Page 3 of 3

Re: Cold Fusion Achieved?

Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2011 3:35 am
by thekinkykid (imported)
You won't see cold nuclear fusion soon. Probably never.

The reason is pretty simple, no obscure nuclear physics mysteries here. The nuclei of atoms are made of protons (charge +1) and neutrons (charge 0), with the negative particles (electrons, charge -1) out of the nuclei, in orbitals around.

Because of this, the nuclei of all atoms are strongly positive (charge +n). Like charges repel. So "nude nuclei" strongly repel themselves by electrostatic repulsion. If you can't bring together the nuclei, they're not going to fuse. That's all. Not rocket science, is it?

As a result, all of these "cold fusion" stories out there are always wrong. There's always something that was not taken into account, an experimental or calculation error somewhere, and of course it doesn't work.

Why does "hot fusion" work? It's also easy: because heat means atomic movement, so at high temperatures the nuclei strongly "vibrate". At VERY high temperatures ("thermonuclear temperatures", millions of degrees) these nuclei vibrate so strongly and move so fast that their kinetic energy overcomes the electrostatic repulsion and makes them crash (or approach very much). At such short distances, different forces apply (like the weak nuclear force) and fusion is possible. That's what happens in a star like our Sun (by massive gravitational attraction/compression), in a H-bomb (the primary A-bomb makes the outrageous-energy trick), and we hope in future nuclear fusion reactors (trick expected via powerful magnetic fields or lasers).

So you can see, it's just a matter of basic physics. Like charges repel, heat is movement, much heat needed to overcome the electrostatic repulsion. It wasn't so difficult, was it? ;)

(And sorry for my English, it's sort of hard trying to explain science in a language you don't use daily)

Re: Cold Fusion Achieved?

Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2011 4:08 am
by punkypink (imported)
We should probably sort out the matter of being able to obtain sustained (hot) fusion first before trying to do cold fusion anyway.

Besides, isn't this an old thread?

Re: Cold Fusion Achieved?

Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2011 4:50 am
by clysmaniac (imported)
I'd still like to have one of these cold fusion devices so I could put it on an obscure shelf in my basement right next to my perpetual motion machine.

Re: Cold Fusion Achieved?

Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2011 5:11 am
by Riverwind (imported)
clysmaniac (imported) wrote: Sat Jun 04, 2011 4:50 am I'd still like to have one of these cold fusion devices so I could put it on an obscure shelf in my basement right next to my perpetual motion machine.
And your lava lamp.

River

Re: Cold Fusion Achieved?

Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2011 6:31 am
by Dave (imported)
I"ve been resisting saying this but

The laws of thermodynamics prohibit getting something for nothing.

It will always take an equivalent amount of work to get work out of a system.

That is, you can't peddle a bicycle for two miles and expect it to roll three miles on that energy.

Re: Cold Fusion Achieved?

Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2011 4:28 pm
by Riverwind (imported)
Dave (imported) wrote: Sat Jun 04, 2011 6:31 am I"ve been resisting saying this but

The laws of thermodynamics prohibit getting something for nothing.

It will always take an equivalent amount of work to get work out of a system.

That is, you can't peddle a bicycle for two miles and expect it to roll three miles on that energy.

Not true oh wise one, if you hook up your bike to a generator and peddle it you can power the tv you couch potato. 😄

That is solving two things, exercise for your body and TV to rot your brain.

River

Re: Cold Fusion Achieved?

Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2011 5:10 pm
by moi621 (imported)
Dave (imported) wrote: Sat Jun 04, 2011 6:31 am I"ve been resisting saying this but

The laws of thermodynamics prohibit getting something for nothing.

It will always take an equivalent amount of work to get work out of a system.

That is, you can't peddle a bicycle for two miles and expect it to roll three miles on that energy.

In chemistry and probably nuclear physics too there is the concept of activation energy, which is less then the energy given off in the case of fission or fusion bombs.

Uniting hydrogen atoms creates energy.

Invoking thermodynamics is fine for gasoline and cars, but nuclear forces ? ? they are as free as sun shine.

I would reconsider when the helium pollution gets too extreme. 😄

Moi

BTW, sun shine should only be used for Bio energy or roof panels as may be photovoltaic or hydrolysis for the hydrogen for my cold fusion device, car and fuel cell powered home.

Be considerate, condense your water.

Water vapor is a green house gas.

Carpeting the desert with mirrors or photovoltaic systems is plain WRONG! 📢