Text: May 26, 2004 Tom Bearden explains an interesting phenomenon: The Coulomb Barrier Law and the absence of brute force in the 'cold fusion' process. Cold Fusion is a very interesting phenomenon, probably explains in part why it has been muted rather than challenged. Reference: http://www.cheniere.org/correspondence/062103.htm http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=comments&op=Reply&pid=2324&sid=680&mode=&order=&thold= http://blake.montclair.edu/~kowalskil/cf/138plotkin.html Energy From the Vacuum http://www.cheniere.org/books/efv/toc.htm Tom Bearden's book http://www.zpower.net/zpe.htm http://www.spiritofmaat.com/archive/feb2/bearden.htm http://www.cheniere.org/techpapers/on_extracting_EM%20energy.htm http://jnaudin.free.fr/meg/meg.htm http://www.ldolphin.org/energetic.html http://www.ldolphin.org/zpe.html http://www.keelynet.com/gravity/putnasa.htm http://www.energyscience.co.uk/le/Le27/Berlin.htm http://twm.co.nz/Vac_energy_jse.html http://www.padrak.com/ine/ZPESCIAM2.html http://www.spacedaily.com/news/cosmology-03zc.html A Rebuttal All the Best, Leslie R. Pastor ----- Original Message ----- From: Tom Bearden To: 'Leslie R. Pastor' Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 11:36 PM Subject: Leslie, No time for that, unfortunately. I suspect that additional factors and mechanisms also exist in cold fusion that enhance the probability of reaction reversal, but one really needs to look at solid experiments already in the literature, to see what results were obtained under what circumstances. Fluctuation theory is well-established in thermodynamics, e.g., particularly by work recently done by researchers at the Australian National University and elsewhere (Wang, Evans, etc.) and reported in the hard literature. So the fluctuation reaction reversal effect itself definitely exists and is proven experimentally. What remains to be established is the expectation of specific new "backwards reactions", in such a "reversal zone", etc. which would yield the proper observed nuclear reaction products at room temperature, and other factors which influence and change the probability that such reactions succeed in passing beyond what is normally the Coulomb barrier. The methods used by hot fusion are already brute force methods, where the charged particles are simply made so "hot" (so energetic) that their momenta will carry some of them through the Coulomb barrier of others. The cold fusion method attempts to do it without brute force methods, since obviously the heating (high energy) is not there, and the reported results have achieved this (hundreds of successful experiments worldwide). So what remains to be explained is, what happens to the Coulomb barrier so that it is no longer so difficult to overcome in a fluid? We did notice (and published in our chapter on cold fusion, in Energy from the Vacuum, 2002) , several reversed reactions that could produce deuterium, tritium, and alpha particles, which are known products anomalously produced in a great many cold fusion experiments. So the conjecture's results definitely match the results of many cold fusion experiments. Understand, these may not be the only reactions capable of doing so; they are just prime candidates where Coulomb barrier reversal occurs with sufficient probability and for sufficient time, in fluctuations already known to occur. Any experimental demonstration of a result doing that by a mechanism, is sufficient. What has to be "connected" are the fluctuation experiments in thermodynamics with the successful cold fusion experiments. The fluctuation theory effects are indeed well-demonstrated experimentally, but mostly in thermodynamics rather than in fusion etc. The fluctuation theory researchers, so far as I'm aware, do not even discuss nuclear fusion possibility, since they publish in journals such as Physical Review etc., where cold fusion is still anathema. And the thermodynamicists do not discuss to my knowledge the changing of the Coulomb barrier into momentary attraction rather than repulsion. Nonetheless, that's what a "reversal of reactions" entails, at root level. Or can entail. So it needs to be rigorously investigated further, both theoretically and experimentally, since the fluctuations themselves have been proved experimentally, at surprising large level (cubic micron) and for a surprising length of time (two seconds). In a nucleus, the nucleons continually change between being protons and neutrons anyway, as of course is well-known in standard nuclear theory. That oscillation in the form of the nucleon needs further examination in view of the surprising fluctuation "reversal reaction" probability, now shown to be higher than previously thought. Best wishes, Tom Bearden

See Also:

Source: