, Apr. 1985, 1537-1542.

Hamann et al., "Anharmonic vibrational modes of Chemisorbed H . . . ,"
Phys. Rev. B, vol. 37, No. 8, Mar. 1988, 3847-3855.

Hemmes et al., "Isotope effects and pressure dep . . . ," Phys. Rev. B.
vol. 39, No. 7, Mar. 1989, 4110-4118.

Fleschmann et al., "Electrochemically induced nuclear fusion . . . ," J.
Electroanal. Chem., 261, Mar. 1989, 301-308.

Jones et al., "Observation of cold nuclear fusion . . . ," Nature, vol.
338, Apr. 1989, 737-740.

Yokoyama et al., "Temperature-dependent EXAFS Study . . . " Jap. J. Appl.
Phys., vol. 28, No. 5, Apr. 1989, L851-L853.

Yokoyama et al., "Temperature dependent EXAFS Study . . . ," Physica B,
158, no month 1989, 255-256.

Johnson et al., "Hydrogen-Hydrogen/Deuterium-Deuterium . . . ," Mod. Phys.
Lett., vol. 3, No. 10, no month 1989, 795-803.

McNally, "On the possibility of a nuclear mass-energy . . . ," Fusion
Tech., vol. 16, May 1989, 237-239.

Prelas, "Advanced energy conversion methods for cold fusion," Fus. Tech.,
vol. 16, May 1989, 240-242.

Ragheb et al., "On the possibility of deuteron disintegration . . . ," Fus.
Tech., vol. 16, May 1989, 243-247.

Rogers, "Isotopic hydrogen fusion in metals," Fusion Tech., vol. 16, May
1989, 254-259.

Oka, "Electrochemically induced deuterium-tritium fusion," Fusion Tech.,
vol. 16, May 1989, 260-262.

Oka et al., "D.sub.2 O-fueled fusion power reactor . . . ," Fusion Tech.,
vol. 16, May 1989, 263-267.

Stacey, "Reactor prospects of muon-catalyzed fusion . . . ," Fusion Tech.,
vol. 16, May 1989, 268-275.

Yokoyama et al., "Temperature-dependent EXAFS study," Jap. J. Appl. Phys.,
vol. 29, No. 10, Oct. 1990, 2052-58.

Huot et al., "Low Hydrogen overpotential Nanocrystalline . . . " J.
Electrochem. Soc., vol. 138, No. 5, May 1991, 1316-1320.

Potvin et al., "Study of the Kinetics of the Hydrogen . . . ," J.
Electrochem. Soc., vol. 138, No. 4, Apr. 1991, 900-905.

Galbaatar et al., "On the influence of anharmonicity . . . ," Physica C,
185-189, no month 1991, 1529-1530.

Suryanarayana et al., "The structure and Mechanical Props . . . ," Mettal.
Trans. A, vol. 23A, Apr. 1992, 1071-1081.

Kolesnikov et al., "Strong anharmonic H(D) vibrations," Physica B 180 &
181, no month 1992, 284-286.

Cahen et al., "Room-temperature, Electric-field . . . ," Science, vol. 258,
Oct. 1992, 271-274.

Koleske et al., "Temperature dependence and anharmonicity of . . . ,"
Surface Science, 298, Jul. 1993, 215-224.

Fleischmann et al., "Calorimetry of the Pd-D20 System . . . ," Physics
Letters, A 176, Mar. 1993, 1-12.

Flach et al., "Integrability and localized excitations . . . ," Physical
Review E, vol. 49, No. 1, Jan. 1994, 836-850.

Reifenschweiler, "reduced radioactivity of tritium . . . ," Physics Letters
A, 184, Dec. 1994, 149-153.

LREP  Legal Information
FR2     Combined Principal Attorney(s):         Lober; Theresa A.

ABST  Abstract

For a condensed matter system containing a guest interstitial species such
as hydrogen or its isotopes dissolved in the condensed matter host
lattice, the invention provides tuning of the molecular orbital degeneracy
of the host lattice to enhance the anharmonicity of the dissolved guest
sublattice to achieve a large anharmonic displacement amplitude and a
correspondingly small distance of closest approach of the guest nuclei.
The tuned electron molecular orbital topology of the host lattice creates
an energy state giving rise to degenerate sublattice orbitals related to
the second nearest neighbors of the guest bonding orbitals. Thus, it is
the nuclei of the guest sublattice that are set in anharmonic motion as a
result of the orbital topology. This promotion of second nearest neighbor
bonding between sublattice nuclei leads to enhanced interaction between
nuclei of the sublattice. In the invention, a method for producing dynamic
anharmonic oscillations of a condensed matter guest species dissolved in a
condensed matter host lattice is provided. Host lattice surfaces are
treated to provide surface features on at least a portion of the host
lattice surfaces; the features have a radius of curvature less than 0.5
microns. Upon dissolution of the guest species in the treated host lattice
in a ratio of at least 0.5, the guest species undergoes the dynamic
anharmonic oscillations.

GOVT  Government Interest

                     GOVERNMENT RIGHTS IN THE INVENTION

     This invention was made with U.S. Government support under contract No.
F19628-90-C-0002, awarded by the Force. The Government has certain rights
in this invention.

BSUM  Brief Summary

                           FIELD OF THE INVENTION

     This invention relates to techniques for enhancing conditions for causing
anharmonic oscillations in protonated and deuterated alloys, leading to
enhanced electron tunneling between degenerate molecular orbitals and
enhanced nuclei interaction; and more particularly relates to materials
processing techniques for maximizing anharmonic oscillations of hydrogen
isotope nuclei in the interstices of such alloys.

                        BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

     Strong force nuclear interaction of hydrogen isotopes, deuterium in
particular, have been extensively studied in the regime above 30,000 eV.
Tunneling phenomena through the Coulomb barrier has been well
characterized and described as requiring tunneling through a barrier of
0.7 .ANG. in width and 400,000 eV in height.

     Interaction of nuclei in a palladium-deuterium condensed matter system has
been shown to be 10.sup.7 times more probable than the Coulomb tunneling
described above. The reposed successes in this system are best accounted
for by a palladium-deuterium interaction scheme occurring in the presence
of strong wave function overlap. It has been shown that such wavefunction
overlap may be achieved via specific molecular orbital degeneracy
conditions.

     Fundamental shifts in the molecular orbital topology of a condensed matter
system are known to be achievable via sub-micron, nanometrically-sized
surface features. Such nanometric space features alter the surface and
near surface electrochemistry of a condensed matter system, and thereby
effect the orbital topology of the system. This effect cannot be
attributed to a simple increase in surface area; rather, the surface
character at the nanoscale can only be predicted from a real-space
molecular orbital perspective. The resulting properties are purely
quantum-mechanical in nature, i.e., they cannot be derived by a simple
extension of continuum elasticity theory to the nanoregime. Thus,
nanometric, low-dimensional surface features can be expected to interact
with electromagnetic fields and radiation in a corresponding
quantum-mechanical nature.

                          SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

     In view of the above considerations, the inventors herein have recognized
that for a condensed matter system containing a guest interstitial species
such as hydrogen or its isotopes dissolved in the condensed matter host
lattice, tuning of the molecular orbital degeneracy of the host lattice
via the methods of the invention enhances the anharmonicity of the
dissolved guest sublattice to achieve a large anharmonic displacement
amplitude and a correspondingly small distance of closest approach of the
guest nuclei. The electron molecular orbital topology of the host lattice
creates an energy state giving rise to degenerate sublattice orbitals
related to the second nearest neighbors of the guest bonding orbitals.
Thus, it is the nuclei of the guest sublattice that are set in anharmonic
motion as a result of the orbital topology.

     The invention provides methods for enhancing this guest lattice
anharmonicity such that promotion of second nearest neighbor bonding
between sublattice nuclei leads to enhanced interaction between nuclei of
the sublattice.

     In one aspect, the invention provides a method for producing dynamic
anharmonic oscillations of a condensed matter guest species dissolved in a
condensed matter host lattice. In the method, host lattice surfaces are
treated to provide surface features on at least a portion of the host
lattice surfaces; the features have a radius of curvature less than 0.5
microns. Thereupon dissolution of the guest species in the host lattice in
a ratio of at least 0.5, the guest species undergoes the dynamic
anharmonic oscillations.

     In preferred embodiments, the host lattice comprises palladium, a palladium
silver alloy, preferably Pd.sub..77 Ag.sub..23, or nickel. The guest
species comprises hydrogen or deuterium. Preferably, the surface features
of the host lattice have a radius of curvature less than 0.3 microns, and
more preferably, less than 0.2 microns. The guest species is dissolved in
the host lattice preferably in a ratio of at least 0.8. In prefer, red
embodiments, the dynamic oscillations are characterized by an oscillation
amplitude of at least 0.5 .ANG. and an oscillation frequency of at least
10.sup.10 Hz. Preferably, the dynamic oscillations are sustained over time
such that interaction of guest species nuclei is initiated and maintained
over time.

     In other preferred embodiments the host lattice comprises a sheet of
palladium silver alloy, preferably wound to form a coiled tube of the
sheet. The gust species dissolution is preferably accomplished by
submerging the host lattice is an electrolytic solution of the guest
species. A platinum-coated anode is submerged in the solution and a
voltage is applied between the host lattice and the anode; preferably the
voltage is a square wave signal having a DC offset voltage, where the
signal is characterized by a time varying amplitude no less than 0.93
volts and a frequency between about 5 Hz and 2000 Hz.

     In other preferred embodiments, a host lattice is provided by a continuous
wire that is drawn through a diamond die which has been processed to
include relief structures on inner surfaces, the relief structures having
a radius of curvature less than 0.5 microns. Preferably, the wire is a
continuous nickel wire or a multiclad wire consisting of a nickel core
surrounded by a layer of palladium, and the inner surfaces of the die
result from laser processing of the inner surfaces.

     In other preferred embodiments, the host lattic surface is treated by
lapping the surface using a polishing slurry or scribing the surface with
a diamond stylus. Preferably, the diamond stylus has a working tip
diameter less than 0.5 microns; more preferably the scribing is
accomplished using an array of tips all positioned on a common stylus
fixture, and after the scribing, the surface is anodically etched with a
hydrochloric acid solution undergoing ultrasonic agitation.

     In other preferred embodiments, the lattice surface is treated by anodic
etching of the surface, or chemical vapor deposition or molecular beam
epitaxy of host lattice material on a substrate. Preferably, the host
lattice surface is treated by lithographically defining a pattern of
surface features on at least one surface and etching the patterned surface
to produce the surface features. Preferably, the patterned surface is
anodically etched, and the etching results in V-shaped surface grooves,
rectangular-shaped surface channels, or prismatic asperities.

     In another aspect, the invention provides apparatus for producing dynamic
anharmonic oscillations of a condensed matter guest species. The apparatus
includes a condensed matter host lattice having surface features of a
radius of curvature less than 0.5 microns on at least a portion of its
surfaces, and apparatus of dissolving the guest species in the host
lattice in a ratio of at least 0.5, the guest species undergoing the
oscillations upon dissolution in the host lattice.

     In preferred embodiments, the guest species is provided in an electrolytic
solution of the guest species; the electrolytic solution is preferably a
solution of heavy or light water and K.sub.2 CO.sub.3.

     In another aspect the invention provides a host lattice for causing a guest
species dissolved in the host lattice to undergo dynamic anharmonic
oscillations according to the methods of the invention. Preferably, the
host lattice comprises a coiled tube formed of a sheet of palladium silver
alloy. In other preferred embodiments, the host lattice comprises a
superlattice of first and second submaterials alternately layered in
layers of between 10 and 100 nanometers in thickness. Preferably, the host
lattice submaterials are nickel and copper, or nickel and palladium, or
copper and palladium. In other preferred embodiments, the host lattice
structure has been cold worked, and comprises a nanograined
polycrystalline morphology.

     Other features and advantages of the invention will be apparent from the
description of a preferred embodiment, and from the claims.

DRWD  Drawing Description....

-----------excerpt ends--------------


sorry...that's all my clipboard would hold.  Lot's more contained in the 
original patent text.

regards

Gary



cudkeys:
cuddy27 cudengsteckly cudfnGary cudlnSteckly cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszL cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.07.27 / Robin Spaandonk /  Re: Solar-panelled highways
     
Originally-From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion,sci.energy
Subject: Re: Solar-panelled highways
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 1995 05:12:55 GMT
Organization: Improving

On 25 Jul 1995 19:17:29 GMT, schultz@garnet.berkeley.edu (Richard
Schultz) wrote:

>In article <3v1tut$su@otis.netspace.net.au>,
>Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa@netspace.net.au> wrote:

>>My thoughts ran in this direction, because roofing would remove
>>light from the road itself, making driving more difficult (Unless the
>>solar roofing panels were semi-transparent (translucent?).

>Wouldn't having translucent solar panels kind of defeat the purpose?
>I mean, how do you propose to actually collect any energy if you're
>letting all of the light through?  Unless you're proposing to use
>Edmund Scientific-style radiometers (you know, those things that spin
>around when the sun shines on them) to run turbines.
>--
>					Richard Schultz
>             "an optimist is a guy
>              that has never had
>              much experience"
If current solar panels had a transparent backing, instead of opaque,
how much light would they allow to pass? I suspect quite a lot, given
that only about 25% is converted into electrical energy. Granted much
of the remainder is converted to heat, but a good portion of this
would be due to the opaque backing.
(If I'm making a complete fool of myself again, I'm sure you will all
let me know. :-)

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa@netspace.net.au>
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything,
Learns all his life,
And leaves knowing nothing.
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

cudkeys:
cuddy27 cudenrvanspaa cudfnRobin cudlnSpaandonk cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.07.27 / MARSHALL DUDLEY /  Re: Marshall Dudley hyhpothesis
     
Originally-From: mdudley@brbbs.brbbs.com (MARSHALL DUDLEY)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Marshall Dudley hyhpothesis
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 1995 11:15 -0500 (EST)

mrichar353@aol.com (MRichar353) writes:
 
-> 2. Electron capture by a proton or deuteron isn't energetically allowed
-> due to the mass difference between the neutron and proton. If it were,
-> then the electron in the hydrogen or deuterium atom would be captured
-> since there is all the time in the world for this to happen.
 
You bring up a very good point here.  If you have a He4 nucleus which is highly
excited (> 20Mev) then it could theoretically capture an electron.  The capture
would decrease the nucleus's energy by around 800Kev.  Then since H4
(Quatium?) is unstable, it would emit a beta particle, returning it back to
He4, but losing the energy of the beta in the process.
 
You state that a nucleus can only decay by specific energy (quantum) amounts.
However when I check beta and alpha emitters, I find that emitters will emit a
broad range of energies from virtually 0 energy up to a certain maximum.  How
do you reconcile these two "facts"?
 
                                                                Marshall
 
cudkeys:
cuddy27 cudenmdudley cudfnMARSHALL cudlnDUDLEY cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.07.27 / Matthew Kennel /  Re: Moessbauer Effect?
     
Originally-From: mbk@caffeine.engr.utk.edu (Matthew Kennel)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Moessbauer Effect?
Date: 27 Jul 1995 05:25:28 GMT
Organization: I need to put my ORGANIZATION here.

Dave Davies (dave.davies@anu.edu.au) wrote:
: Bill Page says:
:  >In any case, I think it has been argued fairly successfully here
:  >that these effects are much to small in magnitude to be directly
:  >applicable to "CF" effects. On the other hand, it may well be some
:  >kind of theoretical "foot in the door". I.e. can we think of any
:  >reason way that this effect could be operative at much higher
:  >energies?

: Someone with all the theory fresh in their head should be able to
: get a handle on this. 

: eg: What is the maximum phonon energy for a single xtal domain of a 
: certain size? 

: I did a very rough estimate of this a couple of years ago and decided 
: that it might be in the right ball-park but my estimate was *very* rough. 
: (Too rough even for me to discuss here:-).

Can you make sound loud enough that it could conceivably pop electrons
and positrons out of the vacuum?  (14Mev > 2*511kev)  What does
it mean to have a MeV phonon if the binding energies of nuclei holding 
them in  the lattice are O(1eV).

Even if you turn it up to eleven, geez that's pretty loud.

: A phonon can build up incrementally as it recruits more atoms so the 
: energy of the reaction could, hypothetically, be bled off relatively 
: slowly.

This doesn't make any sense. 

Phonons are a fancy name for quantum sound.

You have an excited nucleus.  Now just how is it supposed to make sound?

How can it "jiggle" back and forth against the lattice without emitting
something else?  Remember you have to conserve momentum.


: dave

cudkeys:
cuddy27 cudenmbk cudfnMatthew cudlnKennel cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.07.27 / C Harrison /  Periodic Post: Cold Fusion online at sunsite.unc.edu
     
Originally-From: harr@netcom.com (Charles (Chuck) Harrison)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Periodic Post: Cold Fusion online at sunsite.unc.edu
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 1995 03:17:37 GMT
Organization: Fitful

This message is posted periodically to inform readers about on-line
data sources related to "cold fusion" which are located at the 
University of North Carolina SunSITE server.

Two public WAIS (Wide Area Information Server) sources are online:
(1) Dieter Britz's Bibliography (periodically updated), and
(2) A sci.physics.fusion archive (1989 to present).
WAIS provides for multiple keyword searches in these databases.  It
does _not_ support boolean logic in the searching :-(.

1.  If you are directly connected to Internet, you can log onto a public
    WAIS server at the University of North Carolina:
    %telnet sunsite.unc.edu
    ...
    login: swais
    ...
    TERM = (unknown) vt100
    It takes a minute to load ...

    <use ? for online help>
    <use /cold to locate the cold-fusion "Source" - the Britz biblio>
    < or use /fusion to locate the fusion-digest source>
    <follow the prompts to select the source and enter your keywords
     for searching>

2.  If you have a "gopher" client, you can use it for WAIS access.  Many 
    university campuses provide gopher as a public information service.
2a. On most systems, you first select an option labeled "Other Systems",
    then from that menu select "WAIS based information".  Since each
    gopher site creates its own menus, I can't tell you exactly where to
    go from there.
2b. If you can gopher to SunSITE, at UNC, navigate the menus down thru
    SunSITE archives..All archives..Academic..Physics..Cold-fusion.
    You will find the searchable databases (typically marked <?>), as
    well as the primary-literature files discussed below.
2c. If you can 'telnet' but not 'gopher', you may telnet to
    sunsite.unc.edu and login as 'gopher'.  Then follow 2a or 2b above.

3.  If you have World Wide Web (WWW) browser, such as Mosaic, Cello, or
    Lynx, you may use the following URL's:
     wais://sunsite.unc.edu/cold-fusion       Britz bibliography
     wais://sunsite.unc.edu/fusion-digest     newsgroup archive
     gopher://sunsite.unc.edu/11/../.pub/academic/physics/Cold-fusion

4.  If you have a WAIS client on your system (the most common ones are
    "swais" -- character-based, and "xwais" -- for X-Windows), use it.  The
    Britz source is called "cold-fusion" and it is listed in the 
    directory-of-servers.

    If you _want_ a WAIS client program to run on your system, several are
    available in the public domain.  Try ftp-ing to one of these sites:
      sunsite.unc.edu
      think.com

There are several additional files archived at sunsite (e.g. Bollinger's
Twist of Ribbon, preprints of the Fleischmann&Pons 1989 paper), which
are accessible by anonymous ftp.
    %ftp sunsite.unc.edu
    . . .
    >cd pub/academic/physics/Cold-fusion
    >dir
The collection (mostly primary papers) maintained by vince cate has been
copied over to pub/academic/physics/Cold-fusion/vince-cate.

Additional contributions are welcome; e-mail cfh@sunsite.unc.edu.
cudkeys:
cuddy27 cudenharr cudfnCharles cudlnHarrison cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.07.27 / MARSHALL DUDLEY /  Re: Moessbauer Effect?
     
Originally-From: mdudley@brbbs.brbbs.com (MARSHALL DUDLEY)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Moessbauer Effect?
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 1995 11:18 -0500 (EST)

mbk@caffeine.engr.utk.edu (Matthew Kennel) writes:
 
-> Can you make sound loud enough that it could conceivably pop electrons
-> and positrons out of the vacuum?  (14Mev > 2*511kev)
 
You can't make sound in a vacuum.
 
                                                                Marshall
 
cudkeys:
cuddy27 cudenmdudley cudfnMARSHALL cudlnDUDLEY cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.07.27 / Jim Bowery /  Re: Mitchell Swartz, vocabulary genius
     
Originally-From: jabowery@netcom.com (Jim Bowery)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Mitchell Swartz, vocabulary genius
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 1995 15:30:13 GMT
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)

Behold I am become the national labs, the destroyer of progress in in the 
physical sciences.
-- 
The promotion of politics exterminates apolitical genes in the population.
  The promotion of frontiers gives apolitical genes a route to survival.
                 Change the tools and you change the rules.
cudkeys:
cuddy27 cudenjabowery cudfnJim cudlnBowery cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.07.27 / Robin Spaandonk /  Re: Moessbauer Effect?
     
Originally-From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Moessbauer Effect?
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 1995 08:50:43 GMT
Organization: Improving

On 26 Jul 1995 12:21:08 GMT, wspage@ncs.dnd.ca (Bill Page) wrote:

>In article <3v4bb8$9ft@soenews.ucsd.edu>, barry@starfire.ucsd.edu (Barry Merriman) says:
>>...
>>
>>This would seem like a good example of a chemical lattice 
>>mediating a nuclear event. 
>>
>>(a) is there any reason it is not a good example of such
>>

>Well, for one thing, the energies involved are very small. In fact
>there are some other nuclear/chemical effects of similar small
>magnitude, such as chemical influences on the internal conversion
>of electrons (a type of beta decay).

>>(b) is there a intuitive, causal way to understand the Moessbauer
>>effect? I have a hard time seeing naively how the effect is achieved.

>For intuitive purposes an anthropomorphic explanation might be
>appealing: Nature prefers to perserve the periodic structure of
>the lattice over local momentum conservation laws. At a higher
>level of abstract, of course, it probably makes perfect sense in
>momentum space - not very intuitive though.

>>I would expect the de-excitation to occur as in vacuo, with
>>a gamma emitted and doppler shifted down in energy as the 
>>nucleus recoils, and then some time much later the recoiling 
>>nucleus would collide with the coulomb fields of lattice nuclei
>>and electrons, and gradually dissipate its recoil energy. How
>>should this picture be ammended to result in no recoil and the 
>>emmission of a higher energy gamma?
>>

>You have to take into account the effect the lattice has on the
>conservation of momentum. It is the so called crystal or lattice
>"momentum" that is conserved, not the local momentum of the
>particle.

>In any case, I think it has been argued fairly successfully here
>that these effects are much to small in magnitude to be directly
>applicable to "CF" effects. On the other hand, it may well be some
>kind of theoretical "foot in the door". I.e. can we think of any
>reason way that this effect could be operative at much higher
>energies?

>Cheers,
>Bill Page.
I may be completely wrong in this, but I had always assumed that this
effect only occurred when a particular nucleus just happened to absorb
a phonon "going the other way" as it were at exactly the same time as
the nuclear decay occurred. I.e. as vibrations are transmitted through
the lattice, nuclei move backward and forward. If a particular nucleus
just happens to get a push in one direction from its neighbor that
precisely compensates for the recoil from the emission of the gamma,
then essentially no recoil occurs, and the energy of the phonon is
passed on to the gamma. This may seem very coincidental, but take the
following into account.

1) Very few of the decaying nuclei in any given sample actually
contribute to the Moessbauer effect.

2) Just maybe there is some mechanism whereby it is actually the
absorption of the phonon of exactly the right energy that through
resonance triggers the nuclear decay at that moment. (Analogous to
the way in which exited atoms in a laser are triggered to decay by the
absorption of an external photon of exactly the right frequency).

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa@netspace.net.au>
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything,
Learns all his life,
And leaves knowing nothing.
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

cudkeys:
cuddy27 cudenrvanspaa cudfnRobin cudlnSpaandonk cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.07.27 / Paul Koloc /  A conspicuous Senate Budget Item
     
Originally-From: pmk@prometheus.UUCP (Paul M. Koloc)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: A conspicuous Senate Budget Item
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 1995 09:11:23 GMT
Organization: Prometheus II, Ltd.

In an article on A4 of yesterday's Washington Post, the following was
written concerning possible fusion or plasma related research.  

.. .

   Under the allocations worked out between the 13 Appropriations 
sub-comittees in the Senate, there is more for defense nuclear
spending than in the House bill.  Also, Los Alamos and Sandia,
two of the three major nuclear weapons laboratiories, are located
in the home state of Sen. Pete V. Domenici (R-N.M.), chairman 
of the energy and water panel.  
   Dominici's bill beefs up the House allowance for research 
and developmement at the labs, and restores $225 million the
House cut for partnerships between the laboratories and private
companies, amied at using defense know-how to assist the 
commercial sector.  
   The subcommittee proposed no federal funds for another multi-
billion dollar long-term project, General Atomics Inc.'s helium-
cooled nuclear reactor program.  The panel followed the House's 
lead in providing $40 million to the Energy Department to assist
General Electric Co., Westinghouse Electric Corp. and Asea
Brown Boveri Inc. design advanced light water reactors as a 
21st century energy alternative.  
  BUT THE BILL REDUCES funding for solar and renewable energy 
research by one-third, and SLASHES the allocation for nuclear 
FUSION research so deeply that it left uncertain the future of
Prigceton's Plasma Physics Lab, which once hoped to build a
$1 Billion dollar fusion reactor with federal help.  

.. .

Well, this could be a rather historic twist in the development
of fusion.  It remains to be seen if reality breaks through
the chaps caught in the grip of the immediate changes 
accelerated by this coming budget.  There was a meeting of 
the "current fusion biggies" in VA not too long ago; quite 
selective it was, in which only the "Circle the Wagons" 
mentality was effectively expressed. The touchstone for 
the meeting was "the money" ITER.       What else?

Bet that philosophy ain't a gonna save it.  No, I think it's
time they pulled their heads out and took a look around in
the day light for something that works .. .  something real.   

                    Anything HUGE isn't.  
                       
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Paul M. Koloc, Bx 1037 Prometheus II Ltd, College Park MD 20741-1037    |
| mimsy!promethe!pmk; pmk%prometheus@mimsy.umd.edu   FAX (301) 434-6737   |
| VOICE (301) 445-1075   *****  Commercial FUSION in the Nineties *****   |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+

cudkeys:
cuddy27 cudenpmk cudfnPaul cudlnKoloc cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.07.26 / mitchell swartz /  Re: autoradiographs
     
Originally-From: mica@world.std.com (mitchell swartz)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: autoradiographs
Subject: Re: autoradiographs
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 1995 16:07:27 GMT
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA


  In Message-ID: <9507261451.AA11883@pilot08.cl.msu.edu>
Subject: Re: autoradiographs
blue@pilot.msu.edu (Richard A Blue) writes:

 -db  "Mitchell Swartz's answer to my suggestion that experimental
 -db  evidence concerning the radioactivity of CF electrodes has
 -db  been contradictory is the tired old suggestion that I read
 -db  the literature and cite references.  Mitchell, I can't cite
 -db  information in the literature if it is not there!

  If it is "not there", how could it have "been contradictory"?
Seems like this was one more case of  simple vaporcriticism.

  Best wishes.
    Mitchell Swartz




cudkeys:
cuddy26 cudenmica cudfnmitchell cudlnswartz cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.07.27 / Richard Schultz /  Re: Moessbauer Effect?
     
Originally-From: schultz@garnet.berkeley.edu (Richard Schultz)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Moessbauer Effect?
Date: 27 Jul 1995 11:14:28 GMT
Organization: Philosophers of the Dangerous Maybe

In article <3v6rtu$b6p@manuel.anu.edu.au>,
Dave Davies  <dave.davies@anu.edu.au> wrote:

>A phonon can build up incrementally as it recruits more atoms so the 
>energy of the reaction could, hypothetically, be bled off relatively 
>slowly.

Steven Jones has already addressed this issue.  The problem is that 
you have to dissipate 24 MeV of energy inside the lifetime of the 4He*
nucleus.  He showed that special relativity considerations make it 
impossible for all of the energy to go into phonons in the time available
to it.  I could probably dig up the old articles if you were interested
(or you could get them from sunsite; as I recall, using "special relativity"
as the keywords finds them pretty quickly).
--
					Richard Schultz

"How many boards would the Mongols hoard if the Mongol hordes got bored?"
cudkeys:
cuddy27 cudenschultz cudfnRichard cudlnSchultz cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.07.27 /   /  Re: Marshall Dudley hyhpothesis
     
Originally-From: mrichar353@aol.com (MRichar353)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Marshall Dudley hyhpothesis
Date: 27 Jul 1995 00:04:04 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)

zoltanccc@aol.com (ZoltanCCC) wrote:

>I imagine there is a finite rate with which electron capture happens in
>case there is a proton or a D nucleus embedded in the electron shell of a
>heavy metal like Pd.  Normally the rate of such electron capture is slow
I
>imagine due to the shielding effect of the D s own electron shell. In
case
>of a metal I imagine the freely wandering electrons behave as though they
>had a higher effective mass. This on one hand may promote fusion
reactions
>on the other hand it may promote electron capture. Electron capture may
>convert the proton to a neutron or the pn system to a nn. The presence of
>neutrons or nn systems in the shell may contribute to the generation of
>various fusion products as well as it may explain why some have reported
>fusion in the absence of heavy water. 

>To consider the decay of highly excited helium nuclei in the shell I
guess
>it is enough for the electrons to cool the excited nuclei enough to
>disable the principal decay modes ie. he4 -> D+D or he4 -> he3 + n. I am
>not sure off the top of my head how much that is, but the electrons may
>cool the excited nucleus enough before the decay occurs. After that they
>have all the time in the world. 

>I wonder whether the higher effective mass of valence electrons could
>promote fusion reactions similar to muon catalized fusion.

>I would appretiate arguments pro and con regarding these ideas

There are four problems with these ideas:

1. It's a clever thought that the effective mass of an electron might
cause an effect like muon-catalyzed fusion. However the muon catalyzes two
deuterons due to it's orbital radius (to use classical language),
shielding the electric repulsion between the two deuterons enough to allow
fusion. The effective mass of the electrons only affects it's gross motion
through the lattice. At atomic length scales it is the true rest mass of
the electron that determines the size of the wavefunction.

2. Electron capture by a proton or deuteron isn't energetically allowed
due to the mass difference between the neutron and proton. If it were,
then the electron in the hydrogen or deuterium atom would be captured
since there is all the time in the world for this to happen.

3. "Electron cooling" of an excited nucleus *does not occur* as I have
pointed out in a couple previous posts to this thread. There are only a
few excited states available to the He nucleus and transitions occur
between them very rapidly via neutron emmision (actually producing He3+n)
or gamma emmision. The nucleus cannot lose energy in a "cooling" manner,
i.e. many small losses due to the quantum mechanical nature of the bound
state.

4. If the He4 decayed to d+d then there would be no energy produced!

It would seem that Pd catalyzed fusion would have the same signature as
muon catalyzed fusion. This signature has *not* been seen in any confirmed
CF experiment.

Mark Richardson
cudkeys:
cuddy27 cudenmrichar353 cudln cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.07.27 / B Vidugiris /  Re: General Relativity sucks, "space and time"
     
Originally-From: bhv@areaplg2.corp.mot.com (Bronis Vidugiris)
Newsgroups: talk.philosophy.misc,alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci.astro,
ci.energy,sci.misc,sci.physics,sci.physics.electromag,sci.physics.fusion
sci.physics.particle,sci.research,sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: General Relativity sucks, "space and time"
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 1995 15:35:16 GMT
Organization: Motorola CCRD

In article <3v5opt$igf@hawk.le.ac.uk>, M.D. O'Leary <mdo4@le.ac.uk> wrote:

)>Nope.  I agree with all of the above  (or at least the first two, I'd
)>have to double-check the math on number 3, I'm assuming you have it
)>right, and if you have made a minor typographical error it probably
)>doesn't matter because there is some similar relationship anyway.
)
)Ergo, E = M x C**3
)
)[well, its something like that anyway. Close enough. Few orders of magnitude, I
)can handle that...]

It sounds silly, but at the right level of abstraction, if you
know E is proportional to M, does it matter what the proportionality
constant is? :-) (??).

On the subject of units:  there isn't any sense in throwing away this
idea without any gain (haven't seen any real gain yet from Tom's
theories).

On the other hand, it seems to me that the origin of the idea of units
is closely tied to the idea of scale invariance.  We already suspect
that this idea (scale invaraince) doesn't hold below the Planck length,
however.  So I'm not convinced that the abandonment of units
is necessarily a bad thing, though a good theory would explain why
they were an approximation that worked well.  So far this hasn't
been demonstrated for Tom's theory, but it hasn't really been ruled
out, either.

cudkeys:
cuddy27 cudenbhv cudfnBronis cudlnVidugiris cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.07.23 / Nahum Gat /  Help updating Directory of Technical Societies
     
Originally-From: Nahum Gat <oksi@cerfnet.com>
Newsgroups: sci.techniques.testing.nondestructive,sci.techniques.testing
misc,sci.techniques.spectroscopy,sci.physics.research,sci.physics.partic
e,sci.physics.fusion,sci.physics.electromag,sci.physics.cond-matter,sci.
hysics.computational.fluid-dynamics,sci.physics.accelerators,sci.optics,
ci.med.vision,sci.med.radiology,sci.med.physics
Subject: Help updating Directory of Technical Societies
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 95 22:31:09 PDT
Organization: CERFnet


[Mod. note: Followups to poster, please; the potential for crossposting trouble
on this one just defies description!  -- MWJ.]

Dear Colleagues,

We are creating a directory of technical (engineering, science and technology 
oriented) societies on the WWW.  Our present directory is fairly large but 
definitely incomplete.  For each organization, we'll include a short 
description page indicating the "mission" or "charter", membership 
requirements, benefits to members, and dues.  Also we need phone, fax numbers, 
e-mail and WWW URL addresses of available.  

This list is posted at no charge to the societies, rather as a service to 
hi-tech users.  But we would like to receive the official position of the 
organization rather than someone's creative thoughts.  

If you are associated with any such organizations, please forward this request 
to officials.

Info can best be submitted by filling the FORM at our WWW site:

http://www.techexpo.com/  

and selecting "society" from the buttons there, or via e-mail.  

Less desireable, though still acceptable, is via fax in the USA to: 
310/379-9842  

P.S.  Societies may also post announcements on technical meetings and 
conferences they sponsor at the TechExpo web site.

I appologize for this shot-gun posting, but we would like to reach as many 
organizations as possible.


Regards,

And thanks for all hints


Nahum Gat, Ph.D.
President 
Opto-Knowledge Systems, Inc.
oksi@cerfnet.com
     or
nahum@techexpo.com


cudkeys:
cuddy23 cudenoksi cudfnNahum cudlnGat cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.07.26 / Jim Bowery /  Re: A conspicuous House Budget Item
     
Originally-From: jabowery@netcom.com (Jim Bowery)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: A conspicuous House Budget Item
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 1995 22:17:36 GMT
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)

The legislation Paul posted was the original 1980 act, not the 
replacement act.  I'll try to dig up the replacement act from my tape 
archives and post it.

-- 
The promotion of politics exterminates apolitical genes in the population.
  The promotion of frontiers gives apolitical genes a route to survival.
                 Change the tools and you change the rules.
cudkeys:
cuddy26 cudenjabowery cudfnJim cudlnBowery cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.07.26 / Robert Eachus /  Re: TFTR Update July 21, 1995
     
Originally-From: eachus@spectre.mitre.org (Robert I. Eachus)
Newsgroups: pppl.tftr.news,sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: TFTR Update July 21, 1995
Date: 26 Jul 1995 22:49:21 GMT
Organization: The Mitre Corp., Bedford, MA.

In article <199507241827.OAA11426@pppl.gov> rhawryluk@pppl.gov (Rich Hawryluk) writes:

  > If these enhanced stability configurations can be obtained in TFTR
  > along with the extremely low core transport observed in the ERS
  > mode experiment, the fusion performance is predicted to be
  > strongly enhanced and potentially greater than 20 MW.  In
  > particular, the central heating of the bulk plasma by the
  > fusion-generated alpha particles is predicted to be significant.
  > Further experiments are required to explore and fully establish
  > the experimental scaling of the stability and transport in this
  > new regime and determine its full potential.

   Wow!  Does anyone else read these postings?  This sounds like
exciting results from actual research at the TFTR.  (It also sounds
suspiciously like some Project Sherwood work by Christhofsen(sp?) many
years ago, and some of the work of Paul Koloc, all of which involve a
plasma confining a higher energy/density plasma.)
--

					Robert I. Eachus

with Standard_Disclaimer;
use  Standard_Disclaimer;
function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is...
cudkeys:
cuddy26 cudeneachus cudfnRobert cudlnEachus cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.07.26 / Mitchell Jones /  Re: Refs. on CF, refs. on Wright Bros.
     
Originally-From: 21cenlogic@i-link.net (Mitchell Jones)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Refs. on CF, refs. on Wright Bros.
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 1995 18:20:11 -0500
Organization: 21st Century Logic

In article <3uo2u8$4dn@agate.berkeley.edu>, schultz@garnet.berkeley.edu
(Richard Schultz) wrote:

> In article <J5NDIl1.jedrothwell@delphi.com>,  <jedrothwell@delphi.com> wrote:
> 
> >As for the press
> >versus the Wrights, here is one of my canned quotes showing how things stood
> >until the morning of September 3, 1908. This quote appears in most
books about
> >them:
> 
> You like to go on and on about how any theory has to be thrown out if 
> experiment disagrees with it.  You might try applying the same philosophy
> to your own postings.  I posted quotes from the New York Times dating
> from 1903.  One reported without comment the Wright Brothers' intial
> flight.  One was an editorial criticizing Langley, not because heavier
> than air flight was a priori impossible, but because his deficiencies as
> an engineer were endangering the lives of the people trying to fly his
> planes.  To paraphrase a certain J. Rothwell, I don't know why these
> historians ignore those New York Times articles and editorials, and I
> don't much care.  The simple fact is that the Wright Brothers' flight
> was reported at the time it happened, and the fact is that the "media"
> (at least as represented by the New York Times) did not reject the
> idea that manned heavier-than-air flight was possible.  There's an
> interesting lesson to be learned here, but alas, I doubt that you will
> ever see it.
> --
>                                         Richard Schultz
> 
> "You don't even have a clue as to which clue you're missing." -- Miss Manners

Richard, I really fail to see the point of your post. You seem to be
trying to dispute Jed's claim that major elements in the media and the
"scientific" community continued to deny that the Wright brothers had
flown for literally years after the fact. But your citations are
irrelevant. Do you really believe that the mere fact of two newspaper
articles failed to dispute the claim or to be openly skeptical about it
implies that the scientific community accepted the claim with open arms?
Surely you are aware that many of the initial articles written in response
to the Pons-Fleischmann announcement--i.e., in late March and early April,
1989--were also inclined to take the claim at face value. Would you cite
those articles as evidence that the media did not reject the
Pons-Fleischmann claims?

--Mitchell Jones

===========================================================
cudkeys:
cuddy26 cuden21cenlogic cudfnMitchell cudlnJones cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.07.21 / Jim Carr /  Re: extrapolation
     
Originally-From: jac@ds8.scri.fsu.edu (Jim Carr)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: extrapolation
Date: 21 Jul 1995 09:48:57 -0400
Organization: Supercomputer Computations Research Institute

In article <3ukm7s$ina@hermes.louisville.edu> 
cbsite01@starbase.spd.louisville.edu (Charles B Sites) writes:
>
>    ...      But if you follow some of the quantum statistical argument 
>as used by Chubbs & Chubbs, there are arguments for the branching ratio 
>being schewed.  

That is the approach one must take, since the suppression of the d+d --> 
He-4 + gamma branch is due to quantum statistical effects that hinder 
this particle combination of initial and final states.  However, if 
you remove the suppression somehow, that would not explain the sudden 
suppression of the normally allowed modes.  You would see all three. 

>                Most extrapilations of branching ratios to zero energy 
>do not include Multi-body effects.  

That is why the APS session on cold fusion was organized by the Few Body 
Topical Group.  They are most interested in this sort of question.  The 
problem is that the examples of many-body effects (such as three-body 
reactions) are rare, which suggests only one combination of special 
circumstances could lead to CF rather than the panoply we see proposed. 
Even Hagelstein's proposal argued for special conditions.  It is very 
hard to get more than 2-body reactions to occur at a sub pm length scale. 

-- 
 James A. Carr   <jac@scri.fsu.edu>     | Tallahassee: the Flowering Inferno
    http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~jac        |  
 Supercomputer Computations Res. Inst.  | Record Hi/Lo: 100/62  Normal: 91/71
 Florida State, Tallahassee FL 32306    | 9AM Today: 80 with 91% Rel.Humidity
cudkeys:
cuddy21 cudenjac cudfnJim cudlnCarr cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.07.21 / Jim Carr /  Re: Hypothesis to explain cold fusion in metals
     
Originally-From: jac@ds8.scri.fsu.edu (Jim Carr)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Hypothesis to explain cold fusion in metals
Date: 21 Jul 1995 09:56:47 -0400
Organization: Supercomputer Computations Research Institute

In article <USE2PCB354028840@brbbs.brbbs.com> 
mdudley@brbbs.brbbs.com writes:
> 
>What is immediately?  Nothing happens in 0 time.  Dick Blue has indicated that
>the decay should occur within 1E-40 second.  

I noticed this once before, and I have no clue where this number comes from. 
Certainly strong-interaction processes take place on a time scale given in 
time units of fm/c = about 10^{-23} seconds.  Even an interaction on a 
quark scale would not be manifest until the particpants were clearly 
separated by a distance like the size of a nucleon even if it "happened" 
faster than that.  After all, it could un-happen (as occurs in the virtual 
cloud around particles) during a period of continued overlap. 

-- 
 James A. Carr   <jac@scri.fsu.edu>     | Tallahassee: the Flowering Inferno
    http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~jac        |  
 Supercomputer Computations Res. Inst.  | Record Hi/Lo: 100/62  Normal: 91/71
 Florida State, Tallahassee FL 32306    | 9AM Today: 80 with 91% Rel.Humidity
cudkeys:
cuddy21 cudenjac cudfnJim cudlnCarr cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.07.27 / Dave Davies /  Re: Moessbauer Effect?
     
Originally-From: Dave Davies <dave.davies@anu.edu.au>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Moessbauer Effect?
Date: 27 Jul 1995 01:59:26 GMT
Organization: Speaking for MYSELF

Bill Page says:
 >In any case, I think it has been argued fairly successfully here
 >that these effects are much to small in magnitude to be directly
 >applicable to "CF" effects. On the other hand, it may well be some
 >kind of theoretical "foot in the door". I.e. can we think of any
 >reason way that this effect could be operative at much higher
 >energies?

Someone with all the theory fresh in their head should be able to
get a handle on this. 

eg: What is the maximum phonon energy for a single xtal domain of a 
certain size? 

I did a very rough estimate of this a couple of years ago and decided 
that it might be in the right ball-park but my estimate was *very* rough. 
(Too rough even for me to discuss here:-).

A phonon can build up incrementally as it recruits more atoms so the 
energy of the reaction could, hypothetically, be bled off relatively 
slowly.


dave

cudkeys:
cuddy27 cudendavies cudfnDave cudlnDavies cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.07.27 / Dave Davies /  Re: Whats up with P&F?
     
Originally-From: Dave Davies <dave.davies@anu.edu.au>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Whats up with P&F?
Date: 27 Jul 1995 03:10:01 GMT
Organization: Speaking for MYSELF

Jed:
>Me:
>>   "Again, tea-leaves and guesswork. I agree with Jed here that F&P do not
>>     seem to be the leading edge here but might be stuck in a rut."
>
>Well, um, er . . . I sorta get that feeling sometimes. 

My appologies for putting words in your mouth Jed. Quite enough of that 
around here without me adding to it.



Barry Merriman writes:
>In article <3uva7b$6h2@manuel.anu.edu.au> Dave Davies <dave.davies@anu.edu.au>
>writes:
>> reason why a commercial organisation should boast about success until
>> they had a commercial device ready to roll?
>
>uh, to keep their stockholders informed? 

A fairly low priority where Proprietory Secrets are involved. I have given
technical reports to shareholders in a situation where some questions might
have initiated a vote (among the shareholders) to keep information 
confidential.
>                                          To stake out a market
>niche. 

A bit premature probably.

>       To foster interest in new potential customers, investors
>or partners. 
Potential investors can be briefed privately. But you miss out on 
broad exposure. It very much depends on the situation. I cant think
of any good comparison here. The CF saga is quite unique.

>              Why do you think almost all software products are
>pre-announced by a substantial (even years) margin?
>

Different market conditions (but these cavitation devices (Griggs etc.)
add a touch of realism to the expression 'vapour-ware'). Will we get a
Mr Fusion before we see a usable version of Win95?

>...
>> Everyone else learns from their mistakes.
>
>how can others learn from their mistakes when they have no clear idea
>what P&F have even done, due to their lack of exposition?

I imagine P&F etc. dont want others to learn from their mistakes. 

>>...(some gratuitous insults from me deleted)
>I think you would value the academic fixation
>on demonstration of existance beforing worrying too much about
>commercialization.
>

Yup. I am still not convinced that the effect(s) are real because I have
seen nothing first hand and would like to see more exploration of the basic
physics but what do I matter? I can understand that those who have spent 
hundreds of hours/days with these devices and seen high energy modes 'switch
in' are in a much better position to believe and make a dash for the finishing
line regardless of the theory.


dave

cudkeys:
cuddy27 cudendavies cudfnDave cudlnDavies cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.07.27 / Barry Merriman /  Re: What's up with P&F?
     
Originally-From: barry@starfire.ucsd.edu (Barry Merriman)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: What's up with P&F?
Date: 27 Jul 1995 04:19:18 GMT
Organization: UCSD SOE

In article <js_vetrano-2507951239150001@js_vetrano.pnl.gov> js_vetrano@pnl.gov  
(John Vetrano) writes:
> In article <5bGiBoZ.jedrothwell@delphi.com>, jedrothwell@delphi.com wrote:
> 
> (much deleted before and after this quote.  hope it is not out of context)
> > That is true. As I recall, Shockley and Bardeen did not do much after 1952.
> > - Jed
> 
> Well, except for the SECOND Nobel Prize in Physics that Bardeen managed to
> secure in 1972 (along with Cooper and Schrieffer) for developing a theory
> of superconductivity. 

I think he meant that they didn't do much to advance 
semiconductor transistor technology.

--
Barry Merriman
UCSD Fusion Energy Research Center
UCLA Dept. of Math
bmerriman@fusion.ucsd.edu (Internet; NeXTMail is welcome)


cudkeys:
cuddy27 cudenbarry cudfnBarry cudlnMerriman cudmo7 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
processed by cud.pl ver. 0.5 Fri Jul 28 04:37:05 EDT 1995
------------------------------
