111) Photos of Fleischmann and Jones, August 2003

Ludwik Kowalski
Department of Mathematical Sciences
Montclair State University, Upper Montclair, NJ, 07043.

Return to the clickable list of items

This item contains pictures of Martin Fleischmann and Steven Jones. I took these photos during the 10th International Conference on Cold Fusion (Cambridge, Mass., August 2003). And I was not able to resist temptation of showing myself in the company of at least one of these two scientists.

Martin Fleischmann with a glass containg cold fusing ice.


Steven Jones and myself.


And this John Dash, a physics teacher from Portland State University
at the conference presentation. John also brought a group of students
to demonstrate their own cold fusion projects (see items #103 and #98).
I suppose he is the first teacher in the world to direct a student project
devoted to cold fusion research.

A high school student showing a simple excess heat setup.


1) Prior to 1989 Fleischmann (with Pons, who is no longer active in the area of cold fusion) and Jones were using similar electrolytic cells to study completely different phenomena. Their laboratories were only about 20 miles apart but the two Utah scientists did not know of each other's work. Fleischmann was a chemist, Jones a physicist; each was known as a top scientist in his field. They intended to cooperate, to study the phenomena systematically, and eventually publish the result of findings. That would have been the normal way of conducting science.

2) But, due to unusual circumstances, the cooperation did not materialize. After 1989 the scientists became victims of bureaucratic manipulation and their work the subject of an unprecedented public debate. The scientific community became polarized; some rejected cold fusion findings on the basis of presumed errors, incompetence or fraud; others took the data seriously and continued investigating. Most scientists and teachers (among those who are still interested in the controversy) wait for an official verdict from a team of appointed experts. They are not equipped to conduct sophisticated cold fusion experiments. It turns out that most questions asked by early critics have been answered by those who continued conducting research. But are the answers satisfactory? The appointed panel of unbiased experts should answer such questions. In my opinion our National Academy of Science, or National Science Foundation, should take the initiative. The focus should be on scientific claims, not on practical aspects of cold fusion. It is premature to speculate about practical applications at this time.

Return to the clickable list of items