CFRL English News No.8 (January 10,
2000)
Cold Fusion Research Laboratory Prof. Hideo Kozima
A Happy New Year to you and your group working in the CF field.
May prevail Recognition of Cold Fusion Research as a Science on the
Earth for its Prosperity without Hazardous Byproducts.
This is CFRL News (in English) No.8 translated from Japanese version published for friend researchers of Cold Fusion Research Laboratory directed by Dr. H. Kozima.
In this issue, there is following items.
1)
Our paper submitted to Intern. J. Hydrogen Energy has been accepted,
2)
Opening of CFRL-Homepage,
3)
Fate of Miley’s proposal to NERI of DOE, and
4)
On the theory of CF phenomenon.
1) Our paper submitted to Intern.
J. Hydrogen Energy last August was accepted for publication:
Kozima, H. and Arai, K. “Local Coherence, Condensation and Nuclear
Reaction of Neutrons at Crystal Boundary of Metal Hydrides and Deuterides”
ABSTRACT: Using a concept of the neutron Bloch wave in the one-body
approximation presented previously, possibilities of following effects in
boundary regions of crystals including hydrogen isotopes are pointed out:
occurrence of local coherence, formation of neutron Cooper pair, condensation
of neutrons, formation of neutron drop and an effective nuclear reaction of a
nucleus with thermal neutrons. It is shown that these new states and reactions
will have strong effects on solid state-nuclear physics in metal hydrides
(deuterides). Stochastic occurrence of localized nuclear reactions observed in
CF experiments is explained by these properties of the trapped neutron.
Possible application of the nuclear reactions in metal hydrides is discussed.
2) CFRL-Webpage was open by the effort of MS K. Arai of CFRL. Web site
is:
http://www.mars.dti.ne.jp/~kunihito/cf-lab/index.html
Lists of books and papers, back number of this News, and others related
with CFRL are available in this site. We hope readers visit here easily and
make communication with us freely to promote CF research.
3) The recent issue of Infinite
Energy (No.28) sent to CFRL from Mr. H. Yamamoto of Yamaha Motors Co.
reports
“Killing of Prof. G. Miley’s Contract”
Director Mr. W.D.
Magwood, IV of Office of Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology replied Inquiry
of Senator B. Smith (cf. News No.6, Item 7) and explains the story of the
“killing” as follows:
“The proposal in
question, selected for negotiation of an award under the Nuclear Energy
Research Initiative (NERI) is entitled Scientific Feasibility Study of Low
Energy Reactions for Nuclear Waste Amelioration. This proposal was first
reviewed by a peer review panel in the field of nuclear waste technology as identified in the proposal. We believe
this review was appropriate. However, the unique and crosscutting nature of
this proposal prompted us to conduct a further evaluation of the proposal by
six independent peer reviewers specializing in the fundamental sciences, appointed by the Department’s Office [sic]
Science. This review, completed on September 7, 1999, did not recommend that
this proposal be funded. As a result, there will not be a NERI award for this
proposal in fiscal year 1999.” (Italicized by H. K.)
We, cold fusion scientists,
understand from this and other facts (reported already in previous issues of
this News and others) that a theme taken up by technological viewpoint was
suppressed by fundamental scientists trapped in an old regime contradicting CF
facts.
I remember a history in 1992
of Physical Society of Japan (PSJ). Its Board of Directors exclaimed critical
opinion to ICCF3 held in Nagoya (Chairman, Dr. H. Ikegami) for its “Scandalous
operation” based mainly on the Letter of a participant from Europe. They have
not answered to protests against the exclamation from Dr. H. Ikegami and Dr. R.
Ueda and rejected a comment by me submitted to the Journal “Butsuri” for
Members of PSJ with nonsense reasons. As Prof. S. Akasofu of Univ. of Alaska
told, “mathematical scientists in arrogance symbolize decaying time of physical
science by neglect of facts inconsistent with established framework of physics
at hand.”
Decrease of scientific mind
in Japan and US expresses extraordinary situation of natural science on the end
of the century even if we notice following facts of competition with hot
fusion, the scandalous book by G. Taubes, the hasty Report to DOE written by J.
Huizenga, and so on. There is a hope survival of scientific spirit at least in
Europe, homeland of the Science. In Russia, the Annual Meeting on the Cold
Fusion and Nuclear Transmutation has been held since 1992 now on. In Italy,
scientists in National Laboratories and Universities have worked in science of
cold fusion.
This tradition of Science
has been symbolized in the organization of next ICCF8 held in Lerici, Italy in
May 2000. The Chairman of the Conference, Dr. Franco Scaramuzzi, declared
Scientific Heritage of Europe in the Invitation to the Conference as follows:
“I am pleased to inform you that in May 2000 the 8th
International Conference on Cold Fusion (ICCF8) will take place in Italy, at
Lerici, near La Spezia, in a beautiful spot on the Tirrenian Sea, and will be
organized by the “Ente per le Nuove Tecnoligie, l’Energia e l’Ambiente” (ENEA).
Cold Fusion, which some
prefer to call “New Hydrogen Energy”, is still having difficulties as far as
communication with the traditional scientific community is concerned. This has
not prevented research on this subject from making progress, witness the seven
preceding Conferences. The scientific features of this field are highly
exciting, from the production of excess heat of most probably nuclear origin to
the fascinating field of “transmutations”, to the theoretical interpretations
in terms of collective and coherent phenomena in condensed matter. The prospect
of potential future applications adds more charm to the field.
In this Conference an effort
is made to improve communications between the Cold Fusion community and the
scientific world at large. This is the significance of the important
sponsorships that have been secured to it: the Italian Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche (CNR), the Italian Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare
(INFN), the Societa Italiana di Fisica
(SIF).”
In this sentence, we read clearly enthusiasm to clarify CFP (Cold Fusion Phenomenon) scientifically and establish a New Science of Solid State-Nuclear Physics if it is necessary to explain the curious phenomenon of cold fusion.
4) A speculation on Theories of Cold Fusion and New Sciences
The strange nature
of events in CF phenomenon induced various reactions to it from the overall
denial of the phenomenon inexplicable by the present frame of Science to denial
of Quantum Mechanics to make short-cut explanation of the phenomenon. To the
reader abroad, the situation in Japan will be less interesting and we skip the
talk about it in this English version. Only one thing to cite here is that even
the Physics Today magazine of the
American Physical Society is more open and tolerant for CF materials than the Butsuri magazine of the Physical Society
of Japan, which rejects any article with words Cold Fusion in its title.
It is possible to speak generally that there are
authorities in a juubako (established
framework) who judge value of a work done and the reviewer system adopted in
many journals in science now works effectively. It is impossible by definition
to have such an authority in the case of trials to create a new juubako. An idea far from conventional juubakos has raison d’etre as far as it’s meaning is clear in relation with old juubakos.
In the case of CF phenomenon
disclosed explicitly in 1989, confusion induced by the curious experimental
data inexplicable in old juubakos of
solid state physics and nuclear physics has lasted more than ten years until
now. The confusion could be resolved by following discrimination of the
problem. A) There is a group who denies experimental data, which are
inexplicable by established principles with known conditions. There are two
subgroups in other group who accepts reality of experimental data. B)
The first is a subgroup that tries to explain the data by New Principles over Quantum Mechanics well
established in the science of atomic and subatomic regions. C) The
second is a subgroup who tries to explain the data by Quantum Mechanics with
new conditions to apply it. In this case, the long history of material science
since 1925-6 is taken up with appropriate weight as far as possible. The cold
fusion phenomenon (CFP) is a small part of the material science developed in
these 70 years and it is natural to try the data in CFP to reconcile with more
various data in the material science.
There is, unfortunately,
many scientists who have been in the group A) due to their interest related
with vested rights or due to ignorance in experimental data biased with second
class information. We have heard monotonous repetition of denial of
experimental data by a criterion deduced from simple assumption of d-d
reactions and read such articles as that in the Science magazine introduced in the News No.6 (Section 7).
As has been explained often,
the TNCF model belongs to the group C) and the new condition not noticed
before is taken as “the existence and behavior of thermal neutrons trapped in
solids with peculiar property and structure.” The Bohr model of the hydrogen
atom is, on the other hand, belongs to the group B) reforming principles of old
electrodynamics and induced Quantum Mechanics finally.
We notice there are some
trials in the group B) to explain CFP without explicit recognition of
their standpoint. Anyway, a model or theory should be explicable whole feature
of CFP with clear recognition of its standpoint whether it belongs to B)
or C).
It is written in Infinite Energy No.28 that Dr. Steven
Chu of Stanford University (Nobel laureate) made following comment on the
theory of R. Mills: “It’s extremely unlikely that this is real, and I feel
sorry for the people who are backing this.”
The editor of Infinite Energy write in reply: “To that
we reply, with an out-of-context take-off on one of Dr. Robert Park’s lines,
“As far as new energy is concerned, a Ph.D. and a Nobel Prize is no inoculation
against foot-in-mouth disease or a guarantee against uttering foolishness.”
It is, however, not the
problem of Nobel Prize laureate or simple Ph.D. but scientific consistency of
facts and theories. The critical point is consistency of the conclusion of
Mills’ theory belonging to the above group B), ”His theory of “classical
quantum mechanics” that allows sub-ground state hydrogen atoms”, and Quantum
Mechanics (Q.M.). The “classical quantum mechanics” which concluded “sub-ground
state hydrogen atoms” contradicts with the conclusion of Q.M. and has to find a
new fundamental principle over that of Q.M.
Similar discussion is
applicable to the theory of E. Conte in the group B) concluding
proton-electron fusion to make a neutron in cathode. It is, however, necessary
to feed more than 782 keV to make the above fusion feasible which is the energy
liberated by the beta-decay of free neutron into proton and electron (and
anti-neutrino) in addition to overcome the small reaction probability inherited
by weak interaction.