CFRL English News No

CFRL English News No. 2９ (2001. 11. 10)

Cold Fusion Research Laboratory Dr. Hideo Kozima

This is CFRL News (in English) No. 29 translated from Japanese version published for friend researchers of Cold Fusion Research Laboratory directed by Dr. H. Kozima in Portland State University

In this issue, there are following items.

1) Lecture of Cold Fusion Science in Winter Term at PSU

2) Reading ”The Making of the Atomic Bomb” by Richard Rhodes (２),

Development of Neutron Physics – Effect of Application on Science

3) INE Symposium 2001, Report (1)

1. Lecture of Cold Fusion Science in Winter Term at PSU

Professor Hideo Kozima will give a course of “Solid State-Nuclear Physics” for senior and graduate students in a Science Course at PSU (Portland State University) in the Winter Term of 2002. The course was made possible by financial assistance of New York Community Trust through J. Dash and by the decision of E. Bodegom of Physics Department.

The class “Solid State-Nuclear Physics” (2 credits) is held on every Tuesday 13:00 – 14:50 from January to March at Room 104, Science Building 2.

This is, perhaps, the only course on cold fusion science in the world held this year. I thank J. Dash and E. Bodegom for their generosity in accepting my proposal to give this lecture on the controversial theme in the curriculum of PSU with open-minded spirits.

2. Reading

”The Making of the Atomic Bomb” by Richard Rhodes (２), Development of Neutron Physics – Effect of Application on Science (The preceding essay “Reading Richard Rhodes (1)” is published in this News No.24.)

In an enterprise such as the building of the atomic bomb the difference between ideas. hopes, suggestions and theoretical calculations, and solid numbers based on measurement, is paramount. All the committees, the politicking and the plans would have come to naught if a few unpredictable nuclear cross sections had been different from what they are by a factor of two. (Emilio Segre, from the back of the front page of Richard Rhodes’ “The Making of the Atomic Bomb”).

The neutron discovered in 1932 (cf. News #24) has revealed its characteristics through investigation of its properties in interaction with other particles and materials. The story starts with the discovery of the artificial nuclear transmutation.

“Irene and Joriot Curie induced an artificial nuclear transmutation bombarding aluminum (Al) nucleus by alpha particles from polonium (Po)” (Comtes Rendus, Jan. 15, 1934)

The neutron was thought by visionary scientists to be the more appropriate particle to bombard at target nuclei with than the alpha particle.

“Leo Szilard applied a patent ‘Improvements in or relating to the Transmutation of Chemical Elements’ inducing a chain reaction – that neutron would be more efficient than alpha particles at bombarding nuclei” (March 12, 1934, p. 203).

About Leo Szilard, a genius of a kind, I will write in another place.

“’The Compte Rendus reporting the Joriot-Curies’ discovery of artificial radioactivity reached Rome in January 1934. When Fermi began his neutron-bombardment experiments, he was thirty-three years old. They used a neutron source in the form of polonium (Po) evaporated onto beryllium (Be). [Alpha particles from Po bombard Be nucleus and produce a carbon nucleus (C ) and a neutron.] They had roughly classified the effects they were seeing; Light elements generally transmuted to lighter elements by ejecting either a proton or an alpha particle. --- So, heavier elements got heavier, not lighter; they captured the bombarding neutron, there off its binding energy by emitting gamma radiation, and thus, with no added or subtracted charge, became a heavier isotopes of a negative beta ray to an elements with one more unit of atomic number.” (p. 212)

The idea of the chain reaction was put forth by L. Szilard.

“July 4, 1934, Leo Szilard wrote a patent amendments where are following ideas of application of chain reactions;

‘the liberation of nuclear energy for power production and other purposes through nuclear transmutation.’

‘a chain reaction in which particles which carry no positive charge and the mass of which is approximately equal to the proton mass or a multiple thereof form the links of the chain.’” (p. 214)

“Marie Sklodowska Curie* born in Warsaw, Poland, on November 7, 1869, died that day of Szilard’s filing, July 4, 1934, in Savoy. Einstein’s was the best eulogy: ‘Marie Curie is,’ he said, ‘of all celebrated beings, the only one whom fame has not corrupted.’”

*It is a memorable fact that Marie S. Curie did not attempt to take a patent for her discovery of radium in 1898 as described in a biography written by her daughter: Madame Curie by Eve Curie, translated into English by Vincent Sheean, Doubleday, Doran & Co., Inc., New York, 1939.

“Marie’s gaze grew fixed. She readily considered this idea of gain, of material compensation. Almost at once she reflected it. ‘Physicist always publish their researches completely. If our discovery has a commercial future, that is an accident by which we must not profit. And radium is going to be of use in treating disease. --- It seems to me impossible to take advantage of that.’” (p. 204)

[Marie was to write twenty years later]

“In agreement with me Pierre Curie decided to take no material profit from our discovery: in consequence we took out no patent and we have published the results of our research without reserve, as well as the processes of preparation of radium. Moreover, we gave interested persons all the information they requested. This was a great benefit to the radium industry, which was enable to develop in full liberty, first in France and then abroad, furnishing to scientists and doctors the products they needed. As a matter of fact this industry is still using today, almost without modification, the processes, which we pointed out.

The ‘Buffalo Society of Natural Science’ (in USA) has offered me, as a souvenir, a publication on the development of the radium industry in the United State, accompanied by photographic reproductions of the letters in which Pierre Curie replied most fully to the questions asked by the American engineers [1902 and 1903].” (pp. 204-205)

This is an episode of a hundred years ago when science scarcely maintained its autonomy in the afterglow of its glory earned in preceding two centuries.

Characteristics of slow neutrons in the nuclear reactions were recognized by chance in Italy.

“October 27, 1934, Italian group of E. Fermi found a strong effect of slow neutrons on nuclear transmutation of bombarded nuclei.” (p. 218)

“H. Bethe writes; ‘the efficiency of slow neutrons might never have been discovered if Italy were not rich in marble --- A marble table gave different results from a wooden table. If it had been done [in America], it all would have been done on a wooden table and people would never have found out.’” (p. 219)

The use of nuclear energy for any kind of application was born in young scientists not in authorities.

“Thus by the mid-1930s the three most original living physicists (Rutherford, Einstein, Bohr) had each spoken to the question of harnessing nuclear energy. --- The essential future is always unforeseen. They were experienced enough not to long for it.” (p. 218)

Fission of a uranium nucleus (U) bombarded by a neutron into two medium nuclei with emission of neutrons was discovered by Hahn, Strassmann, Meitner and Frisch in 1938.

Frisch and Meitner gave the correct interpretation of fission by the liquid-drop model of nucleus in January 1939.

“Frisch the sketch artist, good at visualizing as his aunt [Meitner] was not, had metamorphosed his liquid drop into a dividing living cell. Thereby the name for a multiplication of life became the name for a violent process of destruction. ‘I wrote home to my mother’ says Frisch, ‘that I felt like someone who has caught an elephant by the tail.’” (pp. 263 - 4)

In the laboratories in USA, use of the uranium fission reaction for warfare were started due to the threat of Nazis using the reaction for bombs.

Fissionability by neutrons and the number of neutrons emitted by the fission of U235 and U238 and thorium (Th) became central problems.

“They (Fermi and Szilard group in Columbia University at that time) had made a rough estimate of neutron production: ‘We find the number of neutrons emitted per fission to be about two.’ --- Fermi and Anderson estimated ‘a yield of about two neutrons per each neutron captured.’” (p. 291)

The neutron energy dependences of fission cross sections of these nuclides had different characteristics; Due to these characteristics, U238 has been used for plutonium (Pu) production and U235 for a fast chain reaction as itself.

In history, there appears personality of researchers that has played an important role in developing a research.

“Fermi in any case was more interested in pursuing a chain reaction in natural uranium than in attempting to separate isotopes.” (p. 298)

A new element plutonium (Pu) was discovered in this research.

“’With this final separation from Th (in neutron irradiation of uranium 238 in cyclotron using d and Be target)’ Seaborg records with emphasis, ‘it has been demonstrated that our alpha activity can be separated from all known elements and thus it is now clear that our alpha activity is due to the new element with the atomic number 94’” (p. 354)

“This gives strong indications that 94²³⁹(²³⁹Pu) undergoes fission with slow neutrons.” (p. 355)

In the history of the making atomic bombs, the cyclotron had been used to separate U235 from U238.

“Late in 1941 Lawrence had installed such a 180-degree mass spectrometer in place of the dees in the Berkeley 37-inch cyclotron. By running it continuously for a month his crews produced a partially separated 100-mg sample of U235.” (p. 487)

“--- Based on Nichols’ schedule Groves decided in mid-March (1945) not to build more Alpha calutrons (cyclotrons for use of U235 separation), as Laurence has proposed, but to construct instead a second gaseous diffusion plant and a fourth Beta plant (factory to handle U238). ---“ (p. 602)

This history of the cyclotron reminds me an episode in 1945 in Japan: The occupation army destroyed cyclotrons in Riken built by Nishina group in the war time for scientific research and threw them into the sea of Tokyo Bay. We heard it as an act of absurdity not knowing the historical role of the cyclotron in USA as depicted in R. Rhodes’ book..

Properties of the new element Pu in relation with interaction with neutron were investigated intensively.

“On Sunday, May 18 (1941), having finally prepared a sample thin enough for accurate measurement, they (Segre and Seaborg) calculated plutonium’s cross section for slow-neutron fission at 1.7 times that of U235.” (p.366)

“--- he (Groves) recalls ‘Every other process ---depended upon the physical separation of materials having almost infinitesimal differences in their physical properties. Transmutation by chain reaction was entirely new, but the rest of the plutonium process, chemical separation, while extremely difficult and completely unprecedented, did not seem to be impossible.’” (October 1942) (p. 431)

Atomic pile for production of Pu was constructed in “a half-abandoned riverside village, population about 100”.

“Tuesday evening, September 26, 1944, the largest atomic pile (for production of Pu at Hanford) yet assembled on earth was ready. It had reached dry criticality ---“ (p. 557)

“Plutonium production at Hanford depended as much on chemical separation as it did on chain-reacting piles. ---“ (p. 603)

The nuclear reactor for chain reaction was patented.

“Ten years after the end of the war Szilard and Fermi won a joint patent for their invention of the nuclear reactor.” (p. 508)

There are many textbooks on neutron physics and neutron optics published after World War II depending on the wide use of nuclear reactors for peace and for weaponry. Interactions of neutrons with a variety of their energies with isolated nucleus and matter have been investigated and many facets were clarified. There remains, however, many features of the interactions which remain untouched especially for neutrons with thermal energy in crystals of transition-metal hydrides and deuterides that have the characteristics of neutron-proton and neutron-deuteron interactions. The cold fusion phenomenon observed mainly in these hydrides and deuterides should be related closely with these characteristics.

3. INE Symposium 2001, Report (1)

Institute for New Energy Symposium 2001 was held in Salt Lake City, Utah on October 26-27, 2001, at Conference Room of Quality Inn City Center.

About 30 people attended. Twenty-three papers were presented as a whole; 13 papers of them were presented by author(s) and other 13 papers (with (*) in the following list) were summarized by Conference staffs.

Following is the list of papers with author(s) (institution and others) with (**) on the title to papers closely related with cold fusion phenomenon.

(1) A Summary of the Latest Developments of High-Density Charge Technology**, Hal Fox and Vasily Baraboshkin (EEMF).

(2) Status of the INE Devices Database, and the Interest and Commercialization Criteria Rankings, Dr. Patrick Bailey (INE).

(3)* Comments on an Interesting Experimental Feature in Electrolysis Loading Experiments**, Dr. Dan Chicea (Univ. of Lucian Blaga, Physics Dept., Romania).

(4) Scalar Compression, Moray B. King.

(5) An Introduction to the EV Workshop, Kenneth Shoulders.

(6) New Sources of Energy from the Point of Unitary Quantum Theory**, Lev Sapogin, Yuri Ryabov and Valery Graboshnikov, (Department of Physics, MADI, Moscow, Russia).

(7) Magnetic Motors, Tom Valone,

(8) Magnetic Vortex Domains and Structures – Insights from Research at the Oregon Vortex, Nick Nelson.

(9) A Discussion of EVs and Audience Participation Workshop, Kenneth Shoulders.

(10) Dangers of Using Volt and Amp Meters to Measure Device Efficiency: Examples of Fraudulent Over-Unity Claims, Patrick Bailey, (INE).

(11)* Vortex Dynamics and Exploiting Energy from the Vacuum, X-l Jiang, et al. (Science School, Beijing University of Aeronautics & Astronautics, Beijing, China).

(12) Cold Fusion Phenomenon and Atomic Processes in Transition-Metal Hydrides and Deuterides**, H. Kozima, J. Warner and G. Goddard (Physics Department, Portland State University)

(13) A Unified Classical Theory of the Electric, Magnetic and Gravitational Forces, Bruce Harvey (England, UK)

(14)* High-Density Tidal Energy Powering Ahead, Michael Maser (Blue Energy, Canada).

(15)* A New Paradigm for Time – Evidence from Empirical and Esoteric Sources, Donald Reed.

(16)* Water is the Main Power Carrier of Future Power Engineering, Ph.M. Kanarev (The Kuban State Agrarian University, Krasnodar).

(17)* Twisting & Untwisting of Spirals of Ether and Fractal Vortices Connecting Dynamic Ethers, Chiharu Sano (International Club of Scientists, St.-Petersburg, Russia).

(18) Perspectives of the Torsion Technology, V.F. Panov. V.V. Strelkov, V.V. Yushkov, T.A. Yushkova, B.V. Testov and Hal Fox.

(19)* Fusion by Sound Waves, Gabriel Ducrey.

(20)* Energy Stored in a Gravitational Field, Mahmoud A. Melehy.

(21)* Shape Power Anti-Gravitational Breakthrough, Dan A. Davidson (RIVAS),

(22)* Why Exotic Inventions Don’t Make it into the Public Domain, Dan A. Davidson (RIVAS),

(23)* Dirac’s Equation – A Relativistic Generalization of the Schroedinger Wave Equation – The Other Half, Don Hotson.

(24)* Free Energy Surprise & Occult Ether Physics: Tesla’s Hidden Space Propulsion System and the Conspiracy to Conceal It, William Lyne.

(25)* Universal Laws, Keely’s Secrets, and Atlin, Dale Pond.

(26)* A Possible Gravity Control in Photo-luminescent Materials, Fran de Aquino (Brazil)

As seen in the above list of titles, there was a diversity of themes presented in this Symposium. Main themes are cold fusion, electronic devices and magnetic machines. As is well known in classical electromagnetism, there are inconsistencies in classical field theory based on the uncertainty of the origin of magnetism and on the locality of electric charge. Those points and others have made several physicists rewrite the textbook of electromagnetism. The same problem causes people to try to construct machines moving on magnetic force with high efficiencies as high as 1 or more (over-unity).

Considering the nature of the first law of thermodynamics strictly, it is an empirical law. Therefore, it is possible to try somehow to find breakthrough it by making a new machine based on a mechanism not noticed before. Serious trial should not be blamed solely because of its objective to overcome a physical law established empirically in their essence. Those works do not belong to professional scientists who have to earn their livestock on works in the established framework. The Medawar zone (cf. P. Gluck’s essay, in my Website http://web.pdx.edu/~pdx00210/Miscllnse/Essays/Gluck.htm) is extending widely outside to area fading into the realm of science fiction. Nicola Tesla’s work typically shows this.

Abstract of many papers presented at the Symposium are seen in the following Website of INE;

http://www.padrak.com/ine/INECONF01ABSTRACTS.html

At the symposium, I met many people for the first time.

Dr. Patrick Bailey, one of organizers of this Symposium and director of the Institute for New Energy, is a scientist enthusiastically pursuing new energy sources and improvement of efficiency of machines. It is inevitable to have some presentations that belong to the outermost range of the Medawar zone in such a conference as this Symposium that oriented to new techniques attempting to breakthrough known barriers. Great inventors as N. Tesla ventured to do so with a few marvelous successes.

Mr. J. Kolev is a nice guy selling ”New-Used-Rare Books – Human Sciences, Science & Technology – Out of Print Books” as his profession. You can ask him to find out books you are looking for by his E-mail and Website addresses;

Website; www.abebooks.com/home/lubov

E-mail; jkarcl@qwest.net