CFRL English News No. 28 (2001. 10. 10)

Cold Fusion Research Laboratory Dr. Hideo Kozima

This is CFRL News (in English) No. 28 translated from Japanese version published for friend researchers of Cold Fusion Research Laboratory directed by Dr. H. Kozima now in Portland State University

In this issue, there are following items.

1) Abstract of a paper “Cold Fusion Phenomenon and Atomic Processes in Transition-metal Hydrides and Deuterides” by H. Kozima to be presented at IEN Symposium 2001

2) On the new editorial principle of Fusion Science and Technology

3) Website for Programs and Abstracts of Papers presented at JCF3

4) US Patent 6,248,221 “Electrolysis apparatus and electrodes and electrode material therefore” by R.R. Davis et al.

1. “Cold Fusion Phenomenon and Atomic Processes in Transition-metal Hydrides and Deuterides” by H. Kozima

As written in this News No.27, INE Symposium 2001 (Salt Lake City, Oct. 26-27) will be held on the end of this month. We are going to present a paper with the above title and its abstract is copied below. About the Symposium itself, I will report it in the next news.

Abstract

The cold fusion phenomenon (CFP) is manifest in various events ranging from huge excess energy to various nuclear transmutations in solids containing a high density of hydrogen isotopes (both protium and/or deuterium). Until now there has been no satisfactory explanation. CFP has several characteristics which require explanation consistent with modern physics: the sporadic occurrence of the events, their qualitative reproducibility, localization of nuclear products in small (\teido \mikuro m) regions at surfaces of samples, occasionally simultaneous occurrence of several events, and so forth. We have tried to provide a consistent explanation of CFP as a whole, using a model (called the TNCF model) with a single adjustable parameter and several premises based on experimental facts. To give physical bases for the premises in the TNCF model, which has shown its ability to give a consistent explanation of CFP, we have worked with neutron bands in solids. In this paper, we show a possibility of neutron bands originating in excited states of neutrons in atomic nuclei on lattice points (in lattice nuclei) mediated by band states of protons (deuterons) occluded in the transition-metal hydrides (deuterides). An indirect nuclear interaction between neutrons in lattice nuclei (the super-nuclear interaction) becomes effective in those crystals when the density of hydrogen isotopes is high and the neutrons are in excited states with widespread wave functions in lattice nuclei. The super-nuclear interaction, then, results in the formation of neutron bands which give rise to nuclear reactions observed as anomalous nuclear reactions in solids, the so-called cold fusion phenomenon (CFP). A relation between the physics of transition-metal hydrides (deuterides) and CFP is investigated using the trapped neutron catalized fusion (TNCF) model, which has been successful in the systematic explanation of many phases of CFP.

2 On the new editorial principle of Fusion Science and Technology

About the new editorial principle of the journal Fusion Science and Technology (former Fusion Technology) published by the American Nuclear Society, there have been discussed how they exclude cold fusion papers and when. I have submitted two papers this year and refused to receive them by following reasons that reflect their attitude for the cold fusion papers. We can guess their new editorial principle from the matter.

Two reasons are (emphasized at citation):

1.Having reviewed the contents of your article, I have concluded your article falls outside the scope of Fusion Technology, but it is perhaps suitable for journals in Atomic Physics, Nuclear Physics, or Chemistry.

You may wish to take this suggestion into account and pursue one of these paths. (April 2, 2001)

2. Having reviewed the contents of your paper and reviewer considerations, I have concluded that the theoretical model and experimental data discussed in your paper have been already published in Fusion Technology [FT 33, 52 (1998) by Kozima; and FT 33, 476 (1998) by Iwamura], and therefore is not suitable for re-consideration and publication in Fusion Science and Technology. (May 30, 2001)

The reason 1 shows cold fusion phenomenon is out of the scope of new editorial coverage and CF papers should be excluded unconditionally.

The reason 2 shows that they forcibly cut continuity of a field that took a part of the content of the journal.

We can guess that FS&T confines its scope to “fusion plasma physics and plasma engineering, fusion nuclear technology and materials sciences, fusion plasma enabling science and technology, fusion applications, and fusion design and systems studies” (from “Information for authors” of FS&T).

As I now know, several CF papers are in the editorial process of FS&T and it is possible some papers be published in near future issues if the Editor give fair judges in his/her work sitting between authors and referees who are sometimes laypeople with lack of understanding in CF phenomenon..

I feel that FS&T squeezed out a science from its content to put science in its title. It is not possible to deny an important role of Fusion Technology played in these more than ten years in the progress of cold fusion research. We have to praise the clever decision of the former Editor George H. Miley to include CF phenomenon in the scope of FT （cf. CFRL News #19）. This fact will be esteemed higher after establishment of cold fusion science in few years.

3. JCF3 （Yokohama, October 25-26）will be held.

Programs and Abstracts of Papers presented at JCF3 can be read in the following website as announced by the Office of JCF;

http://fomcane.nucl.eng.osaka-u.ac.jp/jcf/NEW.HTML

4. On the US Patent 6,248,221 “Electrolysis apparatus and electrodes and electrode material therefore” by R.R. Davis et al. reported by T. Valone

T. Valone has mailed about a US patent relevant with cold fusion phenomenon as cited below. Please read details in the following website while I will give a short comment on the patent below.

Patent #6,248,221 at http://patft.uspto.gov/netahtml/srchnum.htm

Brief Comment on the Patent #6,248,221

When I have read the text of the patent, I felt anxiety could not understand well what this patent declares about cold fusion phenomenon. It will be understood if you read its Abstract not written about CF at all..

Abstract

An improved electrolysis system includes a cylindrical anode, a cylindrical cathode, a cathode material including nanocrystalline particles, and an insulator disposed between the anode and the cathode material to prevent contact between the anode and the cathode material.

Following sentences in the Summary of the Invention will show a characteristic of this patent:

These and other objects, features and advantages according to the present invention are provided by a cathode comprising a plurality of nanocrystalline particles formed by spray conversion processing. According to one aspect of the present invention, the nanocystalline particles are formed from a single element selected from the group consisting of Fe, Ni, Cu, Mo, Cr, Co, Mg, Ag, and W. According to another aspect of the present invention, the nanocystalline particles are formed from elements selected from the group consisting of Fe, Ni, Cu, Mo, Cr, Co, Mg, Ag, and W.

We have had many works in CF research in these more than ten years where used cathode materials with large surface areas (large surface-to-volume ratios). Several examples we can cite as follows; Arata cell (Discovery 6.2f)、Notoya’s porous nickel cathode (Discovery 6.3e)、O. Reifenschweiler’s Ti microparticles （Phys. Letter A184, 149, (1994); Cold Fusion 22, 45, (1997)）, Les Case’s commercial porous carbon catalyst coated with palladium, CFRL News #1), thin-films in Patterson beads (Discovery 7.1e)

It is noticed ,as seen in the above cited sentences, that R.R. Davis excludes Pd and Ti from metals used in the patent without mentioning any reason.

In Summary of the Invention, there are also such ambiguous sentences as follows to understand exactly what they mean;

“(--- improved reaction vessel of) porous, rugged, ceramic matrix composites” “electrolysis apparatus applies to fluid, e.g., liquid, gas, or plasma having a cylindrical configuration”

A following sentence in the Detailed Description of the Preferred Embodiments is not true as we know well from list of works I have written above:

“---, the use of such materials (material consists of small, micron-sized (e.g., 10-100 microns) as the cathode in an electrolysis system has never before been proposed.”

At least, Arata’s and Reifenschweiler’s materials are fine-particles of micron-sized ones.

Ambiguity of the explanation is also about fluids used in the experiments;

”for dissociation of the fluid-borne hydrogen (H_{2}) into its constituent parts, --“

“---reaction fluid, e.g. a gas such as hydrogen, --“

It is not clear if they use heavy water or not. It is also unclear what kind of reaction(s) and reaction products were observed in their experiments relevant with the patent even if there are words as follows;

“reaction volume”

“reaction material”

“reactor products generated in the cathode material”

I feel strongly a difference in the patent text and the scientific text. In the science text, description is aimed at how it is easy to understand the essence of the work. On the other hand, as we can see in this patent, description is aimed at just details of method used in the patent and not essential results obtained by it.

This is my impression for the patent as a layman of the patent text and you are advised to read the text yourself if you are interested in it.

Following is the mail from T. Valone reporting the patent.

Mail from T. Valone,

Congratulations to patentee Randy Davis, an attendee of LENREW 2000, who, with a stroke of genius, designed claim language that addresses an electrolysis apparatus comprising a "cathode material including nanocrystalline particles" along with anode, cathode and insulator.

(Patent #6,248,221, issued June 19, 2001, is attached. Complete image version with drawings can be viewed at http://patft.uspto.gov/netahtml/srchnum.htm)

Thus, even with deuterium references that look suspiciously like cold fusion, the classifier only selected the preamble to claim #1 and sent it to Class 204 which is defined below:

First page of the patent text of Davis et al.

United States Patent	*6,248,221*
Davis , et al.	June 19, 2001

Electrolysis apparatus and electrodes and electrode material therefor

Abstract

Inventors:	Davis; Randolph R. (44 Redding Ridge Dr., N. Potomac, MD 20878); McGraw; Thomas F. (4801 Lightkeepers Way, #17A, Little River, SC 29566); Woll; Richard S. (P.O. Box 52, Delray, WV 26714)
Appl. No.:	322690
Filed:	June 1, 1999

Current U.S. Class:	204/260; 204/228.1; 204/262; 204/272
Intern'l Class:	C25B 009/00
Field of Search:	204/260,262,252,282,272,228.1 429/31,40,44