• 3 minutes e-car sales collapse
  • 6 minutes America Is Exceptional in Its Political Divide
  • 11 minutes Perovskites, a ‘dirt cheap’ alternative to silicon, just got a lot more efficient
  • 6 days They pay YOU to TAKE Natural Gas
  • 3 days How Far Have We Really Gotten With Alternative Energy
  • 3 days What fool thought this was a good idea...
  • 12 hours A question...
  • 5 days Why does this keep coming up? (The Renewable Energy Land Rush Could Threaten Food Security)
  • 12 days The United States produced more crude oil than any nation, at any time.

Breaking News:

Venezuela Bans Bitcoin Mining

Brian Westenhaus

Brian Westenhaus

Brian is the editor of the popular energy technology site New Energy and Fuel. The site’s mission is to inform, stimulate, amuse and abuse the…

More Info

Premium Content

The Answer to all our Energy Concerns: A Look at Cold Fusion

A Cold Fusion explanation that seems workable and can be a base for theory that the layperson can grasp is making its way around the world.  This writer is going to put it out here for your perusal. (Please see below video)

The idea is that cold fusion is an act of an artificial stimulation of atoms into a state where these atoms can be induced to artificial “quantum transition” as they are squeezed tightly down to a 50 nanometer sized lattice type of structure.  The atoms are deuterium and the lattice is the metal palladium.  The size at 50 nanometers and the lattice are key.  Too big, as well as getting too small of a lattice and the fusion event doesn’t occur.  This requirement is a dead on matter that derailed the efforts to repeat the famed Fleischmann and Pons rediscovery – now more than 20 years ago.

When an experimenter has the palladium lattice sized right, the cold fusion effect is predictable for success although other factors can derail an experiment.  But now the know how is high enough that predictability is reliable.

Next up is to stimulate the atom electrically, which looks sort of like an electroplate or water splitting experiment.  Hold the criticism, the cold fusion experiment is quite simple, and isn’t much more complex in design than these two simple electrochemical demonstrations.

The electrical stimulation has to come in at the atom’s resonant velocity – 1,094,000 meters a second some 2/137ths of the speed of light.

What the evidence suggests is when the atoms are duly packed into the right sized lattice with the correct stimulation applied, the strong nuclear field which holds an atomic nucleus together slips out of alignment ready for a proton coming in, but in the palladium lattice what gets in is another nucleus slipping in – and a fusion event occurs.

That’s a very simple explanation, but it is eminently something that can be visualized in the imagination by many people.

For the cold fusion experiment to work the electrical stimulation frequency is also getting clarified.  It seems that the successful experimenters use 14 megahertz.  This fits well, in physics the relationship between 14 MH and the 50 nanometer size offers a workable way to explain what’s going on.  Now its gets deep.  Stay with me . . .

One of the major mysteries for the layperson in quantum physics is the “Fine Structure Constant” and another is the “velocity of the quantum transition” noted above.  The velocity of the quantum transition has been question in search of an answer for quite some time and having it known would solve a bunch of quantum mechanics questions.

The Fine Structure Constant is unit-less because it is a ratio of velocities, and those velocities cancel. The ratio is the velocity of the quantum transition, which is the velocity of light within the electronic structure of the atom, to the velocity of light in the vacuum of space.

The velocity of light in the vacuum of space is well known and the successful cold fusion researchers have happened on the velocity of light within the electronic structure of the atom – some 1,094,000 meters per second or 2/137ths of the speed of light out in a gravity free vacuum.

The atom’s strong nuclear force that ties the nucleus together has been accurately stated as a barrier with the name the “coulomb barrier”.  Getting past the coulomb barrier is much easier by understanding the atom and its nature than trying to strong arm it by brute force.  Hot fusion scientists have been assaulting the coulomb barrier and failing at for decades.  Other ideas such as Bussard’s IEC and Lerner’s Focus Fusion will likely gain some insight when the Fine Structure Constant ratio is considered in their experiments.

The short list of the variables to get to reliable specifications for a cold fusion reactor includes: the palladium metallurgy, the D2O purity, the type of electrolyte and concentrations, the electrochemical cell design, the electrode arrangement, the type of calorimeter, proper scaling of the experiments, the handling of metals, the current densities used, the duration of the experiments, the optimal loading of deuterium into the palladium, the use of additives, and on and on.  It’s still a long road.   The list of variables listed here defies a single research group of gaining a full specification.  It’s going to require a large set of groups and extensive coordination or incredible serendipity.

Cold fusion reactions as anomalies have been reported since 1927, when Swedish scientist J. Tandberg stated that he had fused hydrogen into helium in an electrolytic cell with palladium electrodes.  Leveling all the horrifics at Fleischmann and Pons is simply indefatigable ignorance coupled with emotional immaturity.


There is one more observation worth noting. Many of the deniers of cold fusion are the alarmists of global warming.

Meanwhile around the world independent labs, serious sophisticated private researchers and even a smattering of high school students have managed to get reactors going such that a first reactor specification looks probable in the foreseeable future.  Getting there will require funding and serious organization.  But the payoff, now well understood is a turning point in human history.

By. Brian Westenhaus

Source: A Noteworthy Stride for Cold Fusion

Download The Free Oilprice App Today

Back to homepage

Leave a comment
  • Anonymous on November 18 2010 said:
    I know a lot about the economics of nuclear energy, as you will find out if you examine my new book ENERGY AND ECONOMIC THEORY. I'm afraid though that you wont find anything about cold fusion ine the book because the most intelligent people that I have communicated with say that it is complete and total nonsense. They could be wrong of course, but an article like this WOULD GET YOU FAILED IF YOU WERE ONE OF MY STUDENTS. What we need now are Generation 4 reactors, and we might need them soon. Pllease save the cold fusion fantasies for one of those gorgeous student clubs in Uppsala about midnight on friday or satusday nights, when the people at the bar will entertain anything that makes them feel intellectual.
  • Anonymous on November 18 2010 said:
    The theory put forward in the video is the subject of profound disagreement by the best informed advocates of cold fusion, which by the way is indeed likely to prove very important.See the LENR-CANR.org website for a trove of material supporting the fact that cold fusion is far from a fantasy.
  • Anonymous on November 19 2010 said:
    I know three things about energy: it flows, disperses and ridges no matter what the particle size may be. I also know that vested interest works very hard to keep their golden goose. We just can not let those guys stop us from communicating and creating pro-survival living means for the majority of us.
  • Anonymous on November 19 2010 said:
    Mr Goldes, the Web specializes in fantasies. This site (OilPrice.Com) is a bit different, and personally I would like to see it remain that way. Cold Fusion is Pie in the Sky.
  • Anonymous on November 19 2010 said:
    I think cold fusion is a real and legitimate effect and worthy of study. However, I think Bussard's polywell concept is much further along and the more likely future of fusion. All fusion research however ought to be studied extensively. Energy underlies all economic activity. The cheaper we can obtain it and the more independently it can be produced the freer we all shall be and the greater a society we shall have. Thanks for the post.
  • Anonymous on November 21 2010 said:
    Tyler Jordan is correct when he says that all fusion should be studied, but it is a mistake to have extremely talented people studying the wrong kind of fusion. Emphasis at the present time should be on Gen 4 nuclear equipment. A very smart physicist once told me that Gen 4 equipment might never be produced, by which he meant that he hoped that it would never be produced.One of the highest energy bureaucrats in Sweden entertains the same opinion about nuclear energy. He entertains it because many of his friends have similar opinions, only instead of studying physics, those good ladies and gentlemen have studied things like art history,
  • Anonymous on November 21 2010 said:
    These out-of-the-mainstream approaches to nuclear physics are worth pursuing at some level. Cold fusion has shown good enough results to suggest that something interesting is happening. On the other hand, I do not expect to see an economic payoff from cold fusion for at least 100 years. 100 years is a very short time as the universal clock ticks.Bussard's IEC fusion is another story, and we should learn what to expect from that within the next 5 years.It is likely that mainstream fusion physicists have been going about the problem the hard way for the past several decades. It is not a simple problem. Sometimes the secrets and shortcuts appear as if by accident.
  • Anonymous on November 29 2010 said:
    "Many of the deniers of cold fusion are the alarmists of global warming."There's a way to make a science story believable. Bash global warming.

Leave a comment

EXXON Mobil -0.35
Open57.81 Trading Vol.6.96M Previous Vol.241.7B
BUY 57.15
Sell 57.00
Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News