Cold Fusion: Future of physics or phoney?

[Ron]

http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2011-10/28/cold-fusion?page=2

May I have my own powerplant plz?

Energy costs are a big problem for many people, and the UK government recently expressed concern over domestic heating bills. After the October test, Rossi proposed as his own solution: a home E-Cat, a cube measuring 40 centimetres a side, which will produce all the heating and hot water you want. (Think "Mr Fusion" Home Energy Reactor in Back To The Future). His target cost is 500 euros per kilowatt, so replacing a typical boiler with an E-Cat would cost about £6,000 -- but you could then leave the heating on 24/7 and never see a fuel bill again.

[Nick1911]

ah hahaha, this crap again?

The international patent application has been partially rejected because it seemed to "offend against the generally accepted laws of physics and established theories" and to overcome this problem the application should have contained either experimental evidence or a firm theoretical basis in current scientific theories. Due to this secrecy, the Swedish evaluators were not allowed to examine the inside of the reactor, and there is still uncertainty about the viability of the invention.

[Ron]

I report, you decide   

Would be a game changer if true though...

[Nick1911]

Would be a game changer if true though...

To quote someone else on the internet, if it works they will be putting his picture on postage stamps and money.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.  So far, I see the proof hidden behind "trade secrets".  Standard scam artist fare.

1. Create hoax device
2. Get media buzz.
3. Hide details behind "trade secrets" - don't let anyone examine it up close
4. Claim you only need another year to prefect it.
5. Get money from venture capitalists.
6. Disappear

[HankB]

Maybe he can team up with this guy, who was ISSUED a patent for a spaceship that taps vacuum energy . . . .

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PTXT&s1=6,960,975.PN.&OS=PN/6,960,975&RS=PN/6,960,975

[Tallpine]

generally accepted laws of physics

Just get Congress to change the laws 

[Fitz]

Just get Congress to change the laws 

while they're at it, I want my hoverboard, tiny pizza that can be cooked to full size in seconds, Mr. Fusion on back of a delorean, and a sports almanac

[MechAg94]

To quote someone else on the internet, if it works they will be putting his picture on postage stamps and money.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.  

QFT.  He needs to prove it.

If he can prove it and keep it secret, he can start his on Shipstone Industries Inc.

[TechMan]

birdman, please pickup the glowing courtesy phone. 

[AZRedhawk44]

Rossi has claimed that the device will output six times as much energy as it consumes.

I don't get it.

I understand needing catalyzing energy to start a power plant or energy producing reaction.

But, if it truly generates power... 6:1 is a crappy ratio.  Look at a fission plant.  Palo Verde here in AZ produces 3 gigawatts.  I am extremely skeptical of the notion that Palo Verde requires 500 megawatts to operate its power generating subsystems.

Or even 500 megawatts to start in the first place.

[birdman]

Not cold fusion, looks like a "low energy nuclear reaction" device...a concept that many have claimed, no one has proven, and no one even has a physics explanation for.  Personally, given the energies involved in the small scale devices, experimental error makes a big difference, and until someone can explain why it works, I don't believe it.  Perhaps there is a phenomenon we can't explain that is being exploited...(like fire, before a few hundred years ago), but it seems more likely that there is an error we don't understand yet.

I would love to be proven wrong, but any energy generation that only works in small scale, is apparently thousands of times more powerful than chemical processes, but thousands less than nuclear, and relies on unexplained physics arouses my skepticism.

Google LENR for more "information".  Take with grain of salt.

Also, occams razor.  If these phenomenon (starting with the Utah "cold fusion" debacle) were as capable as people claim...you'd think in 20+ years....someone would have made money off it?  I mean, it's not like there is VAST amounts of money in producing energy....oh wait...there is.

[HankB]

. . . but it seems more likely that there is an error we don't understand yet.

This.

Reminds me of a guy who got a lot - and I do mean a LOT - of attention from the local media up in Minnesota 20+ years ago; he claimed to have invented a furnace based on circulating hydraulic fluid that was more than 100% efficient. They even had professors at University of Minnesota who measured energy input, airflow, input temperature, and output temperature, plugged the numbers into an equation, and got . . . over 100% efficiency.

Much amazement.

Until an undergraduate got hold of the numbers and realized they had computed thermal efficiency by entering temperatures in degrees centigrade - rather than the proper degrees kelvin.

Oops. 

[RoadKingLarry]

Just get Congress to change the laws 

Don't need congress, Obama can just make another executive order.