Return to the clickable list of items

94) Browsing the Internet

Ludwik Kowalski (August 13, 2003)
Department of Mathematical Sciences
Montclair State University, Upper Montclair, NJ, 07043

1) The web site at:

contains links to many sources for reading about cold fusion; they even have a link to my own web site on blake. The link to Scientific American Frontiers yielded three interesting articles, very critical of cold fusion. Like Huizenga, the authors are fighting the straw man. But this is likely to be typical among mainstream scientists. These articles were written in 1997.


2) Matti Pitkänen, a theoretical physicist from Finland, at:

has a short reviews the entire cold fusion field followed by a theoretical interpretation. He lists questions that any theory of cold fusion should be able to answer:

a) Why cold fusion is not a bulk phenomenon?
b) Why cold fusion of the light nuclei seems to occur only above the
critical value x=about .85 of D concentration?
c) How fusing nuclei are able to effectively circumvent the Coulomb wall?
d) Why gamma rays are not produced, why the flux of high energy
neutrons is so low and why the production of 4He dominates
(also some tritium is produced)?
e) How nuclear transmutations are possible?

Then he presents his theory; I am not able to follow it. He often refers to the TGD model. I never heard of it. Here is a sample of text which means nothing to me, probably because I am not familiar with the concepts involved.

Trojan horse mechanism provides a manner to avoid Coulomb wall: since the two D nuclei feed their electric fluxes to different spacetime sheets, they do not see the Coulomb wall. The description of the reaction looks roughly like follows. Two D nuclei collide. The incoming D feeds its em gauge flux to the atomic spacetime sheet labeled by prime k=k_{em}>=131 (the p-adic prime p is p=about 2^k, k prime or power of prime). The target D is attached to Pd lattice and feeds its electric gauge flux to k>= 137 non-atomic spacetime sheet so that there is no Coulomb wall. In the collision deuterons stick together and the transformation of di-deuteron to ^4He occurs instantaneously in the time scale of em interaction since strong interactions are involved. Also reactions involving strong decay to ^3H +H and ^3He+n are possible. The same diagram involves also the photon exchange interaction of D nucleus with the electrons at the atomic spacetime sheet and electrons or Cooper pairs at the non-atomic spacetime sheet: it could be this mechanism which makes possible the transfer of surplus energy to the electronic degrees of freedom instead of gamma rays.

Trojan horse mechanism might work also at the level of chemistry making possible to circumvent electronic Coulomb wall and might be an essential characteristic of the catalytic action. In separate context I have dubbed this mechanism as 'Houdini effect'. Biosystems are full of extremely effective catalysts, which suggests that the claimed biofusion [biofusion1,biofusion2] is based also on Trojan horse mechanism (perhaps it is someday possible to produce metabolic energy by biofusion or perhaps Nature has already discovered the trick!). . . . The model can be summarized conveniently using quantum field theoretical language. ^4He is described as a scalar particle having standard minimal coupling defined be the covariant derivative D_{mu}= partial_{mu} +ieA_{mu} plus magnetic moment coupling of form mu*B to photon field. Gradient coupling does not allow the decay of the virtual state since this would lead to a nonconservation of angular momentum. Since transition magnetic moment is of order e/M(He) (e denotes electromagnetic coupling), magnetic decay is supressed by a factor of order E^2/M^2(He), where E is the energy of the gamma ray.

What does it mean “to feed electric fluxes?” What is a “spacetime sheet?” What is the “em gauge flux?” What is “p-adic prime?” My lack of understanding does not mean that the explanation is not valid. Perhaps the explanations make sense to theoreticians. Perhaps I should look at references at the end of the document. I suspect that this will not be enough; somebody else must interpret the theory for me. In the absence of help I will remain suspicious. P.S. A quick look at

makes me even more suspicious.


3) Rotational fields?

Kruglyakov wrote about claimed effects of axion (spin) fields. According to him such fields are likely to exist but they are too weak to be detected. Practical applications based on such fields are highly unrealistic. But fraudulent claims about devices generating rotational fields are common in Russia. Here is a translation of writing about rotational fields.

There is even a suggestion that the field can be used a weapon to fight terrorism. Crazy? A trick to get money from the government?


4) An item on cold fusion from an encyclopedia:

The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition.  2001. “. . . Research into the possibility of cold fusion, by Fleischmann and others, nonetheless continues, because of intriguing but inconclusive experimental results -- such as claims of the production of excess heat, helium, or tritium where heavy water reacts with metals -- and because of the desirability of producing relatively nonpolluting fusion energy in quantity at any temperature. Cold-fusion proponents believe that the fusion mechanism is different from that of “hot fusion” in that it encompasses some type of unusual nuclear reaction in the metal lattice involving deuterium and possibly other atoms. Several dozen models to explain the observed phenomena have been advanced, but none accounts for the full range of experimental observations.”


5) Charle Platt has a description of some leading US cold fusion experimental scientists still active in the field. It can be seen at:

a) Edmund
Storms is not an antiestablishment pseudoscientist pursuing a crackpot theory. For 34 years he was part of the establishment himself, employed at Los Alamos on projects such as a nuclear motor for space vehicles. Subsequently he testified before a congressional subcommittee considering the future of fusion. He believes you don't need millions of degrees or billions of dollars to fuse atomic nuclei and yield energy. "You can stimulate nuclear reactions at room temperature," he says, in his genial, matter-of-fact style. "I am absolutely certain that the phenomenon is real. It is quite extraordinary, and if it can be developed, it will have profound effects on society."

b) George Miley, who received the Edward Teller medal for innovative research in hot fusion and has edited Fusion Technology magazine for the American Nuclear Society for more than 15 years: "There's very strong evidence that low-energy nuclear reactions do occur. Numerous experiments have shown definitive results - as do my own."

c) John Bockris, formerly a distinguished professor in physical chemistry at Texas A&M University and a cofounder of the International Society for Electrochemistry: "Nuclear reactions can occur without high temperatures. Low-energy nuclear transformations can - and do - exist."

d) Michael McKubre, director of the Energy Research Center at SRI International: "I am absolutely certain there is unexplained heat, and the most likely explanation is that its origin is nuclear."

Credentials of Martin Fleischmann have already been described in my unit #4. Work of several scientists from the US Navy labs are described in my unit #51.

Return to the clickable list of items