Cold Fusion is Back (there's just one problem)
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 3 พ.ค. 2024
- Try out my quantum mechanics course (and many others on math and science) on brilliant.org/sabine. You can get started for free, and the first 200 will get 20% off the annual premium subscription.
In the past couple of years cold fusion has received renewed attention, though it's now been renamed to "low energy nuclear reactions" or LENR for short. In this video I look at what we know and don't know, and how promising it is.
The early papers on muon catalyzed fusion that I mention are here:
www.nature.com/articles/160525a0
journals.aps.org/pr/abstract/...
The papers about electron shielding in lattices are here:
www.publish.csiro.au/ph/PH540373
link.springer.com/article/10....
The references for the early cold fusion papers from the 1920s are
Paneth & Peters, Naturwissenschaften, 14(43), 956-962 (1926)
Wendt & Irion, JACS, 44(9), 1887-1894 (1922)
Huw Price has a paper about the entire cold fusion story here
arxiv.org/abs/2201.03776
If you want to get started with reading about the topic, I suggest you start with Huw's paper.
The paper with the laser modulation is this:
dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/...
The report from the follow-up experiment that failed to reproduce the laser modulation results is here:
coldfusioncommunity.net/wp-con...
The paper from Edmund Storms is here:
www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/Bib...
Arvin Ash's video about the strong nuclear force is here:
• Why Don't Protons Fly ...
The recent paper with hypotheses for how low energy nuclear reactions might come about is here:
arxiv.org/abs/2208.07245
💌 Sign up for my weekly science newsletter. It's free! ➜ sabinehossenfelder.com/newsle...
👉 Support me on Patreon ➜ / sabine
📖 My new book "Existential Physics" is now on sale ➜ existentialphysics.com/
🔗 Join this channel to get access to perks ➜
/ @sabinehossenfelder
00:00 Intro
00:31 Cold fusion works
05:27 Cold fusion doesn't work
09:41 Something works, but we don't know what
14:12 What does it mean?
18:16 Sponsor message
#science #physics #technology - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
I didn't know that there where some cold fusion that actually works. Even if the current methods is impractical for energy generation it doesn't sound like we have to break a few of the laws of physics to achieve it. So then it worth while to do some research about it.
Yeah, it won't save the world, but careful funding and experimentation is likely to produce some new knowledge.
Exists for a long time as a neutron source, for which it is really handy. For example, the "Fusor" was developed in the 60s and is a viable neutron source. A company called "NSD-Fusion" produces them as a commercial product today.
the wright brothers first plane flew only 180 feet, it was a glider with an engine and was shot off the ramp with a catapult, basically a worthless piece of crap,
@@graealex Fusors use hot fusion
@@robc1952 No catapult for the first Wright flight. We all have seen the film clip, but that was not their first plane, which was wrecked on the first day.
I love Sabine’s sense of humour. There’s just one problem [insert sad violin music]... only she can do it.
put her in the same room as Weinstein, Sir Roger and Sean Carroll.
What about Einstein? Yes, that guy again.
So - no one else has been able to reproduce the results...
I had an elegant response to this, but this comment section is not large enough to contain it.
At the end I am glad that there is just one problem ...
“Understanding the strong nuclear force in LHC collisions is quite simple, by which I mean a PhD in particle physics will do.” Loved that!
Rocket scientists need not apply evidently ! hilarious zinger on her part.
From what I understand (mainly from Dyson Freeman), a Masters in particle physics should do, then. A PhD involves working for 3 years on one tiny little area of something but the general knowledge comes with the Masters.
@@robertbrandywine not many people that choose to get a Masters in Particle Physics tbh. If you're going into that field, you'll likely need a phD anyways, so there's often no point in getting the Masters first. AFAIK, there are no Masters degree programs for particle physics in the US, though there are several in the UK and EU
@@TheGuyCalledX "Particle programs", you nuts or what...they found about a billion already yet nothing works! There is but ONE force only. Infidels, hail to one and the only, the mighty Electromagnet AKA just do it-the return to monopole magnetic stillness :P
@@TheGuyCalledX Well, if a MSc is enough, doing the work can be a legitimate PhD project. If a PhD is needed, the PhD probably has to be closely related.
I greatly enjoy Sabine's discussions. I earned a Ph.D. in physics many years ago and can appreciate the exceptional depth and range of her knowledge. She does not engage in adverse criticism, personally, of other physicists with whom she disagrees. That makes her lectures even more enjoyable.
I wish my high school science, chemistry, and physics teachers had been as effective as Sabine in communicating complex ideas.
Definitively! If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough - Albert Einstein.
@@augustlandmesser1520 As simple as possible, as complex as needed. - Albert Einstein
I wish mine had been as good as Sabine in communicating how _interesting_ science is!
They made it so boring, so I didn't even want to try to understand.
@augustlandmesser1520
To me, this implies that we can only understand simple things!
It worries me though that Albert Einstein said it.
I love this channel, does anyone know any other similar science channel similar to this one? (just straight science and no fluff)
I led one of the teams that Sabine cites in this video (at the 10.34 mark). We spent almost five years looking into LENR. In the video, Sabine states that we could not replicate the prior results. That's true, but there’s more to it. We observed the claimed heat effect, both in magnitude and duration, in our parallel *control* cells. This indicates a calibration error in the apparatus. One little known fact about these electro-chemical cell experiments is that they are run for a week or more before the effect is observed. Typically, calibration is conducted over a few hours and is done both before an experimental run and intermittently during it, to re-check thermal stability.
We submit that this approach to calibration is inadequate for establishing a calorimeter’s propensity for heat artifacts. Stability over time periods longer than the experiment should be demonstrated in order to minimize the possibility of misinterpreting the fluctuations that we observed as “excess heat” events.
Consequently, we contend that all claims of anomalous heat in LENR experiments using electro-chemical cells that do not exhibit thermal stability on a time period longer than the time duration of the experiment itself must be thrown out. As the majority of research over the past 30 years has not demonstrated this kind of calibration stability, that eliminates most of the effort in this field. You can read more about our work on the ReResearch LLC website.
That is not to say that we know everything about hot fusion in the solid state or how quantum mechanical interactions might impact fusion reactivity. There is much still to be discovered. But these electro-chemical LENR heat experiments are noise, not signal.
Gave you a thumbs up, I followed your report a little bit. ( Absolutely totally Out of my field)
I was Hoping to see some input from the female narrator and the owner of this channel, about your findings.
But she didn't say nothing. 🥺
thanks for sharing; i appreciate the insight.
At least the experiments are cheap. And you're supposed to say that more research is always better, right? Am I allowed to say it's never been shown to work above experimental error (is this still true if multi experiments are combined into a big meta-experiment?) and I wouldn't advise a friend to get involved in this direction?
As George Orwell wrote, "All objects are cold, but some objects are colder than others."
As Oscar Wilde wrote, "To make one video about cold fusion is unfortunate; to make TWO begins to look like carelessness."
I love that the "there's just one problem" line had its own theme music!
That was hilariously obnoxious
Or obnoxiously hilarious. I don’t know
It was funny at start, but than it became more of a distruction and annoyance because of two reasons. Sabine kept talking and the music was too loud. Good idea, but needs work. :)
I agree... But... There is one... 🎻🎵😈🤣
Sorry but for me by the end I couldn't stand it. It ruined what would otherwise have been an interesting video.
I am retired now, but back in the day, I spent a lot of time studying the channeling phenomena of MeV alpha particles in single-crystal silicon.
The channeling phenomena widens and becomes less pronounced as you decrease the incident particle's energy. It often struck me that if you aligned a single crystal substrate with a low-energy deuterium beam the beam would be focused to the center of the channel. as the deuterium piled up in the center of the channel the incident beam would be focused on that deuterium, effectively "Increasing" the d-d cross-section. It seems to me that an optimum energy and crystal substrate could be found to get a enhanced reaction going. There are some other tricks with two crystals you can do, but I digress
Ι remember I was a physics student in 1989 when Fleischmann and Pons conducted their experiment; we were all in the auditorium talking enthusiastically about it, when the Nuclear Physics Professor came in and, when we asked him about it, he managed to wipe the smiles off our faces in five minutes! Still, I remember the excitement. We must never give up hope!
I like that she acknowledges her skepticism, yet believes more study is beneficial. So often, science is treated as established fact. "There's just one problem..." - it is not. Science is still very much 'figuring it out'. That's not bad. We just need to recognize that our models are incomplete, and keep studying.
Much continued success, Sabine. I like your attitude, and clear explanations. Well done! :)
The problem is when something is so unlikely to be achieved in theory that we might be wasting resources on that that we could use on more achievable stuff that is also very important.
Yes. We are the science. That's why it's incomplete.
@@didack1419 But given that our 'knowledge' is so limited, any ideas of what is 'so unlikely' could be way off. It's by stretching the limits of our perceived limitations that we exceed them, and find new horizons... :)
@@madnessbydesign1415 But resources are limited (money, HR, materials), if you have to choose between several options, you have to invest into what is realistic to be achieved yet important, not on what is hypothetical.
We need some standards, it can't be that we invest on whatever we feel like it regardless of how likely it is to give results.
The problem isn't really in science. REAL scientists (I'd say the majority of them at least) never claim to have "full knowledge" of anything, and are very much aware of the gaps and vast areas uncharted. They are even afraid sometimes to get to these vast uncharted areas in their research.
The problem is with the billions of ignorants who MUST have something to believe in, and with the decline (in popularity) of religion, have made the scientist figure (yes, the one with strange hair-cut and white apron, holding glass test tubes and colorful liquid in them) their new high priests, doing the rituals of the new religion.
True, we owe much of modern day's technology to the findings of scientists, still... the masses put way too much faith on the scientific method and "what we know at present" for their own health.
I think the strongest example is the huge political force on scientists today to align with the new prophetic warnings of "global climate catastrophe" which is of course a big fat lie - there's absolutely no evidence, or even reasonable model to predict that. Anyway - the workings of religion severely damage scientists ability to do their thing successfully.
I admire Sabine's commitment to speaking the truth and letting the chips fall where they may. The first time I heard of her was her article in Symmetry Magazine attacking the sacred cow of "beauty" in physics. As a practicing physicist in the US, I can tell you that was an important message that physicists needed to hear. This video may have an even more important message since it address the conformity rampant in all fields of science. I am certainly guilty of thinking cold fusion is a hoax, but I am now willing to reconsider. Thanks Sabine!
This is really what I come to Sabine for. There are a lot of Science enthusiasts ready to explain the specifics of an experiment or project, but only she really brings the broader context. So thankful that she speaks plainly and from her experience in the field about practicalities
As a non-scientist I have the same appreciation of Sabine. I've read her book about the issue of beauty in physic. The problem is in the past that notion worked. However now we are so far beyond where our brains evolved to keep from being eaten by lions I'm amazed at the progress we have made.
She's speaking her opinion, not the truth. Maybe her opinion will eventually turn out to the right one, or maybe it won't. I'm not sure it's a good idea to take any one source and treat them as "the truth", it's better to just keep an open mind, but not so open your brains fall out, and listen to a lot of sources. And you don't have to decide which claim is true, you can listen to competing claims and end up just saying that there's not enough evidence to choose and so I don't know what the truth is.
Science is not about truth
I first heard about Pons & Fleischmann back when the big story broke, and I thought it was the most exciting thing, and the following months were such a letdown. I'm considerably more skeptical now... maybe cautious or patient. Glad there's a lot of fusion research going on today, public and private, exploring so many different approaches.
Stanley Pons introduced cold fusion to the American Chemical Society in Dallas in 1989. It was very exciting. Later attempts to replicate were like trying to play basketball when the air goes out of the ball. One person at Texas A & M explained that in their further work, when it seemed to work, there was a lot of heat and the palladium rods would distort. And, that pure palladium would not work; it had to have impurities, possibly if i recall 5% platinum. Something was happening, if not cold fusion, but possibly neutron capture? Very obvious is that if we stick to known channels using known paradigms, we will not discover new worlds. Kudos to those who continue this work. Thank you Professor Sabine, for an insightful presentation.
Sabine's video is probably one of the most balanced and enlightening discussions on cold fusion that I've seen. Well done!
One thing I really value about this channel.
Sabine is frank about the holes in our scientific knowledge.
It's what Physics is about, though most holes are just in my knowledge. :)
Another, similar, example is being a Project Manager and not liking to solve problems.
She's making them up.
@@hans-joachimbierwirth4727 **licks your elbow** 😍😍
You only said "holes" because she's a woman
Frank? She draws the gaps in knowledge out, puts them in a party dress, covers them in beaded necklaces and parades them around in the town center, describing them in detail with a megaphone to anyone who will listen.
A solid-state diode was in use for radio reception long before science explained how it worked. It was found that a metal wire in contact with a crystal of galena could perform rectification on weak amplitude-modulated signals. It was used simply because it worked.
Yep, it highlights the difference between science (knowledge for knowledge sake) versus technology (tool making). Blacksmiths were making metal, not just metal objects, thousands of years before metallurgy became a thing. Science and technology are now linked, because science is a tool that technologist can use to make their wares. They are still separate disciplines. Just because you use a computer does not make you a computer programmer.
Ha! You bring back old memories. I read an article in Popular Mechanics or some similar publication on how to build a crystal radio using galena. A friend of mine was a rock collector and gave me a small crystal of galena. I remember heating a lump of lead with my father's gasoline blowtorch and dropping the crystal in it. Then I needed to make an inductor. It turns out that Quick Quaker Oats came in a cylindrical container of the right diameter. I pestered my mom to make me Quaker Oats for breakfast.
When the tube was finally empty, I asked my mom if I could have it. The next problem was finding wire to wind the inductor. It turns out that old power transformers from radio and TV sets had a lot of wire. I used some to make the inductor, and some heavier wire to make the antenna. Now that everything was together I found a sensitive spot on the galena crystal, and lo and behold I heard voices!
The signal was much stronger than I expected, so I got on my bike and followed the road down to the end. There sat radio station CFRB, a 50,000 watt station on 1010 kilocycles. The friendly engineers let me in and took me on a tour of the station. I was completely fascinated and returned many times for more explanations of how the station worked. This started a lifelong career in electronics. I am now 80 years old and retired with a total of 6 United States Patents and numerous inventions. All thanks to a small crystal of galena from a friend.
We probably run out of low hanging fruits that can be found just by clumping stuff together, and some luck.
@@stevewilson5546 : Your story deserves to be recorded.
@@stevewilson5546 I used a cat whisker on the Galena crystal using some tungsten wire, which I obtained by cracking open a 100 W lightbulb.
But OA91 diodes become available not long after...
As luck would have it, I actually knew Pons and Fleischmann back in the early-to-mid 1980s. I have reason to believe that, based on a cryptic remark the two of them once made to me, I think that they had already started their work on cold fusion at the time they made their remark to me. Martin Fleischmann died a few years ago. The last I heard Pons was still working on cold fusion at an undisclosed site, probably in France.
There is another small fusion device called a fusor. It's not exactly cold fusion, but the devices can be quite small. The inventor (or perhaps one of the inventors) of the fusor was Philo T. Farnsworth, who was more famous for inventing television. Farnsworth was my grandmother's second cousin, and I once met his widow at a family party. I am actually in possession of one of Farnsworth's fusors, not the complete device but parts of it. The parts are sitting in my garage.
The demonstration a few days ago of hot fusion exceeding the break even point was exciting. There is an old joke about nuclear fusion which goes something like this: practical fusion is just 20 years away, always has been, always will be. I heard that joke about 35 years ago, and it still applies.
I have come to greatly enjoy your programs. You explain complex issues and problems, with no dumbing down. That takes great skill and a thorough understanding of the subject. I may just be a bohunk Georgia boy, but I am not an ignoramus. I think you respect the intelligence of every viewer.
The "there is just one problem" got me EVERY. SINGLE. TIME.
A highly reproducible phrase
There are not many people who could pull that off. This is the first of her videos I have seen (won't be the last!) and I adore her delivery. Lively enough to keep us listening, and punctuated enough to know when we are taking a sharp turn.
Yes, priceless isn't it? Bordering on profound!
According to Sabine, there is only one problem with LENR: Labs aren't blowing up left and right.
Finally somethings about physics that I can understand.
Not left and right, but there have been anomalous explosions, from the nano/micro-scale up to SRI losing one of their researchers in a lab explosion that COULDN'T possibly be accounted by a H + O or D + O or any combination thereof.
I remember this being described as ‘the dead graduate student problem’ (i.e. there should be explosions if this was working)
@@PeterAndrewsVermont Schrodinger's lab intern?
Excellent video thank you very much Sabine. We humans aren't great at admitting that we don't understand something and I'm totally with you that there may be an interaction between chemical & nuclear reactions. As you say though we haven't ever been able to boil a kettle with cold fusion, yet.
I stumbled upon her videos when a discussion of the pros and cons of nuclear power were discussed. I fell in love with her lectures because she does her best to avoid hype and present the material with humor and in terms I can understand. It’s like having a good professor.
I never entirely understand what’s going on in these videos, but they give me such excellent research rabbit hole fodder. I get to be confused about so many new, exciting things. Thank you, truly!
You have to be careful with cold fusion, it is easy to waste time on rabbit holes. Actually I've watched a bunch of stuff about it and I've never seen a better explanation than this video...
I've learnt rather a lot that I'm more confused about in these last couple of years than my entire life beforehand, regarding physics. 😆
@@CAThompson that is called the beginning of the enlightenment phase. Once you reach that stage, you stop working but continue talking.
Yeah show some caution with this particular rabbit hole. Theres a *lot* of crazy persons messing up what little sanity is in the field of cold fusion. There well may be something legit going on with the purported phenomena, but ever since they started teaching small children why perpetual motion machines will always be impossible, the crazy-person brigade seems to have moved over to cold fusion instead.
See also Alcubiere Warp Drives (on paper possible, in practice probably impossible), EM drives (on paper impossible, in practice mixed results) and pretty much anything out of Eagleworks labs (NASAs mad scientist division, the guys who investigate hetrodox propulsion ideas on the understanding that 90% of what they look at is nonsense, but 10% *might* change the world)
Sabine, you are absolutely BRILLIANT. I suffer from a lifelong allergy to math, and yet with your presentation I can actually understand the broad outlines of this research and some of the problems the scientists are encountering. You are a highly gifted teacher providing people like me a glimpse into areas of thought we would not otherwise have access to. Thank you so much!
"I suffer from a lifelong allergy to math"
You suffer from trauma from crappy teachers, over bearing parents, and a shitty scholastic system. You need to address this trauma and stop deflecting with ridiculous notions like being scared of numbers or having an allergy to maths. Its not kitchy, its not funny, its not a badge of honor, its not a personality quirk. IT IS UNADDRESSED TRAUMA. Stop it. Get help.
Also, its not the maths that matter. The concepts are whats important. If you understand the concepts at play you can look up the formula, put it into a spreadsheet, and have the computer do it for you. Just like literally everyone else does. No one is doing polynomials by hand. No one. That belief is a side effect of the trauma your shit school experience left you with. Stop making excuses for the people that have abused you and get over yourself. As someone who taught themselves more than school ever tried to, I know you're traumatized and you need to stop using it as a crutch. No one is going to pat you on the back for it except those who also think themselves cool for being afraid of maths. For the record, none of them are cool.
George, you may also want to check out (if you don't already), PBS's "Spacetime". Much in the manner of Sabine's show, the host takes a lot of really gnarly stuff and breaks it down into, "these are the theories between certain ideas physicists are toying with, minus the crazy math."
This is far more interesting than I expected. I came to hear about cold fusion research, but I was intrigued by the particle physics questions.
One of the clearest technical presentations I've ever listened to.
0:00 It's not working
0:30 Fusion release Energy
1:23 Hot Fusion Eats Up Energy More Than It Releases
2:17 Replace Electrons with Muons - Neuron Catylized Fusion
5:56 Palladium and Heavy Water
7:16 Reputation Trap
8:29 2019 Google, Japan
9:09 Low Energy Nuclear Reactions LENR
11:02 Nano-Cracks, "unable to replicate finding."
13:18 "Something's going on, we don't know what"
14:30 The Strong Nuclear Force becomes weaker at high energy
15:34 16:26
17:16 1991 method, ongoing inexpensive research
18:16 Basics of Physics w/Brilliant
Nice work, man. Thanks 👍🏻
Cool thanks
Good.
we see what you are doing here (everywhere?) - much obliged and keep up the good work sir 🙂
5:40 since the 1920's ,,,
Bring back the palladium night club!
Or maybe the Petro giants has sabotage all research ,after all they buy all governments?
*I love Cold Fusion.* It brings me back to my university days when Fleischmann-Pons first made their 'announcement'
I remember so many people setting up their own experiments, and faxing, yes faxing each other their results(or non-results)
I hate to break it to you, but fax machines are still widely used. Xerox on the other hand..
@@Lady_Phoenix Indeed. We were warned, a long time ago, that it was always important to practice "Safe Fax" and use a cover sheet. 😊
Fax machines pre-date the telephone, and are still widely used today. I just faxed someone yesterday.
Reasons for use today often involve faxing legal documents, which are recognized in law as something close to the original for legal purposes, and also that a hard copy is necessarily produced in normal fax communications.
*_"There was just one FAX?"_*
😊😊😊
Hey. Hey there. Some of the Floridonians’ electrical cars caught fire when hurricane Ian flooded the salty sea water up to them. It was salty seawater. ohmigod. Why’d they catch fire BECAUSE of water? OhmiGAHD! I don’t know why because I’m a casual savant, and I didn’t look up shit.
Thank you! It's refreshing to see you are willing to say something maybe possible because of things we do not understand.
The studio lighting in this video is superb, really makes your eyes pop. And the scientific content is great, of course.
Sabine: There's just one problem...
Me: Wow. Only one problem remaining to solve? That's fantastic!
Sabine: It's not working.
Me: ...oh
"there's just one problem" x 30
I'm reminded of Isaac Arthur's favourite catchphrase: "The first rule of warfare is..."
Reminds of Colombo, "There's just one thing..."
Well... it *might* work, it just hasn't been replicated :P
hahahaha yeah :D shes always funny to the bone:D
So much information, thank you!! About the Fleischmann cold fusion, what struck us like hell was the simplicity of their set up in the lab. It was at secondary school level. It was hillarious. My uncle demonstrated us kids cold fusion using two little blocks of ice in a glass of whisky. After several tries and tasting the whisky, it really felt hot. My aunt threw us out of the the kitchen.
More Germanic humour. Love it.
Obviously it worked! There's just one problem. Auntie isn't funding any more experimentation! Ronn :)
I didn't know that scientist have sense of wicked humor.
Just one problem: no one has been able to stop reproducing the results and have all ended up as alcoholics.
That's got me thinking what might whisky taste like if it was made using heavy water.
everything we do not know for sure and everything we do not know is worth researching about. Great video! Superb explanation! Thank you for sharing it ❤
Okay, coming back to this, because I watched it when it first came out, and youtube just proposed it to me again, and it made me laugh.
That "there is just one problem"...
Sabine is a very talented educator and communicator. We need more of her. In fact, we need at least one of her in every school.
If you make your lessons interesting and engaging, students will learn. If you bore them to tears, they won't. It really is that simple. Of course, simple is not easy, and finding a good educator is an endlessly frustrating task.
During my entire schooling I had... I think two teachers who were both engaging and effective. I had a great one that taught me next to nothing, because he was engaging but not very good at teaching, and none that were great at teaching but not very engaging, because the latter is a prerequisite for the former. Over the course of two decades, that is a very small number.
“It’s not just that lab life is lonely and neutrons are better than nobody” you’re awesome. I love your videos
cold fusion is the ultimate fantasy energy source
I feel like there needs to be a large tattoo proclaiming "LAB LIFE!" across the abdomen of a particularly smug researcher...😉
@@TyMoore95503 please don't give them ideas like that🤣
@@TyMoore95503 are you like a badger just taking resources or something?🤣🤣
@@raven4k998 Honey Badger don't care! 😁
Don't worry Sabina: your exquisite sense of humor shields you completely of that "bad reputation effect"! I've been laughing all along with your review. I'm being "infected" by your deep German/Physicist/ Geek humour. Thanks a lot.
nopons here.
Her absolute best line so far was about string theory: "... which means that if you tune the parameters right the theory will prove that the universe does not exist. This is of cause in conflict with observations". It doesn't get more deadpan than that, and I laughed hysterically for way longer than I should have.
Thank you for the clarification, I was looking all internet about that topic.❤
Sabine I love your style. Keep it up. Eagerly watch your videos.
This was fascinating. I had previously been under the impression that cold fusion simply doesn't work, but it sounds like it really just has the same problem hot fusion does: taking more energy to cause the fusion than you get out of the reaction.
That does make it annoying that it doesn't see research and investment the way hot fusion does.
the problem is much worse: we dont actually understand what the problem is because we dont understand the mechanism. it gets worse than that though: we dont understand the mechanism because we cant get it to work consistently enough to start isolating variables. unfortunately, we dont understand why we cant get it to work consistently so we arent making progress on isolating those variables, therefore we cant figure out the mechanism, and thus we cant figure out how to get it to work consistently. its a real conundrum, and quite unique afaik.
@@jonathanodude6660 All I would like to know if there is good experimental confirmation (peer reviewed, clear enough) that anything nuclear happens in these experiments. That there is (delta)E=(delta)mc^2 kind of energy release and creation of isotopes that were not there to start with in the experiment. If so- then all the power to experimenters. But I'm afraid that we don't have such confirmation(none of cited sources in video). Am I correct?
And the problem is much worse. Due to the reputational risk, we don't have many scientists entering the field or money being used to investigate it (outside of Japan, initially), or even trying to replicate it. By the way, there were many people who did claim to replicate it, but due to the reputational hit to the field, these people were written off as "true believers" despite their previous experience as scientists. Storms was a good example. It didn't help that the field was also influenced by some folk that did have all the traits of true believers.
I don’t know why, but all fusion sounds “hot” to me.
yes--- because you believed the onslaught of propaganda used to discredit Fleishman and ponds. Because the establishment controls the media.
Fanbloodytastic video! You're an absolute star. Your videos should be part of the school curriculum, they're pitched at just the right level for kids who have any interest in science with just the right amount of detail to make them want to know more without overcomplicating it. And you're a born entertainer!
Pitched at kids? I'm 47 and don't understand any of it 😂💖
@@KerriEverlasting I think diogenesagogo is referring to her methods of presentation. The particular points she makes, could be simplified for a younger audience.
Fred
@@KerriEverlasting I understand enough to go and ask Sabine and her other more knowledgeable followers random questions later. :)
ΜΠΡΑΒΟ ΡΕ SABINE ΜΠΡΑΒΟ! Μπράβο για την έρευνά σου και για την υποδειγματική επιστημονική και ανθρώπινη προσέγγισή σου. Είσαι ΑΞΙΑ!
I am not a physicist. But I have read about cold fusion some. I also read a considerable amount about thorium reactors. And the working reactor at oak ridge national laboratories in Tennessee. I would love to see a video about that! Thanks for your time. I enjoyed your video.
Back in the day I used to pay people with sweets to act as 'friends'. I was so glad to discover nuclear physics because with neutrons there's no charge.
Haaaaa. Good one 😂
Good summary. In 1989 I didn't think there was any breakthrough but it has come to mind from time to time and I don't dismiss the idea of cold fusion anymore.
I enrolled in Brilliant three days ago then saw your video today, by chance. Great video, thanks!
this is the funniest physics channel on youtube. Maybe its because I'm also german, but the "punchlines" are perfectly placed to be funny without really interrupting the flow of information.
How many Germans does it take to change a lightbulb?
One, they're efficient.
Great summary. I'm an engineer and I have experience measuring temperature and heat. As you say it is difficult to make precise measurements in this area. I think it was Feynman who warned about effects just on the borderline of experimental precision. It is unfortunately common in science for experimentalists to ignore data that disagrees with their pre-conceived ideas.
Very informative and well presented. Thank you
CF is a catalyzed nuclear reaction that occurs by tunneling. It can be done using any of the D8 transition metals Ni Pd or Pt. The strongest resonance transition is with Pd. What happens is the electrons from the deuterium tunnel to fill the gap 9'10 D transitions giving Pd the configuration of Cd. When this occurs the hydrogen briefly forms an intermetallic alloy that nullifies the space charge. This drags the nuclei within the capture radius via quantum tunneling. A curous effect of this reaction is that it will preferentially create 3He and a free neutron rather than 4He and a gamma ray. It was studied as a potential source of tritium production. The major issue is that the reaction damages the lattice of the palladium partly by mechanical dislocation and partly by activation. The energy isnt enough for serious power generation and is self terminating. The best catalyst for the reaction are carbon nanotubes loaded with palladium nanocrystals in deuterium. Trigger with a magnetic field and an accoustic shockwave. Your choice of matrix deuterium at high pressure, lithium deuteride, or deuterium oxide. The first two options require an explosive to pump it, the last one can be done using ultrasound. With plain D2O you get dim blue flashes in the sonoluminescent cavitation cell, with carbon nanotubes the same but sometimes greenish white, with pd nanocrystals you get blue flashes and occasionally a brighter than normal and while flash. With Pd loaded nanotubes it will make the blue and greenish white flashes and occasionally very bright pinkish white flashes with detectable nuclear radiation both gamma and neutron. 🤓
Wow! Nice job Sabine. Incredibly comprehensive information on this subject! Learned quite a bit here. And thanks for mentioning my recent video on the Strong Force. Incredible
Thanks for watching 👆 msg my trader Jeremy tell him I referred you he will introduce you to an investment with big profits if you are interested.
As an old guy from Utah that remembers the Pons/Fleischmann flash and fizzle news events, I'm glad to hear there is still research going on in cold fusion. It is one of those things that *seems* like it should be feasible and we just need that first breakthrough. We are sort of at that post electric but pre lightbulb era. Where we know enough to conjecture and try out a bunch of things, but it's mostly just guessing from millions of permutations. Once we have a small success, we can focus on a narrower set of parameters.
As Sabine pointed out very well, scientists ought to be cautious as not to become too overconfident that we believe we know that cold fusion is impossible, as chemistry cannot do such a thing. Science has shown in the past how easy it is to be too overconfident about presumptions. We have to acknowledge that we do not know everything and still have quite some gaps in our knowledge about materials science. A cold fusion method that we did not yet invent may just be lurking around the corner.
"if" we have a small success :) even with the unknowns, it may still turn out to not be viable way of extracting energy.
@@Guido_XL if the scientific elite had put more effort in high temp MSR_fission_reactors, we would have plenty of energy with little residual actinides (wastes ! ,?) available by now! The technology of FLiBe salt would be well known and established or chloride-salt-based fast reactors would be running and feeding on old nuc wastes, completely eliminating the need for long term safe storage facilities! Fission is easy, Fusion is hard.
Time's up. They had 30 years and produced nothing, time to move on.
I was a post doc in the Chemistry department in the early to mid 1980s and I knew Pons and Fleischmann. Perhaps you and I know each other back then.
Thank you. This is the most informative video I have seen in a long time.
How have I not watched any of your videos before? This is solid gold. Clear and concise explanations, absolutely hilarious dry humor, and a healthy questioning of the current Doctrine of Science which masquerades as science? Excellent, I love everything about this.
Yes, pseudo science for profit.
Are you sure you are describing this video? I don't think it contains any "questioning of the current Doctrine of Science" at all. What would that even mean?
@@richardhussong7232 I am in agreement with Sabine when she suggests Hydrogen power is not a very practical efficient alternative, unless for a government which could not care less about efficiency. Just my opinion. But scientists will probably push hydrogen as a viable source of power and hide the cost to manufacture it in mass.
Well said, i just found her too, great content. Haven't seen another person as unbiased as she seems to be so far, have to see more videos about nuclear power to be sure about it.
Education and comedy a great combination there is just one problem, very few brilliant people have a sense of humor like Sabine. She brings a smile to my face each time I watch a video of hers. 😁👍👍
Or a laugh-out-loud moment. I love how she blindsides you by slipping in a silly image/idea into the middle of a serious technical stream ala Dave Barry. 3:56 "It's not just because lab life is lonely, and neutrons are better than no company"
@@GntlTch The deadpan delivery of that one was perfect.
Even if LENR never produces significant amounts of energy, surely research in this energy will produce significant amonts of knowledge. Basic research is never wasted.
Sadly that is not true, billions of dollars have gone into various cold fusion efforts and produced nothing usable at all, both at a theory level or practical level.
Standard conclusion of nearly all research: "More research is needed."🙂
I love Sabine's understandable explanations of physics! And her selection of topics. The things I am curious about! Less importantly, but still nice, she is charming, humorous & adorable.
I've been reading about Tadahiko Mizuno, who says he had one making significant excess energy; but it took several months to break it in. He came up with a system with more modest results, but takes less time to get up and running. It reminds me of how Raney Nickel was found to be a useful catalyst, but at first, others couldn't replicate the work. Only after realizing that the alloy needed some aging and therefore, "contamination", to make it work, did it become an important catalyst for organic chemists.
Sabine is literally one of the most respectable creators on the platform
With "Mutti" gone she is the next star to make waves!
8:15 This Australian is Dick Smith, who started out as a home grown version of Radio Shack, selling electronic components and kits to hobbyists. He was the first person to fly a helicopter to both poles, and started the Australian Geographic Society.
Dick Smith hates Germans but his middle name is Harold!!!
He came to my highschool in a helicopter back in my senior year, I cannot remember what it was for I think for some speech about leadership and perseverence.
@@Moonchild15225 Clearly his speech wasn't about memory :)
@@LawpickingLocksmith Harold is a pretty common name, albeit not so much for younger people.
That explains that. I'm glad Sabine dismissed him as 'some Australian', I think he's not as important as he wishes he was in public life, apart from his contributions to knowledge.
What I like most about your channel is that you are open to the possibility the conventional interpretation is wrong where evidence permits.
Thank you for all your work.
It sounds like the palladium issues could be attacked by the significantly less-sexy fields of metallurgy and crystallography. It would be interesting to see whether the grain structure of the palladium influenced the decay products (checking the material defect hypothesis) and whether the crystal structure of the palladium was significantly changed after irradiation (checking the palladium decay hypothesis).
Many experimenters have found “micro pitting” on their electrodes after successful runs and none after unsuccessful runs.
My guess is that palladium's electronic field properties are connected with why it's such a standard catalyst in so many reactions as well as being useful in rudimentary cold fusion. It seems to me that if we are going to discover a way to generate energy-positive low-gravity cold fusion, we will need to find some way to exploit electron fields in order to breach their repulsive effects. We cannot simply push the nuclei together against the outward electron degeneracy pressure. Converting the electrons into muons is a good example of finding a way around the degeneracy pressure. Apparently palladium has some way of slipping past it as well, and I would wager good money (if I had any) that it's connected to palladium's use as a catalyst. Perhaps research into platinum, another major catalyst, could yield more insight. Maybe we can engineer a metamaterial with far stronger catalytic properties which could assist with the process to a greater degree.
@@TheReaverOfDarkness I'd think that any potential contribution palladium might have would be crystalline lattice confinement of deuterium atoms.
As for defects, annealing would help illuminate any such contribution by altering the defects in either direction.
Probably end up with another neutron source, rather than an energy source.
The problem of repeatability seems to be reoccurring issue. And that may be due to the ignored non-repeatability of the materials used to repeat the experiments.
It is very possible that to repeat the experiment, the confirming/debunking lab needs to use the very same substrate samples that the original labs used to observe the anomalous phenomena.
The 'magic' that is being missed might be contained in the rare and fortuitous piece of palladium used in the first experiments. Such debunking/confirming efforts must be done using the same original materials used originally.
@@GeeTrieste from what I've observed, it may well come down to techniques used in construction of the unit under test.
That's been borne out in every field over the years.
I agree that skepticism about getting practical cold fusion power is well-placed. I also agree that there's enough we can't explain, to make these lines of inquiry worth pursuing.
We may not get world-saving amounts of energy, but we'll probably get some new understanding of physics out of it.
Fred
The mysteries are what keep us interested. _Something_ is there, and if it is not what we are hoping to find it is still something we can find. That is good enough for now.
Skepticism? All LENR results have been characterised as "fraud" in the past, but now it becomes accepted, slowly but surely. Sabine has a short memory.
I appreciate you covering this taboo topic. Science is subject to popularity contests and politics that restrict technical curiosity and as a community we should recognize and resist that. The examples of discoveries from subjects once considered "pseudo science" is countless.
Know this, Sabine: I think I speak for many, many people when I say to you, we love you. You provide true value, and that, nowadays is a precious commodity. I utterly enjoy your content. I salute you.
I love the use of meme music every time "there's just one problem" is said :D
Thank you Sabine for a Cool Cold Fusion review! I love your take on it.
I remember when I was an undergrad at my community college (College of the Redwoods) in Northern California, in 1989 there was a flare of excitement over Stanley Pons and Robert Fleischman's claims. One of the chemistry professors was like "yeah we've got the equipment, let's take a shot at it..." I got wind of the attempt, and asked to see the professor. I pointed out to him that since we really had no idea what was going on, that potential radiation hazards should be considered. I merely showed him that even a 1 W source of fast neutrons could produce a hazardous situation (a whole class of students getting fast neutron flux seemed to horrify him.) I asked that they slow down, obtain some additional radiation monitoring equipment before they attempt it. The suggestion was well taken, and the first experiment was done with a Geiger counter borrowed from the Geology department, and a closed circuit television system (borrowed from the Media and Broadcast Dept,) and a bunch of plastic barrels full of sand behind a maintenance building. First experiment only elicited a small twitch on the Geiger counter...so it was considered safe enough for the lab...
It was just interesting how the Chemistry Dept did not even consider the physics involved in nuclear fusion. Just a little bit of caution....
Yeah. One of the red flags in many of those experiments was that there were people around active "Cold fusion" apparatus and they weren't dying of Radiation Poisoning.
An off-the-shelf Geiger counter doesn’t cut it to detect neutrons, as they work by detecting charged ionizing radiation.
They can be specially built for neutron detection though. By making a tube filled with a gas that will undergo a nuclear reaction with incoming neutrons.
Out of a general curiosity about how networked into the wider science community a community college was back in the day...
Do you remember if they were using such a specialty tube?
@@NullHand No. But the college rented a scintillometer for the experiment. The Geiger counter was for detection of ionizing radiation.
Oh well, if we lose a few college lives it is for a good cause. We will set up memorial college scholarships in their names.
I saw it happening before - people are trying to prepare so much for failing with an experiement that sometimes it don't even occur to them what if it actually works as predicted? Or what if it works even more than predicted?
When typing this somehow the expression "Castle Bravo" came to my mind. Strange.
Dr. H. This is probably the best-written one you've done.
Ok, I'm sold. I love your videos. Count me as one of your new subscribers.
The team that comes up with the patches for the "cold fusion" exploits deserves a round of applause. To come up with bug-solutions on such short notice is really impressive.
Thank you Sabine as always for the great summarization of the field of research, and for being appropriately skeptical but at the same wise enough to realize that LENR has significant potential in the theoretical as as well as applied physics and engineering to understand that something interesting is going on at this energy regime, and that these devices can be used as laboratory devices to probe this area of research.
This is definitely worth investigating for the science alone, and the possible payoff in knowledge and possibly energy.
Not to mention those who make advances can ether be bought off to shut up and pretend their research 'couldn't be replicated' or threated into silence so they don't suddenly disappear... Even if they are willing to bite the bullet to push forward anyway most people fold if you start threatening their family, friends, and other loved ones. To figure out why research is buried/halted or 'reputation' damaging, just think of what corporate or political orgs would lose billions or go bankrupt if such a breakthrough is created.
@@awakenedpersona6488 That could be true when you look at the backlash toward climate change science but I don't know if any scientist has been threatened because of this research. Hanson (cannot remember his first name) the republicans tried to silence him I know. With climate change research there are so many scientists agreeing that it would be hard to threaten them in mass and get away with it. In LENR there is only a few scientists at present so the situation might be very different.
Just found the channel and LOVE it. As it happens, in 1990, I discovered the reason cold fusion doesn't work. After interviewing scientists and reading everything published, these were my findings: The problem was largely due to experimental evidence. We're moving into the realm of parapsychology now.
Initially, cold fusion results couldn't be replicated because tests were performed by nonbelievers. In fact, where scientists were successful at first, sometimes something "happened" in the lab, signaling that nonbelievers must be present, which somehow stopped the process cold. My work was completed prior to cold fusion being treated as a joke; that's when I also learned that I must be psychic😁
Thank you for the thorough breakdown.
Sabine, I love your videos. Your sense of humor is awesome. You not only have deadpan face, but a voice to match too! You would make a great stand-up comic. You guessed it. There is just one problem - it doesn't pay too well...
It is hard to express how relieved I am to learn that there is only one, single problem to be solved before we can enjoy the benefits of safe, reliable, and limitless fusion power. Thank you, Dr. Hossenfelder.
I am quite sure the "Save the Earth" crowd as well as the great unwashed will be venomously against it . . .
Is that figuring out the order of the Dr. Russell's cards?
Thanks for the very clear and interesting video. I hadn't realised that cold fusion was quite so feasible. There's just one problem...
Great overview. I don't think i will be buying palladium any time soon 😂 but one aspect of the ongoing research in cold fusion that has been omitted is the detection of helium which would be the ultimate proof of fusion rather than decay particles or excess energy. A difficult task given helium's volatility
Sabine, I've bought both your books and what can I say...they leave you craving more, yet with a feeling of hopelessness.
You're way of breaking down complex subjects for just about anyone to understand, is far and away better than any other physicist.
Also your willingness to call out unprovable theories is fascinating, as the best thinkers are those who are sceptics and question theories until they break down
There's no one so low-key and dry who can make me laugh so hard I have to stop the video😄. A rare gift. Also, I can understand the content! Very grateful.
Love your videos, Sabine. I would love to see a video on the suncell of Randell Mills. His hydrino theory is particlarly fascinating since to me (as a chemist) it doesn't appear to be supported by quantum mechanics.
Appreciate you doing this video so very much. 🙏
Happy you finalized with serious scholarly thinking - there is something going on that we don't understand. Much better than simply stating that given current knowledge it is impossible, even though that kind of sober judgment is necessary, well in boring and costly situations... Pleasure to see your presentation.
Really good explanation of the "Cold Fusion" concept.
And clearly if there is gaps in our knowledge, even if it does not end up with an energy source, we should spend money exploring it.
Later this knowledge may branch into many new valuable aplications.
I was in grad school (in math) when Fleischmann and Pons made their announcement. Shortly after the announcement, just as cold fusion seemed to be going down the tubes, I was at conference, and a well-known mathematician from the University of Utah (who was good friends with the cold fusion dudes) was there. He was fairly confident that there was something to cold fusion, and that something would eventually come of it. But, the thing that this math guy was most animated about was the way that other scientists reacted to the announcement. He claimed that most of the big researchers working on hot fusion had people present in Utah for the announcement, and that they went to great lengths to denigrate the idea, concentrating their effort on the press. Apparently, the purpose of this was to preserve the funding for hot fusion at all cost.
In any case, it's nice to know that cold fusion (i.e., LENR) has made enough of a comeback so that it can at least be studied once again.
Great video, very good pacing!
Just thank you for your objectivity, clarity, and competence. If you'd fool me I won't realize so keep up with your sense of responsibility. I count on you for honest scientific information!
Once again Sabine sheds light on something I had written off as a fraud. Watching the presentation I came to the same conclusion, something weird is going on that we don't understand. Cold fusion may not be possible but digging into this phenomena ought to add to our wealth of knowledge. Not to mention the notion of physicists and chemists working together, shades of Ghostbusters.
I love love love your sense of humor! 😂🤣🥹
Absolutely fantastic video, very well explained and funny too
We already have a working fusion reactor at safe distance, all we got to do is to install and improve the equipment to harvest its energy and find ways to make that energy source less intermittent, ie find ways to store that energy more easily (aka more efficiently and more economically).
There's just one problem...
It's not a problem, it's a challenge!
Indeed 😅
That's what corporate suits always told us... "don't think of them as problems, think of them as challenges! Positivity!" Makes me physically ill to remember 🤣🤣
@@jamesduncan6729 Yes, the positivity that formulated corporate speak reinforces the cult in corporate culture.
@@albirtarsha5370 One of us... one of us... 🧟♂️
I have a serious drinking challenge!
Thank you Sabine for covering this subject! You arr s RockStar!
Gosh Sabine, in nearly understood it. Great simplification of very complex ideas.
Wow Sabine! Thank you for this.
You really make such clear, precise and easy to understand content ( relative to topic difficulty ofc ).
I cannot imagine combing through all this information / papers / news articles on my own.
She's hot as well.
Thank you so much Sabine. Now I increased my understanding of cold fusion and the inherent problems abounding.
After watching your most recent video on fusion startups I subscribed and found this one. You correctly stated that there may be solid materials that do not require high energy to introduce deuterium into the crystalline structure. I know that is correct because we have found just such a material. Your observations about reputation concerns is spot on and it applies to scientists, government agencies, and investors. Another factor retarding development of LENR that was unmentioned is the huge amount of money available, spent, and being spent for hot fusion development. Who would want to admit that hundred of billions were spent ($400 billion+ at LLNL alone) when a low cost feasible LENR fusion device can be constructed?
Hi Sabine.. Am a big fan.. I really enjoy your videos.. Much love from Kenya..
This was one of the most fascinating (and humorous) videos yet! Keep up the good work Sabine!
When the music popped in I almost spit my drink, I'm used to these types of videos being boring so I let my guard down ahahaha
Even if we don't get net energy gain, it's still a relatively inexpensive way to explore some fundamental physics. Love your videos.
I remember cold fusion coming out in the late 1980's.
There was a hard push against it.
The same thing happened against Rosse, the Clem engine, etc.
And nobody talks about cavitation even though the Japanese have found 10,000 degree
spikes. Could it be that the big trees are shading out the seedlings?
Yay! We have Sabrine!
Very sensible, balanced, lucid discussion. Thank you.