Back to Morrison Index
Dear E632 and WA84 Colleagues,
REVIEW OF SECOND ANNUAL COLD FUSION CONFERENCE.
Over 200 people attended the Second Annual Conference on Cold Fusion
which last 5 complete days. 58 talks were given plus 5 "Survey" talks plus
two Round Table discussions and one Press Conference. No startling new
positive results were presented though Believers considered good progress
had been made. A few careful experiments gave negative results. A couple of
the more interesting positive experiments refused to describe details because
of "patent restrictions". The Kamiokande detector has a very high reputation.
After not finding anything with Titanium, a switch to electrolysis with
Palladium produced some neutrons causing excitement and discussion. The major
problem of Cold Fusion - the disagreement of the amount of heat claimed and
the corresponding expected number of nuclear products - still exists.
Surveys still indicate other major problems, particularly reproducibility.
A Third Annual Conference is planned.
1. MAJOR RESULTS
1.1 Excess heat
1.1.1 McKubre, SRI + EPRI
1.1.2 Droege, Batavia, Ill.
1.1.3 Szpak, San Diego
1.1.4 Liaw, Hawaii
1.1.5 Fleischmann and Pons,
1.2.1 Kamiokande, Japan
1.2.2 Scaramuzzi, Frascati
1.2.3 Taiuti, Genoa
1.2.4 Bertin, Gran Sasso
1.3.1 Will, NCFI
1.4.1 Miles, Naval Weapons Research Center, China Lake, Ca.
1.5 Rates of tritium, neutrons and helium
1.5.1 Cecil, Colorado
1.6 Surface or Bulk effect
2.1 Menlove - survey of neutron detection
2.2 Scaramuzzi - Survey on Gas-loading Experiments
2.3 Ikegami - Research in Japan
2.4 Tsarev - Research in the Soviet Union
2.5 Li - Research in China
2.6 Schlapbach - Hydrogen and its Isotopes in and on Metals.
4. GERISCHER - Review by a Neutral Person
5. ROUND TABLE DISCUSSIONS
6.1 Third Annual Conference
6.2 National Cold Fusion Institute
6.3 Pons and Fleischmann, Jones
1 MAJOR RESULTS
Many results were presented and a hundred pages of notes taken.
It is impractible to present them all, especially as many were very small
experiments which did not fulfil the criteria established at the BYU meeting
which encouraged only major experiments looking at several pieces of evidence
simultaneously. To appreciate the flavour of the Second Annual Conference,
a selection of major experiments where normal controls had been performed,
are discussed here plus a few others chosen for historical reasons. Please
send me documents if you feel there is an error in this. My apologies to
people not mentioned.
1.1 EXCESS HEAT
1.1.1 McKubre, SRI + EPRI
Mike McKubre presented a large experiment by
Cold Fusion standards. This was perhaps the most impressive positive result.
There were measurements of calorimetry, tritium, neutrons, gammas and
autoradiography. No evidence was found for neutrons or gammas. Some indications
for tritium formation but not "evidence". Some positive indication in one out
of 50 audioradiograms.
The hypothesis was that positive results were obtained only with a high
D/Pd loading, about 1.0 and some 100 - 120 experiments were performed on
A closed calorimeter was used as this eliminates most of large corrections
for heat losses. An "isothermal" flow calorimeter was used and some 30
experiments performed. There were still some problems with heat losses, eg
flow streamlining at points where temperature was measured. The bath is about
a meter square and contains four cells. The conditions could be varied widely,
pressure from 40 to 10000 psi, 30 to 600 mA/cm2 and up to 6400 mA/cm2,
0.1 to 100 Watts, runs were 1000 to 2000 hours. It seems that Pd rods were
used eg 3 mm diameter and 3 cm long.
Results for one rod were shown giving 8 or 9 bursts of heat in 2000 hours
in total 45 MJ per mole of Pd. Excess power was often about 10%. One rod
appeared to have a threshold of 300 mA/cm2. Another rod (results not shown) had
an excess of < 250%. No negative heat bursts were found. No excess bursts were
observed before certain "initial conditions". Did not observe bursts when
D/Pd loading was < 0.9.
No bursts were observed when operating with H2O but Mike said that the
amount of running was inadequate.
Question(Bockris) Reproducibility? Ans; 10 successful runs if apply criteria
- initial time was 300 hours for first burst.
Question(Bush) If use PdCl to blacken electrodes, time to start is only 2 hours.
Ans. Often have shiny rods afterwards (and some blackened).
Note that these were not constant temperature calorimeters as at Harwell
and therefore the corrections for temperature measurements could still be
In private conversation, if one takes the total power out and the total
power in over the entire run, the excess was between 1% and 2 to 3%.
1.1.2 DROEGE, Batavia, Il.
This calorimeter constructed by Tom and Lee Droege, was the
finest presented to the conference. It is a closed calorimeter and has inner
and outer shells which are held at constant temperature. Being a null-balance
technique (like the Wheatstone bridge) it has no heat loss errors to worry
about and correct for by assumptions or by special analyses.
It is highly automated, eg by servo-controlled thermo-electric devices.
When operated at 10 Watts, long-term drifts are only 1 mWatt or less.
Depending on the "noise" from the cell, measurement limits are from
4 to 10 mWatts.
The calibration is done in a blind manner - heat bursts whose size is
unknown to the operator, are introduced by a random number generator and the
output is then studied to determine the size of the burst - ingenious!
A continuous measurement is made of the absorbed deuterium. D/Pd values
of between 0.6 and 1.1 were recorded - grinding and polishing the surface
appeared to increase the loading.
Many anomalous heat effects were observed, but on further study rational
explanations were found. The authors write "It is disturbing that as the
sensitivity of our apparatus is increased, the anomalous heat effect seems
to become smaller and smaller. This is one of the signatures of Pathological
The final result was zero +/- 0.2% or in terms of watts, 0.2 W/cm3.
1.1.3 SPZAK, San Diego
S. Szpak et al. of the Naval Ocean Systems Center,
claimed that reproducibility could be greatly increased by a special
preparation technique - preparing the Pd electrodes by the electrodeposition
from Pd++ salts in the presence of evolving deuterium. The reproducibility
was measured by observing tritium. However the amount of tritium involved
was small and when asked about errors, correction for enrichment and checks on
tritium contamination of the Pd, it appeared that the controls and checks had
had been partially but not yet fully performed.
1.1.4 LIAW, Hawaii
Previous Cold Fusion meetings have been electrified by
claims of excess heat of over 600% over input power when a molten salt
technique was used at 370 C. These claims were repeated and it was said 4He
had been measured but not 3He, though it was concluded that the 4He excess was
slight and could be ambient gas. The questioning afterwards was unusually
critical. It was pointed out that the 4He level was ten millions time less
than that of Miles. Dr. Bush questioned the base line of the excess heat
calculation. Fritz Will said he was impressed by the experiments but worried
that very little Deuterium dissolves in Pd at 370 C - was told that the D/Pd
loading was about 0.1 up to 0.3 or 0.4. It was answered that there had been
two positive experiments and 12 others (the impression was that the first two
had apparently given excess heat but it had not been possible to reproduce
this effect since). It was also replied that there was no correlation between
current density and excess heat.
1.1.5 FLEISCHMANN AND PONS
Stan Pons said that the apparatus and
calorimeter had been modified but the conclusions were not significantly
modified - the biggest change mentioned seemed to be that the top of the
cell now had a silver mirror to reduce heat losses. Most of the talk was a
list of sources of heat loss and how to correct for them - the phrase
"non-linear regression analysis" occured frequently.
The second half of the talk was unusual as it was handed over to Dr.
Hansen. He introduced himself as a physicist from the Fusion Energy Council
of the State of Utah who had been asked to analyse the non-released data of
Pons and Fleischmann (a no-win situation as he said). He had taken selected
data, 8 runs of which 2 were blank. Five of the six remaining showed
definitive excess heat and the sixth was unclear - it looked like modest
effects. Did a non-linear regression analysis with Pons and Fleischman and
Chaves and Walling. The excess heat was 6000 eV per Pd atom which is a 1000
times greater than chemical energy. He thought Pons and Fleischmann knew
why the cells worked so well.
In answer to questions, it was said that the electrodes were an alloy
of silver, about 10% but many alloys had been tried. The excess heat was 1.2
to 1.4 watts for an input power of about 6 watts. It was replied that as the
rods are 1mm diameter and 1.25 cm long, the Pd volume is only 1/100 of a cc
and hence the power per cc is large, about 100 Watts. When asked if the
electrodes were prepared in a special way, the answer was "Maybe". Several
times the point was made that one only obtained excess heat
when the D/Pd loading was above 0.9, but when asked how the loading was
measured, it was answered that electro-chemical techniques were being
used, the measurements were being made now but there was good reason to
believe that they were 1.0 to 1.1.
Quite a few Believers complained of the lack of new information and
the non-answering of certain questions. Basically the talk was very similar
to last year's. No mention was made of the large series of 32 and then 64 cells
that had been set up early last year at NCFI. Many times it had been said that
if they changed to a cell which is (a) closed, and (b) in constant temperature
baths,then all these many large corrections for heat losses would be avoided
and the analysis would be very simple. This may have been partially answered
when they said they wished a cell of a simple design so that many tests could
In the poster session, a brief paper was presented where results of
measurements of gammas were given, the gammas being of 2.20 MeV from capture
of thermalised neutrons in water. They had concluded that measurements of the
very weak spectrum of gammas was not possible using NaI detectors in the
presence of the dominant background due to the daughter products of the
Uranium and Thorium decay chains, but that one should use instead high
resolution(but low sensitivity) germanium detectors. The spectra shown had
sharp peaks though they were mainly background. The peak from neutrons was
small. The paper did not show whether these neutrons were from the
cell or from general background. No rates were given, though later Martin
quoted a figure of 5 to 50 neutrons/sec - however the efficiency is not
known, but it is clear that there is no agreement with the normal experimental
results that give a billion billion neutrons per second for a Watt of d-d
fusion. The full paper with all experimental details is awaited.
Have great admiration for this Japanese experimental team
working on detection of neutrinos from Surpernovae and Solar Neutrinos (see CERN
preprint PPE/91-104 that have just finished on this subject). They are a large
group, adequately funded, who do careful work, many calibrations, and who
publish generously and reply frankly to questions. They have obtained
excellent results. Steve Jones and Howard Menlove have been putting Cold Fusion
cells inside the detector since January. Even with the surrounding salt
solution for the neutrons, the volume taken up is small relative to the 3000
tons of water and does not interfere with the detection of Solar Neutrinos.
The idea is that any neutrons produced would be slowed down and interact with
chlorine in a container filled with salt water, giving gammas which would
create electrons which give Cherenkov light which the photomultipliers on the
walls recognise. Have always felt that if Kamiokande detected neutrons at the
low level as Jones and Menlove described, then this confirmation would be
The first talk on the Sunday morning at 09.00 hours was by Dr. Ikegami
from the Fusion Research Institute(almost all "hot' fusion) in Japan - he has
the special responsibility of co-ordinating Cold Fusion research in Japan.
He finished his review by suddenly showing a newspaper cutting of two weeks
ago which he translated as saying that Kamiokande had found neutrons!
Facts were few but with Howard Menlove's help it was possible to
1) Initial experiments were made with Titanium and gas filling with as far as
possible the same conditions as previously and where random neutrons and
also bursts of neutrons had been claimed. In the clean low-background
Kamiokande detector, no evident signal of neutrons were found over several
months, but as Steve Jones says, the analysis is not yet complete.
2) A new set of experiments were started using Palladium and electrolytic
cells. It was here that some six bursts of neutrons were recently detected
3) The bursts of neutrons were from 2 up to 6 neutrons per burst.
Some comments can be made;
a) previously bursts of about 50 neutrons were claimed - it was said that the
new number is only a tenth of that previously claimed - however some
correction for the detection efficiency may be required which might or might
not change this conclusion.
b) Suggested that the observation is consistent with a small contamination of
Uranium or plutonium which occasionally fissions. The contamination could be
in the palladium or the D2O but not in the Titanium or H2O.
When Uranium fissions it gives about 2 to 3 neutrons on average, but
the spread is 1 to 6 - as observed (note happened to see that the probablilty
of 7 neutrons is about 1%), again some correction for efficiency of neutron
detection may be needed. Plutonium gives a higher average number of neutrons.
Now this is a hypothesis, that the neutrons come from uranium or other
contamination and give fusion reactions, but as it is quite possible. It should
be eliminated before claiming a new Cold Fusion effect. This is surely being
done - eg by replacing the D2O by H2O and the palladium by another metal. Note
that Kamiokande is possibly one of the most sensitive detectors of very small
amounts of uranium or plutonium!
In previous correspondance, Steve Jones said one should wait for the full
analysis before drawing any conclusions, and this is correct in general, but
the publication (unknown to Steve) in a newspaper and the presentation at a
conference, rather cancel that argument.
If it should turn out that all the experiments with Titanium and with
palladium that previously gave claims of random neutrons and bursts of neutrons,
fail to be repeated when placed in the low-background, high-efficiency detector
that is Kamiokande, the natural conclusion is that they are unlikely to exist.
Would like to add a further important comment; Kamiokande can detect the
Cherenkov light from electrons produced by gammas. It is suggested by some
that since not enough neutrons and tritons are produced by Cold Fusion, then
the third reaction,
d + d ====> 4He + Gamma of 23.8 MeV
must be dominant(though many experiments have shown it is only ten millionth
of the others). If this were true, then such high energy gammas would be
easily detectable in Kamiokande. They seem not to have been observed. This
would appear to close that loophole. Some escape from this difficulty by
postulating that the 23.8 MeV of energy does not appear as a gamma but the
lattice absorbs the energy. This is considered by most as impossible as the
reaction time is less than ten to the power -20 seconds while the time for the
lattice to transmit energy is ten to the power -10 seconds. This factor of ten
thousand million might seem to kill the idea, but see Section on Theory below.
The Kamiokande result should eventually give a limit on how often the
gamma appears as a gamma and how often its energy is spread over the lattice.
Thus it may be that in a few weeks time the Kamiokande experiment may
give strong evidence in favour of neutron production, but it may be able to
deliver what some would consider to be a fatal blow to Cold Fusion;
but True Believers will probably still believe. At present it appears to have
provided evidence that no random neutrons or bursts of neutrons have been
found coming from cells previously claimed to give positive effects.
1.2.2 SCARAMUZZI, FRASCATI
Dr. Scaramuzzi has continued measurements of
neutrons from cells with Titanium loaded from D2 gas and temperature cycled.
After the first experiments in April 1989 where only a single BF3 counter was
used, the counting efficency has been improved, but it has still proved
difficult to reproduce the earlier results. Now a third generation of
experiments is under way looking for short bursts of neutrons in the Menlove
manner (rather than the long bursts originally claimed). To lower the background
the experiments have been performed in the Gran Sasso tunnel, however the
reduction is much less than would be expected and there must be a suspicion that
gammas are being measured rather than neutrons (indispensible pulse shape
analysis was not mentioned). Reproducibility is still a problem but three
short Menlove-type bursts have been recorded but they occur at a temperature
of -120 C in apparent contradiction with the value of -30 C published earlier -
this was mentioned but not cleared up.
1.2.3 TAIUTI, GENOVA
This experiment is unusual in that great care
has been taken to reduce background, in particular the indispensible
gamma - neutron discrimination is achieved by pulse-shape, energy and neutron
life-time analysis. Further there are anti-coincidence detectors to detect
bursts from cosmic rays. The Scaramuzzi technique was tried by cooling Ti loaded
with D2 gas at 20 bar, and warming up. No neutrons were found. With Ti powder
the low upper limit of E-25 dd fusions/s is found (initially Jones et al.
1.2.4 BERTIN, GRAN SASSO
Dr Bertin recalled that in April 1989, a result
was obtained on neutron production with Jones-type cells in the Gran Sasso
tunnel and the rate was in good agreement with the results of Jones et al.
However the reader of these notes may remember that at the Santa Fe meeting
in May 1989, Yves Declais pointed out that the background rate was very high
so that what was being measured must have been gammas. The numbers given by
Dr. Bertin seemed to confirm this. He described how in the interim they have
now developed an excellent system of measuring neutrons with 6Li glass as
well as NE213 scintillator and pulse-shape analysis so that the contamination
of gammas can confidently be expected to be small. New results should be
1.3.1 WILL, NCFI
Fritz Will and Katherina Cedzynska presented results
from the National Cold Fusion Institute (other than the work of Pons and
Fleischmann). They concentrated on achieving high D/Pd loadings, tritium and
neutron measurements. This was because they had found that if D/Pd < 0.7 then
they found no effects but if D/Pd > 0.8 then they found effects. They used a
volumemetric method with a sealed cell to measure the loading.
With 2mm diameter rods of 3 cm length, it took 2 to 4 days to achieve
loadings of 1.0, a saturation value, but the rods were not uniformly loaded.
Later some members of the audience said they were surprised that such high
loadings were obtained - they were told the answer was a secret following
the patent attorney's request.
Light water controls were run simultaneously with heavy water experiments.
Neutrons were measured with two 3He counters and bursts of up to 280 n/s
were obtained. Only triples or quads were counted in 40 microseconds. There were
a factor of 2.3 more with deuterium than with hydrogen.
Tritium was measured in the gas, electrolyte and in the metal. The
background rate was unusually low, 27 dpm/ml. Dr. Cedzynska said in four out
of 8 experiments the tritium count was above background, a few hundred dpm/ml.
Dr. Will said that latterly four out of four cells gave tritium in each of
gas, electrolyte and metal with deuterium but not with hydrogen. Yields were
4.3 to 11 E10 atoms of tritium per cm3 of Pd in the Pd, but less in the gas
phase, few times ten to the eight.
There was a tentative result of excess heat measured in one of four cells
with a small current density.
The t/n ratio was ten million, but unreliable.
It was replied that the effect did not seem to be a surface one.
1.4.1 MILES, Navel Weapons Center, China Lake, Ca.
Dr. Miles said that
if few neutrons and tritons are observed, then by elimination, 4He must be
produced. During episodes of excess heat, effluent gas samples were sent to
Univ. of Texas at Austin by Bush et al. for analysis. 4He was found with
deuterium but not with hydrogen. The mass spectrometer could separate 4He
and D2 peaks.
When asked by David Worledge whether helium diffusion through the
glass walls could explain the results, and why was no helium found with
hydrogen, Dr. Miles replied that 1000 times more atoms of hydrogen wanted to
escape through the walls than helium atoms wanted to enter and hence the
atmospheric helium could not enter to contaminate the samples.
From an earlier preprint it may be read that the 4He detection limit is
0.14 Watts which corresponds to 2 E12 atoms of 4He in a 500ml flask. The 4He
observed corresponded to 0.14 to 0.52 watts.
1.5 MEASUREMENTS OF RELATIVE RATES OF TRITIUM, NEUTRONS AND HELIUM
1.5.1 CECIL, Colorado
Ed Cecil et al. have measured d-d reactions
at low energy, 170 to 2000 eV in the cm with beams of deuterons of 2 to 15 keV
in the lab. using a Cockcroft-Walton accelerator. They measured the cross
sections for the three reactions;
d + d =====> 3He + n (1)
=====> t + p (2)
=====> 4He + Gamma(23.8 MeV) (3)
They also fired the deuterons on to a 6Li target and measured p, alpha and
gamma production. Down to the lowest energy they found the t to n ratio for
reactions (1) and (2), was unity with no indication of any rise at lower
energies. Also the rates agreed very well with theoretical calculations.
All the other reactions were also in agreement with expectations, in particular
4He production was much less(ten million times) than tritium and neutron
production as would be expected since it is an electromagnetic process and
the others are strong reactions).
Morrison said that these results went down to the lowest values possible
experimentally, but some people thought that at the still lower energies of
Cold Fusion it might still be possible to produce a factor of ten million.
However there are two pieces of evidence against this;
(1) Models of the burning of stars such as our Sun are very successful
and involve still lower energies - any factor of even ten times would show
up in astrophysical observations such as the neutrinos from Supernova 1987A
observed by Kamiokande which agree to a factor of two in estimating 3 E54
(2) Muon catalysed fusion proceeds at effectively zero energy and
people who work on it find the normal ratio of 1 ; 1 ; (very small),
for reactions 1 to 3 resp.
Fritz Will commented that a crystal lattice was different. Morrison
replied that the time of the interaction was ten billion times faster
than the lattice response time.
It was interesting that these results of Cecil et al. were never
referred to again at the meeting.
1.6 SURFACE OR BULK EFFECT
This was one of the more controversial
questions among Believers. Some such as John Bockris, strongly supported
surface effects with Pd and Ti, others such as Fritz Will, considered it
was not a surface effect. Some use Pd rods, others use Ti powder. Many
arguments and theories were advanced, but what was noteworthy was the absence
of direct evidence - for example, no one presented a measured "effect" as
a function of the surface to volume ratio.
2. EXPERIMENTAL REVIEWS
2.1 MENLOVE - Survey of Neutron Detection
Howard Menlove said that in
Ed Storms's review there 38 papers with positive results and 44 with negative
results. At Como there were 38 papers and 5 posters and 2/3 gave positive
results. The source rates of neutron production varied from 1/100 to 100 000
neutrons/sec. This either reflects the equipment is faulty or the source is
non-linear. He reviewed types of detectors and gave a list of a dozen
different ways of getting false positive results. He then talked mainly of
the Los Alamos experiments.
2.2 SCARAMUZZI - Survey of Gas Loading Experiments
listed the large number of parameters that must be chosen and controlled.
He said the experiments are complex but concluded that despite this,
gas-loaded experiments are better controlled than electrolytic ones.
2.3 RESEARCH IN JAPAN
Dr. Ikegami said some 20 groups were working
on Cold Fusion, 12 on neutrons, 4 on excess heat and the others on charged
particles, helium etc. They can get their metals free of charge and the
Fusion Institute(essentially hot fusion) helps with meetings etc. Many
positive results but most of the experiments are small, except Kamiokande.
2.4 RESEARCH IN THE SOVIET UNION
Dr. Tsarev said that the first
conference of Cold Fusion workers was in March 1991 in Dubna where 45 institutes
were represented, but with zero funding. After the initial interest some got
positive results but then stopped perhaps because of the mass media.
Positive and negative results were obtained but generally only the former
were published. He then gave a long list of groups and results. A Dubna
group that was well-known for its excellent work on muon-induced fusion,
found no effect four times and put the strong limit of E-25 d-d fusions/s
but then tried the Menlove type of experiment and analysis and claimed
bursts of neutrons.
2.5 RESEARCH IN CHINA
Dr. Li said that the attendance at the meeting in 1990
was 28 groups with 77 persons on 10 May 1990, while in 1991 there were two
meetings, one for the South-West with 5 groups on May 4th and one in Beijing
on May 15 with 7 groups; so it can be seen that the numbers are shrinking
with time. Some groups found effects but sometimes could not reproduce and
stopped, others continued and tried new techniques. Several used simple
inexpensive plastic detectors such as CR39 which gave tracks for charged
2.6 SCHLAPBACH - HYDROGEN AND ITS ISOTOPES IN AND ON METALS
Prof. Schlapbach of Friburg
gave a very serious, witty and cultured talk which seemed to please
everyone. He gave many technical points and his written version
is awaited. He recommended reading "Topics in Appld. Physics", vol 63, 1988.
Among the points made were;
If the metal surface is oxidised this can create a barrier which could
greatly reduce the rate at which hydrogen enters
explained in detail that the isotopes of hydrogen diffuse at different speeds
in metals and hence this will give an isotopic separation
at high loadings of deuterium in palladium, > 1, the d and Pd ions are
closer together but never close enough to cause fusion
intermetallic compounds can take up more hydrogen - his preference was
LaNi5 which expands 25% in volume, but it is very brittle
also Ca3Pd2, where one can achieve Ca3Pd2H7
the Pd-hydrogen system was very well studied
in answer to a question - if you wanted a non-equilibrium state, would
expect to occur near the surface not in bulk. The best bet would be to study
Many theories of Cold Fusion were presented and often strongly supported
during various question times. A review of the theories was given by Dr.
Preparata with a sub-title "Possible and Impossible Theories". He presented
the problems faced by theory to fit all the experimental results including
the t/n ratio of E+7 - he almost sounded like an arch-sKeptic. He required
a "possible" new theory to explain the new results without un-explaining
He required there to be deep holes of 100eV and 2Ang. wide, one per Pd
atom - this is to penetrate the potential barrier. Theories which cannot
do this are "impossible" - he quoted the theories of Schwinger, Bush, and
Chubb and Chubb as being impossible.
To explain the relative absence of tritium and neutrons compared to the
excess heat assumed to come from fusion, he said that the dominant reaction
must be (3) ie 4He plus energy of 23.8 MeV. Since such high energy gammas
are not observed, the energy is taken up by the lattice. As the reaction time is
very fast, E-21 seconds, the lattice must react quickly and he calculated
that for a lattice spacing of 3 Angstroms, this means the energy must move
at a thousand times the velocity of light - this surprising effect he justified
by asking the audience to remember EPR. Afterwards someone asked him about the
EPR paradox as he thought matter and energy could not go faster than light.
Dr. Preparata replied they were the same thing as there was no release of
information as in Quantum Mechanics. (Comment - was at the Symposium in
memory of John Bell and thought the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox had been
resolved by the Aspect experiment and by considering Quantum Mechanics was
dominant over Locality).
Fritz Will also asked if there was a problem in the fast release of energy
in E-21 seconds. He was told there was no problem as the transfer was
between wave functions.
John Bockris pointed out that his theory was for a bulk effect and was fine
for Palladium rods, but was not good for other metals such as Titanium powder,
and people had talked about steel? The behaviour of hydrogen isotopes is quite
different in different metals. Dr Preparata said he will get to that, he did
not know the facts for Titanium etc.
4. GERISCHER - REVIEW BY A NEUTRAL PERSON
Prof. M Gerischer of Berlin is
a distinguished Physical Chemist who specialises in Electro-chemistry and is
an old friend of Martin Fleischmann.
He said he was invited at rather short notice and had been busy reading
since as he had done no experiment on Cold Fusion.
In general he noted that there had been great initial enthusiasm but when
the big labs could not reproduce the results, this died away though a few groups
continued. At this meeting had heard a lot of new information. He divide his
talk into pros and contras
Pro; anomalous phenomen observed widely - excess heat, n, t, 4He only with
deuterium not with hydrogen
Contra; Comparisons of D2O and H2O often not performed. In many experiments no
effects found. Contrary to what was said, people are more inclined to publish
positive than negative results.
Pro; t and n found
Contra; the t/n ratio found is not the expected 1;1.
Pro; Calorimetric measurements show occasional large bursts of excess heat
Contra; Amounts of nuclear reactions observed not of the same level as would
be expected for fusion. Often no time coincidence between excess heat and
Pro; 4He now supposed to be the main source of heat with 23.8 Mev from
d + d ===> 4He + gamma of 23.8 Mev. The 4He was found in the evolved gases
and very little in the metal
Contra; Quantity of 4He too small to account for excess heat claims
Question; Why does electrochemistry give more anomalous effects than gas phase?
Question 1; Where does the helium originate? If in the volume then the 4He
should be found in the metal rather than in the gas. But Miles found in the gas.
Question 2; tritium is found in the electrolyte - this suggests it is a surface
effect. need more rigourous system of analysis.
Question 3; Role of Lithium? Are impurities essential? as a monolayer? LiH is
Question 4; Is it justified to relate heat to volume? -is risky. If relate heat
to surface - is misleading. Therefore now relate heat to input.
Question 5; Reproducibility? It is essential to be able to convince people.
Little bit sad but we do not seem to see it very often. Are conditions which
improve reproducibility to be kept secret?
Question 6; If heat generation proved, what are the prospects for applications
as a source of energy? Basic problem of the Carnot cycle - need more energy out
than energy in, therefore 100% is not breakeven point. A system works more
efficiently at higher temperature, but the amount of deuterium in metals
decrease with increasing temperature. Must know concentration of
deuterium in all materials and experiments.
CONCLUSIONS; What would be really convincing?
There is not sufficient evidence for phenomenon that could be attributed
to nuclear processes.
However there are many inconsistencies that should be settled if confirmation
of beliefs of the church are to be accepted.
Shocked that people work on experiments where the products are allowed to
escape. Think will only reach any conclusions with closed systems where no
More effort should be made to look for 4He.
Test runs with D2O should be done fully and in parallel with D2O.
All fragmentary results will not solve the problems.
Doubt if we will reach full harmony but we can hope.
5. ROUND TABLE DISCUSIONS
The first Round Table was before Prof. Gerischer's
talk and was entitled "Similarities and Differences in Cold Fusion Experiments"
With such an encouraging title i spent some going through the papers I had
filled the boot of my car with in the hope of making a serious detailed
The Chairman, David Worledge made a serious review of Cold Fusion, not too
different from that of Prof. Gerischer. However no one replied to all the
questions he had raised and the round table was a disappointment although
The Second Round Table was the concluding item of the meeting with Martin
Fleischmann as the Chairman. Like the first Round Table, it never had a
consistent pattern - one person would say something, the next would say the
opposite and no one would object or try to reconcile because no one seemed
to be aware there was any contradiction. Many fine sentiments were expressed
but everyone remained camped in their experiment or theory. For example no one
said he would stop using open calorimeters although the wish had often been
The first Annual meeting finished with a standing ovation. That did not
happen this time, indeed there was rather a sober attitude though the Believers
were determined to carry on.
6.1 THIRD ANNUAL CONFERENCE
It was announced that in view of the progress
made a Third Annual Conference on Cold Fusion would be held. It would be in
Japan, probably September or October 1992. The news was greeted warmly.
6.2 NATIONAL COLD FUSION INSTITUTE
Although in theory the NCFI is
closed and no more money is coming from the State of Utah, the University
of Utah is quietly providing money to allow it to tick over since the rent
has been paid for some time in advance. Staff has been greatly reduced.
6.3 PONS AND FLEISCHMANN, JONES
Stan and Martin were in great form at the
Conference. Stan is working near Nice. A publication suggested that he was
working for a Japanese company. Martin is still based at Southampton.
Steve was busy during the conference working in Japan on Kamiokande.
Some of our Japanese colleagues were greatly angered by an
article that $25 million had been given to Cold Fusion. The real sum from
the Fusion Institute is only for meetings etc. and is rather little.
The biggest source of funds is probably the Electrical Power Research
Institute which has given $3 million over several years.
In many countries such as the Soviet Union, no money has been allocated
to Cold Fusion, the workers have done it mainly in their spare time and
with material gleaned from many sources. Some US government agencies do
fund Cold Fusion.
This was very different from the First Annual Cold Fusion
Conference where hopes were high and the media was everywhere. Now it was a more
restrained gathering. Believers who had been accustommed to expressions of doubt
and sometimes even ridicule, from their neighbours, were pleased to be back in
a company where they were appreciated and where people took their work
seriously. However the early enthusiasm has gone and very few considered that
Cold Fusion would be a source of useful power soon - maybe 5 or 10 years if
the problem of reproducibility has been solved. Was frequently asked if
hearing all these positive results had not changed my opinion of Cold Fusion,
but replied that there were a tremendous number of experiments on fusion
such as those described by Ed Cecil, and experiments on hydrogen isotopes
in metals all performed before 1989, apart from the negative experiments on
Perhaps the most decisive result will turn out to be that in a really
reliable detector, Kamiokande, the groups that had previously reported
random neutrons and bursts of neutrons with Titanium and gas, now cannot
Will there be a Third Annual Conference - probably!
Douglas R. O. Morrison