Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : International Precious Metals (IPMCF) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Richard Mazzarella who wrote (30847)	3/4/1998 10:43:00 PM
From: Zeev Hed	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 35569

Richard, what you are missing is that the most likely daughter nuclei (assuming that indeed you could cold fuse two (or three according to Champion) nuclei to form a heavier one. Furthermore, in cold fusion you GAIN energy in the reaction (the weight of the daughter nuclei is less than the weight of the parents), in Champion examples, the weight of the daughter nuclei is larger than the sum of the parents and thus you lose energy (or you have to put some in it. The graph of mass per nuclei (except for light nuclei where there is quite a structure to the curve) has a minimum around the 3d transition metals (ventered around iron) thus combining lighter nuclei to form iron is energy positive, but combining nuclei with mass above iron to form higher atomic number nuclei is energy negative. Or, if you remember your atomic bomb night stories, when you fission a high atomic number nucleus to lower ones you gain energy, the reverse process would require energies more or less equivalent to those released by a fission weapon. Zeev

To: Richard Mazzarella who wrote (30847)	3/4/1998 11:13:00 PM
From: Bill Jackson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 35569

Richard, The pressure is orders of magnitude lower than what is needed to make the monatomic hydrogen fuse with themselves. The Palladium lacks the strength, it would simply be forced open by that enormous pressure you quote, dissipate, and no effect would be seen. We all cling to the holy grail of cold fusion, but that Pons methods will not and cannot ever work. All those labs working on it are failing. All they can say is we have excess heat production and we cannot explain it, and yet it never works for an audience. Smell a rat. I should tell Joe not to quit his day job, however gathering money from fooles is his day job, and anyone can "make" PGms with doctored start elements. Get into his site and he will tell you to buy $75 worth of reagents to make $5 worth of PGM and he is working to reverse that equation to make $75 worth for $5. He will tell you where to buy the reagents, and some come only from certain places, with whom he has a financial linkage, surprise surprise, but he will deny it of course. And sure enough the ingredients are salted with some PGmMs as bait. Bill