HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: hoey@AIC.NRL.Navy.Mil (Dan Hoey)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Fleischmann interview in JIR
Keywords: may be harmful if swallowed
Date: 18 Aug 92 17:05:23 GMT
Organization: Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, DC
Supersedes: <1130@zogwarg.etl.army.mil>

[ I hope you all don't get this message twice. ]

hoey@zogwarg.etl.army.mil (I) wrote:

>The latest issue of the Journal of Irreproducible Results has an
>interview in which Martin Fleischmann comments on the recent rumors.
>I could try to excerpt it if there is interest, though it's somewhat
>difficult to find a happy medium between giving enough detail to give
>you the idea of it and copying the entire article.

I did include ``may be harmful if swallowed'' in the Keywords line,
but the Fusion Digest dropped it, so one person felt it necessary to
warn me I should take JIR with a grain of salt.  People have sent me
email asking if I could fax the interview to them.  When the long
distance phone calls started, it was clear I had better start spinning
this one down, so here's the scoop on the interview.

The article, by Marc Abrahams, gives a short history of the cold
fusion discovery and controversy, and shows a photo of Martin
Fleischmann holding a cold fusion cell.  It continues:

    During the past two years, sensational rumors have swirled abouit
    Fleischmann and Pons.  Now, in an exclusive interview with the
    _Journal_of_Irreproducible_Results_, Martin Fleischmann reveals
    the truth about the recent rumors.

The rest of the article is the interview proper.  I would dearly love
to include it here, but I would feel terribly guilty at reprinting
what was supposed to be an exclusive interview.  But I think I can
fairly tell you that the only question asked was, ``Are the rumors
true about you and Madonna?''  And the answer was one word long.  It
seems those rumors are not true.

Maybe now you see why it was so difficult to find a compromise between
excerpting and quoting in whole.

If you still want the JIR, here's the information from the title page.
The publisher is Blackwell Scientific Publications, Inc., 238 Main
Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142.  Individual subscriptions are
US $15 in the US, $20 in Canada, and $35 overseas.  Phone
subscriptions are 1-800-759-6102.  The article is in JIR volume 37,
number 4 (August 1992) on page 8.

Dan Hoey
Hoey@AIC.NRL.Navy.Mil
From: 72240.1256@compuserve.com (Jed Rothwell)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Certainly No Orchestration
Date: 22 Aug 92 00:23:52 GMT
Reply-To: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com>
Organization: Sci.physics.fusion/Mail Gateway

To: >INTERNET:fusion@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG

Some people have accused us of fraud, or of attempting to manipulate public
opinion. I suspect these people have never met a real con man. Con men are
never so inept as this. No con man ever does anything so naive and so stupid as
to bring Nature down upon him like a ton of bricks.

I think it is fair to say that we have proven we are *not* clever manipulators,
we have no talent whatever for fooling people, and we would not last 15 minutes
in the con-man business. We were also accused of "orchestrating" the release. I
have orchestrated various events from time to time, mostly software releases
and other non-controversial things like that. I would never deliberately
orchestrate an event in a way that would invite my worst enemy to blow me out
of the water, as Nature did. You can accuse us of a lot of things, but we have
certainly demonstrated beyond any doubt that we have no talent for clever
manipulation or orchestration.

Now, I hope that we can close this chapter. I am always willing to confess an
error or a stupid mistake, and I remind you gentle readers that to err is
human, to forgive, divine. In particular, I sincerely hope that Dr. Buck will
accept our apology.

Let us please get on with a serious scientific evaluation of the theory. I will
leave that debate to Mr. Brightsen and others, but I would like to very briefly
address a few points raised here:

Tom Droege suggests that the paper does not provide a clear method of testing
the thesis. He overlooked two such methods: 1. Add light water to a cell; 2.
Look for GEV energy level particles.

Others have suggested that said GEV particles might easily be detected, or that
they might cause obvious environmental damage, or other effects. I have talked
to a number of high energy particle physicists and they say this is not the
case. These particles are similar to cosmic rays, which do not often cause
damage, and cannot be detected with ordinary equipment; certainly not with the
kind of equipment that has been used in CF experiments up until now.
Knowledgeable sources have told me that even the Kamiokande CF experiment was
not set up to detect such particles.

I would like to ask everyone to please reserve judgement, and wait for high
energy particle studies to be performed, before jumping to conclusions one way
or the other.

- Jed
From: dietz@cs.rochester.edu (Paul Dietz)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Certainly No Orchestration
Date: 22 Aug 92 03:16:21 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Department University of Rochester

In article <920821221932_72240.1256_EHL58-1@CompuServe.COM> Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> writes:

> I would like to ask everyone to please reserve judgement, and wait for
> high energy particle studies to be performed, before jumping to
> conclusions one way or the other.

Apparently, in the absence of experiment, "jumping to conclusions" is
bad, but "issuing press releases trumpeting results" is not.

By the way, are Brightsen and Mallove aware that producing 5.59 GeV
from the reaction 1H+2H-->3He violates conservation of energy?

	Paul F. Dietz
	dietz@cs.rochester.edu
From: lwall@netlabs.com (Larry Wall)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: The nature of Nature
Date: 22 Aug 92 17:48:25 GMT
Organization: NetLabs, Inc.

Frank, I wouldn't want to contradict anything you said.  And I don't
believe you've contradicted anything I said.

Larry
From: balraj@cs.columbia.edu (Timothy S Balraj)
Subject: Re: Periodic Table and Chart of the Nuclides (was Re: Press Release)
Organization: Columbia University Department of Computer Science
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 20:48:47 GMT

>From: bobwhite@nova.ta52.lanl.gov (James R. White)
>~ A handy-dandy Macintosh Hypercard stack I downloaded the
>~ other day has a combination of the chart of the nuclides as well
>~ as the periodic table.
>~
>~ Best I recall, I got it from the file named /info-mac/card/isotopes.hqx
>~ from the Mac archives at sumex-aim.stanford.edu
>~
>~ The file contains two stacks, one of the 'chart of the nuclides', another
>~ containing the periodic table, and they work together.  Really nicely done.

The stacks are not on sumex, but are available by anonymous ftp from
mac.archive.umich.edu in the directory mac/misc/chemistry.  There are two
similarily named files --- the one you want is called isotopes1.3.cpt.hqx. The
other one (isotope1.61) is a completely different program (an isotope pattern
calculator).

The stacks are "semi-freeware" written by John G. Cramer, Physics Prof at
U of Washington.

tsb


Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
From: BUCK@cebaf.gov
Subject: NUCLEON CLUSTER MODEL
Reply-To: BUCK@cebaf.gov
Organization: Sci.physics.fusion/Mail Gateway
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 21:52:23 GMT

TO THE SCIENCE COMMUNITY


In a recent press release, I discovered that my name was listed as a Supporter
of the Nucleon Cluster Model put forth by Clustron Sciences, Corp.  No
permission to use my name in that press release was given.  I am demanding that
a retraction be made and printed.

Furthermore, any use of my name in association with the Nucleon Cluster Model 
or with the Clustron Sciences, Corp. is unauthorized. 


Warren W. Buck
Professor of Physics
Hampton University
From: hoey@zogwarg.etl.army.mil (Dan Hoey)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Fleischmann interview in JIR
Keywords: may be harmful if swallowed
Date: 17 Aug 92 17:59:43 GMT
Organization: Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, DC

The latest issue of the Journal of Irreproducible Results has an
interview in which Martin Fleischmann comments on the recent rumors.
I could try to excerpt it if there is interest, though it's somewhat
difficult to find a happy medium between giving enough detail to give
you the idea of it and copying the entire article.

Dan Hoey
Hoey@AIC.NRL.Navy.Mil
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
From: eachus@Dr_No.mitre.org (Robert I. Eachus)
Subject: Re: Hide the neutron
Organization: The Mitre Corp., Bedford, MA.
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 20:14:03 GMT

In article <9208120306.AA10493@sleepy.network.com> logajan@SLEEPY.NETWORK.COM (John Logajan) writes:

   Okay, I think I understand the "virtual neutron" idea now, and how it
   allows the process to occur even though the "trigger" energy seems
   to be insufficient (which I repeat below.)

   If we want to produce neutrons from D, we need a gamma of at least
   2.45 MeV.  Once we have the free neutrons, they can be captured by the
   Pd(104 in this case) and release 7.09 MeV.  The net gain is 7.09-2.45,
   or 4.64 MeV.

-- The figure I have been using for the mass of deuterium is 2.01410,
-- and 1.007825 for the mass of protium (1H1).  This gives 2.226 MeV
-- for the deuterium disassociation energy, which is close to the
-- "commonly accepted" value.  I also have slightly different values
-- for the Pd isotope weights, but all those are nits.

   A "D" which picks up kinetic energy by direct or indirect Compton
   scattering is going to be able to approach the Pd nucleus closer.
   And like a bullet shot into a tank, it is going to bounce around inside
   the lattice for a while, approaching many Pd nuclei in sequence,
   perhaps until probability smiles on it and it is captured.  (Heh,
   I can even envision a D caught between two Pd's like a ping-pong
   ball between the table top and a descending paddle board -- brrrrt.)

-- I like the image. :-) My analogy is that the deuterium can get
-- caught in a vice.  (There I was, surrounded by eight Palladium
-- atoms, and they were all coming after me!)  But in any case, High
-- kinetic energy and lattice vibrations seem to be the best
-- candidates for bringing things together.

   Under this mode of reaction, direct photodisintegration of a D into
   p + n, even if a virtual n, is not required.  Maybe we are more
   interested in the Compton scattering rather than gamma capture?
   Ehy?

-- I'm hedging my bets!  Seriously, any model which has enough energy
-- to slam the nucleii together by force, also leads to all sorts of
-- detectable radiation.  The combination of a squeeze and tunneling,
-- with the incident gamma energy added, has the advantage (in
-- explaining the data as well as for Mr. Fusion generators) that none
-- of the intermediates can get out.  The new nucleus has lots of
-- energy to get rid of, but it doesn't all have to come out at once.
-- Most of the energy would be released as low energy (order of 20 to
-- 50 KeV) gammas. In fact Pd107 has a beta decay half-life of seven
-- million years.
--

					Robert I. Eachus

with STANDARD_DISCLAIMER;
use  STANDARD_DISCLAIMER;
function MESSAGE (TEXT: in CLEVER_IDEAS) return BETTER_IDEAS is...
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
From: mancus@norm.jsc.nasa.gov (Keith Mancus)
Subject: Re: Press Release
Organization: nasa-jsc
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 17:29:48 GMT

In article <1992Aug12.142146.202345@uctvax.uct.ac.za>, hndcol02@uctvax.uct.ac.za (Colin Henderson, Physics Dept. UCT) writes:
|> 
|> In article <920810212319_72240.1256_EHL49-3@CompuServe.COM>, Jed
|> Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> writes: [most of which has been sent to the
|> electronic winds by yours truly...] 
|> 
|> > PRESS RELEASE  August 10, 1992 
|> 
|> > ... NCM Periodic Table of the Beta Stable Nuclides, and the complete
|> > explanations for thermal neutron fission characteristics, presents
|> > incontrovertible support for CSC's Nucleon Cluster Model.

  Could someone refer me to a readable source of the mainstream nucleon
model?  Specifically, what I want is a "Periodic Table of the Nuclides,
Orthodox Style."  I have never seen anything like this anywhere, whereas
chemical periodic tables appear even in high school texts.

-- 
| Keith Mancus    <mancus@sweetpea.jsc.nasa.gov>                         |
|                 N5WVR                                                  |
|  "If I owned Texas and I owned Hell, I'd rent out Texas and live       |
|  in Hell." -General Sheridan                                           |
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
From: blue@nscl01.nscl.msu.edu
Subject: Crazy Hunches
Reply-To: blue@nscl01.nscl.msu.edu
Organization: Sci.physics.fusion/Mail Gateway
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 23:13:35 GMT

Attn: Tom Droege.  Tom you have badly misinterpreted my earlier post
about hunches.  There is a very broad choice of pathes to follow and
continuing to plod on down the same old familiar one is only one of
the options.  I did not say that is the only correct choice!  What I
said was that just crashing off through the woods in any direction
is not automatically the right thing to do either!  To comment on
your research specifically, I commend you for your efforts in tracking
down and correcting the problems with calorimetry on the Pd + D2O
system.  You have shown that neither Takahashi nor Ying have worked
any real magic.  As long as your having fun, stick with it, but on
the larger scale we all should be a bit more cautious about accepting
at face value everything the "Crazies" out there have been throwing
down the wire.  Today we hear the notion that extra gammas and/or
alphas will turn the trick.  Then comes some new corporate cluster
model, and don't forget the incredible shrinking hydrogen atoms.
Maybe tomorrow someone will ask you to hang a quartz crytal around
your calorimeter, or operate only when the astrological signs are
most favorable.  I just suggest that rational thought still has to
play some role in the screening of suggestions for experiments before
you spend a dime, whether it is your own or the tax payers.

Dick Blue
NSCL @ MSU
From: danforth@riacs.edu (Douglas G. Danforth)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Typo in NCM paper
Date: 23 Aug 92 00:34:01 GMT
Organization: RIACS, NASA Ames Research Center

In <920822184433_72240.1256_EHL67-1@CompuServe.COM> Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> writes:

>To: >INTERNET:fusion@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG

>Tom Droege and others have asked me to send the paper in electronic form, but
>I have not been able to do that because it is in Gene's Mac. I don't speak
>Mac, and I have not been able to get it into a PC intact. Sorry. Anyway, the
>fission paper is essential background to understanding the CF paper. The
>fission paper is not electronic, and it includes many graphs like "Fission
>Yields for Thermal Neutron Fission of PU-241," so, we are stuck with paper
>and fax distribution.

>- Jed Rothwell


I have found a nice program for transfers between Macs and Dos machines
called Mac-In-DOS from:

Pacific Microelectronics, Inc.
201 San Antonio Circle C250
Mountain View, CA 94040
Fax(415) 948-6296
Tel(415) 948-6200

Price $99.00 (tax $8.17)

The program runs on the DOS side and takes 3 1/2" Mac diskettes.
If your PC only takes 5 1/4 you may be out of luck (give them a call).

I am not affiliated with Pacific Macro.  Just a satisfied user.

========
Douglas Danforth
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
From: rick@bluemoon.rn.com (Richard Nelson)
Subject: Imploding Pd pellet
Organization: Blue Moon BBS ((614) 868-998[024])
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 92 20:51:37 EDT

 
  This is probably a stupid idea - I'm an artist not a nuclear
physicist - but would trying to implode a pellet of Pd saturated
with d & t in one of those big Laser Fusion devices be worth
trying? It seems like the densities of the hydrogen nuclei in
the Palladium lattice are much higher than the densities in 
the frozen pellets they're currently working with.  Or maybe
try adding some additional energy with a Star Wars x-ray laser..
 
                               Allowing my curiosity to over-
                               come the high potential for
                               embarassment,

                                Rick
 

 This is from
     rick@bluemoon.rn.com
who doesn't have his (or her) own obnoxious signature yet
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
From: ames!FNALD.FNAL.GOV!DROEGE
Subject: Brigsten-Mallove paper
Reply-To: ames!FNALD.FNAL.GOV!DROEGE
Organization: Sci.physics.fusion/Mail Gateway
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 20:27:25 GMT

A walk down the hall and a visit with an owner of a "little blue book" more
or less straigntened me out on what woul happen with the 5.59 Gev alpha.
Most of the energy does go with the alpha.  But it still kicks a 100 Mev or
so hole in the sidewalk.  This assumes that it kicks off a single Pd atom.

The range of the alpha would be 1500 or so cm of water - or equivalent mass. 
So still a few meters of earth/concrete.  So they have that part right.

But it was hard before to imagine that a few Mev particle could get away from
the lattice without making some gammas that could be seen.  It is even harder
to imagine a 100 Mev Pd atom not making some gamma noise as it comes to rest.
For gammas above read photons.  Seems to me that is the correct generic term
for gammas, x-rays, etc..

Tom Droege
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
From: Frank Close <FEC@v2.rl.ac.uk>
Subject:  The Cold Fusion Solution
Reply-To: Frank Close <FEC@v2.rl.ac.uk>
Organization: Sci.physics.fusion/Mail Gateway
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 13:58:01 GMT

5 GeV helium nuclei????????????
This is the best joke since the 23rd March 1989.
When I suggested that TBs proposed violation of energy and momentum
conservation I didnt expect anyone to take it seriously.

Jed; as you are an arts graduate you have some excuses for your naivety
but some of the other names in your list appear to have some awareness
of the nuclear and particle physics world. Perhaps you should first check
whether they are all as supportive and accurately described as your posting
suggests. You already have some egg on the face from Warren Buck. You might
also revise your incorrect and exaggerated description of Floyd Culler
as `former Director of Oak Ridge National Lab'; he never held that post.
If you really believe there are energetic helium nuclei flying around and
smashing into other material I bet you are glad that your cells arent
producing anomalous heat right now. If they are, then I suggest you have
a medical check up. Or have you been doing the experiments in your garage
and hence the problems with your car?

According to news reports here, many people are paying out fortunes in the
hope of taking part in the second coming which is promised in Korea in October.
I presume that this is not connected to the CF meeting in Japan around that
time? Perhaps you should include it as a side trip; people who have just
been disappointed in one venture are often surprisingly ready to subscribe
to other nonsenses.
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
From: ames!FNALD.FNAL.GOV!DROEGE
Subject: CSC
Reply-To: ames!FNALD.FNAL.GOV!DROEGE
Organization: Sci.physics.fusion/Mail Gateway
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 21:17:41 GMT

Ed Manning writes: Someone who knows Jed Rothwell should ask him to please
post the news release that he's distribution to the print media. ... "

Jed, I assume that those stockholders with Esq. behind their name have told
you what you can and cannot publish.  

The only purpose that I can see to collect that list of people is in 
preparation for a public offering.  Please put me on your "red herring"
list Jed.  The "News Release" reads like it was taken from a prospectus.  
My guess is that the SEC does not have rules yet for publication on 
electronic news media.  But be careful Jed, you do not want to screw up 
the offering, or go to jail.

Back in the late 50's when I was at NADC Johnsville, one of my collegues
bought a nearly defunct meat packing firm, renamed it "Consollodated 
Missiletronics" and took it public.  Lived off the proceeds for a few 
years.  Another friend was one of the founders of Varian Ass.  So you 
never know which "flier" will take off.  Those were exciting times.  My
own effort "Stony Brook Laboratories Inc." (Named after a creek in Princeton
N.J.) lasted a few years and taught me a lot.  So good luck to Jed, Gene,
and Co.  May the 90's be as exciting as the 50's.

Tom Droege
From: logajan@SLEEPY.NETWORK.COM (John Logajan)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Correct spelling is Brightsen
Date: 18 Aug 92 17:03:32 GMT

I misspelled the name Brightsen in my last two posts.  I hope
this doesn't propogate to other poster's posts.  Sorry Dr. Brightsen.

  -- John Logajan

Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
From: bwise@hemlock.mitre.org (Barry Wise)
Subject: Curious data jump
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 21:27:12 GMT

While looking at the last data set published by Tom Droege, I noticed that the  
eight data point (an OFF run) had an average power measurement that was higher  
than the previous ON measurement. The previous data all showed ON measurements  
that were above the adjacent OFF measurements for this run. I went back to the  
data Tom published previously on his pseudo Ying experiment to see if there was  
a similar occurence. At the tenth data point in the first run the OFF power  
exceeded the previous ON value.  What struck me was that this occured in both  
runs after about the same length of time from the start of the data: 550380  
seconds (152 hrs) for the first run and 603600 seconds (167 hrs) on the second  
run. The ON and OFF values on the previous run appear to double at this point  
also. This is about seven days. Maybe there is an effect due to people being  
around more on the weekend or does this coincide with bowling nite?

--
Barry Wise
(bwise@hemlock.mitre.org)
From: ames!FNALD.FNAL.GOV!DROEGE
Subject: Brigsten, Mallove Fusion Technology Draft.
Reply-To: ames!FNALD.FNAL.GOV!DROEGE
Organization: Sci.physics.fusion/Mail Gateway
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 19:47:35 GMT

Jed Rothwell sent me a copy of the Brigsten-Mallove Fusion Technology Paper.
They have obviously been given the word, as the abstract recently posted has 
been cleaned up from the version I have.  My version reads like an MIT press
release.  

There is not much content in the paper.  But one thing is amazing.  They 
claim that we don't see the 3He and 4He products is that they come off at 
"ranging up to 5.59 Gev" very high energy.  That's 5590000000 ev folks!

The claim is that the heat seen is due to the relatively small interaction
rate as they leave the cell.  Hmmm!  I am glad that I am only seeint a few
mw.  With watts, I would worry about the stability of the concrete in the 
basement walls.  

My problem with this is what does the alpha particle push on to leave at 
5.59 Gev?  I always had the same problem with Superman.  Why didn't he 
just punch a hole in the sidewalk when he tried to leap a tall building?

Is it possible that Brigsten-Mallove don't know that if something goes east
something else has to go west??  Am I being asked to believe in particles 
that just come out of the blue with momentum?  It is just too much for a 
poor engineer to contemplate.  I will therefor leave it to you QM guys to
sort out.

Tom Droege
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion