Bienvenido(a) a Crisis Energética, Anonymous Lunes, 29 Abril 2024 @ 05:57 CEST
Crisis Energética Foros
Una de "energías mágicas"
Estado: desconectado
LoadLin
Forum User
Miembro activo
Identificado: 21/10/2003
Mensajes: 1150
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/25/science/25FUSI.html
Me temo que a medida que la futura crísis sea más visible crecerán las especulaciones de este tipo.
Que si son posibles... pues perfecto. Pero no podemos apostar a una carta de dudosa probabilidad.
Me temo que a medida que la futura crísis sea más visible crecerán las especulaciones de este tipo.
Que si son posibles... pues perfecto. Pero no podemos apostar a una carta de dudosa probabilidad.
Estado: desconectado
Teru
Forum User
Miembro activo
Identificado: 06/01/2004
Mensajes: 154
Localización:Azores
El link este que has puesto te pide usuario y contraseña, supongo que será que de un día para otro no te deja ver las cosas... Si lo tienes a mano pega la noticia aquí o comenta así por encima de que iba si puedes, porfa ;)
Saludos.
www.lascartasdelavida.com
Saludos.
www.lascartasdelavida.com
Estado: desconectado
DrPollo
Forum User
Junior
Identificado: 13/03/2004
Mensajes: 32
U.S. Will Give Cold Fusion Second Look, After 15 Years
By KENNETH CHANG
Published: March 25, 2004
old fusion, briefly hailed as the silver-bullet solution to the world's energy problems and since discarded to the same bin of quackery as paranormal phenomena and perpetual motion machines, will soon get a new hearing from Washington.
Despite being pushed to the fringes of physics, cold fusion has continued to be worked on by a small group of scientists, and they say their figures unambiguously verify the original report, that energy can be generated simply by running an electrical current through a jar of water.
Advertisement
Last fall, cold fusion scientists asked the Energy Department to take a second look at the process, and last week, the department agreed.
No public announcement was made. A British magazine, New Scientist, first reported the news this week, and Dr. James F. Decker, deputy director of the science office in the Energy Department, confirmed it in an e-mail interview.
"It was my personal judgment that their request for a review was reasonable," Dr. Decker said.
For advocates of cold fusion, the new review brings them to the cusp of vindication after years of dismissive ridicule.
"I am absolutely delighted that the D.O.E. is finally going to do the right thing," Dr. Eugene F. Mallove, editor of Infinite Energy magazine, said. "There can be no other conclusion than a major new window has opened on physics."
The research is too preliminary to determine whether cold fusion, even if real, will live up to its initial billing as a cheap, bountiful source of energy, said Dr. Peter Hagelstein, a professor of electrical engineering and computer science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who has been working on a theory to explain how the process works. Experiments have generated small amounts of energy, from a fraction of a watt to a few watts.
Still, Dr. Hagelstein added, "I definitely think it has potential for commercial energy production."
Dr. Decker said the scientists, not yet chosen, would probably spend a few days listening to presentations and then offer their thoughts individually. The review panel will not conduct experiments, he said.
"What's on the table is a fairly straightforward question, is there science here or not?" Dr. Hagelstein said. "Most fundamental to this is to get the taint associated with the field hopefully removed."
Fusion, the process that powers the Sun, combines hydrogen atoms, releasing energy as a byproduct. In March 1989, Drs. B. Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann, two chemists at the University of Utah, said they had generated fusion in a tabletop experiment using a jar of heavy water, where the water molecules contain a heavier version of hydrogen, deuterium, and two palladium electrodes. A current running through the electrodes pulled deuterium atoms into the electrodes, which somehow generated heat, the scientists said. Dr. Fleischmann speculated that the heat was coming from fusion of the deuterium atoms.
Other scientists trying to reproduce the seemingly simple experiment found the effects fickle and inconsistent. Because cold fusion, if real, cannot be explained by current theories, the inconsistent results convinced most scientists that it had not occurred. The signs of extra heat, critics said, were experimental mistakes or generated by the current or, perhaps, chemical reactions in the water, but not fusion.
Critics also pointed out that to produce the amount of heat reported, conventional fusion reactions would throw out lethal amounts of radiation, and they argued that the continued health of Drs. Pons and Fleischmann, as well as other experimenters, was proof that no fusion occurred.
Some cold fusion scientists now say they can produce as much as two to three times more energy than in the electric current. The results are also more reproducible, they say. They add that they have definitely seen fusion byproducts, particularly helium in quantities proportional to the heat generated.
After a conference in August, Dr. Hagelstein wrote to Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham, asking for a meeting. Dr. Hagelstein; Dr. Michael McKubre of SRI International in Menlo Park, Calif.; and Dr. David J. Nagel of George Washington University met Dr. Decker on Nov. 6.
"They presented some data and asked for a review of the scientific research that has been conducted," Dr. Decker said. "The scientists who came to see me are from excellent scientific institutions and have excellent credentials."
Scientists working on conventional fusion said cold fusion research had fallen off their radar screens.
"I'm surprised," Dr. Stewart C. Prager, a professor of physics at the University of Wisconsin, said. "I thought most of the cold fusion effort had phased out. I'm just not aware of any physics results that motivated this."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DrPollo
By KENNETH CHANG
Published: March 25, 2004
old fusion, briefly hailed as the silver-bullet solution to the world's energy problems and since discarded to the same bin of quackery as paranormal phenomena and perpetual motion machines, will soon get a new hearing from Washington.
Despite being pushed to the fringes of physics, cold fusion has continued to be worked on by a small group of scientists, and they say their figures unambiguously verify the original report, that energy can be generated simply by running an electrical current through a jar of water.
Advertisement
Last fall, cold fusion scientists asked the Energy Department to take a second look at the process, and last week, the department agreed.
No public announcement was made. A British magazine, New Scientist, first reported the news this week, and Dr. James F. Decker, deputy director of the science office in the Energy Department, confirmed it in an e-mail interview.
"It was my personal judgment that their request for a review was reasonable," Dr. Decker said.
For advocates of cold fusion, the new review brings them to the cusp of vindication after years of dismissive ridicule.
"I am absolutely delighted that the D.O.E. is finally going to do the right thing," Dr. Eugene F. Mallove, editor of Infinite Energy magazine, said. "There can be no other conclusion than a major new window has opened on physics."
The research is too preliminary to determine whether cold fusion, even if real, will live up to its initial billing as a cheap, bountiful source of energy, said Dr. Peter Hagelstein, a professor of electrical engineering and computer science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who has been working on a theory to explain how the process works. Experiments have generated small amounts of energy, from a fraction of a watt to a few watts.
Still, Dr. Hagelstein added, "I definitely think it has potential for commercial energy production."
Dr. Decker said the scientists, not yet chosen, would probably spend a few days listening to presentations and then offer their thoughts individually. The review panel will not conduct experiments, he said.
"What's on the table is a fairly straightforward question, is there science here or not?" Dr. Hagelstein said. "Most fundamental to this is to get the taint associated with the field hopefully removed."
Fusion, the process that powers the Sun, combines hydrogen atoms, releasing energy as a byproduct. In March 1989, Drs. B. Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann, two chemists at the University of Utah, said they had generated fusion in a tabletop experiment using a jar of heavy water, where the water molecules contain a heavier version of hydrogen, deuterium, and two palladium electrodes. A current running through the electrodes pulled deuterium atoms into the electrodes, which somehow generated heat, the scientists said. Dr. Fleischmann speculated that the heat was coming from fusion of the deuterium atoms.
Other scientists trying to reproduce the seemingly simple experiment found the effects fickle and inconsistent. Because cold fusion, if real, cannot be explained by current theories, the inconsistent results convinced most scientists that it had not occurred. The signs of extra heat, critics said, were experimental mistakes or generated by the current or, perhaps, chemical reactions in the water, but not fusion.
Critics also pointed out that to produce the amount of heat reported, conventional fusion reactions would throw out lethal amounts of radiation, and they argued that the continued health of Drs. Pons and Fleischmann, as well as other experimenters, was proof that no fusion occurred.
Some cold fusion scientists now say they can produce as much as two to three times more energy than in the electric current. The results are also more reproducible, they say. They add that they have definitely seen fusion byproducts, particularly helium in quantities proportional to the heat generated.
After a conference in August, Dr. Hagelstein wrote to Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham, asking for a meeting. Dr. Hagelstein; Dr. Michael McKubre of SRI International in Menlo Park, Calif.; and Dr. David J. Nagel of George Washington University met Dr. Decker on Nov. 6.
"They presented some data and asked for a review of the scientific research that has been conducted," Dr. Decker said. "The scientists who came to see me are from excellent scientific institutions and have excellent credentials."
Scientists working on conventional fusion said cold fusion research had fallen off their radar screens.
"I'm surprised," Dr. Stewart C. Prager, a professor of physics at the University of Wisconsin, said. "I thought most of the cold fusion effort had phased out. I'm just not aware of any physics results that motivated this."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DrPollo
Estado: desconectado
Teru
Forum User
Miembro activo
Identificado: 06/01/2004
Mensajes: 154
Localización:Azores
Gracias por pegar el artículo.
Así a primera vista me da la impresión de que son demasiadas palabras para decir demasiado poco: "que un pequeño grupo de científicos ha descubierto 'algo' que hace que la fusión fría pudiera tal vez ser viable...", a mi a primera vista no me convence mucho, vaya... además eso de que "en el Sol ocurre algo parecido" no me convence tampoco, el Sol está muy lejos, nadie ha estado allí para ver que pasa realmente (son todo teorías más o menos creibles) y sobre todo está a una temperatura extremadamente alta.
No sé, me inclino más a pensar que se trata de un "revival" de una entelequia ya descartada.
www.lascartasdelavida.com
Así a primera vista me da la impresión de que son demasiadas palabras para decir demasiado poco: "que un pequeño grupo de científicos ha descubierto 'algo' que hace que la fusión fría pudiera tal vez ser viable...", a mi a primera vista no me convence mucho, vaya... además eso de que "en el Sol ocurre algo parecido" no me convence tampoco, el Sol está muy lejos, nadie ha estado allí para ver que pasa realmente (son todo teorías más o menos creibles) y sobre todo está a una temperatura extremadamente alta.
No sé, me inclino más a pensar que se trata de un "revival" de una entelequia ya descartada.
www.lascartasdelavida.com
Estado: desconectado
magoniaexpres
Forum User
Miembro activo
Identificado: 22/10/2003
Mensajes: 692
Cuando la cosa se ponga realmente mal, intentarán convencernos de que los burros vuelan y además se les puede poner un generador eléctrico.
"Sólo tengo desprecio hacia el mortal que se anima
con esperanzas vacías".
Sófocles. ('Ayax')
"Sólo tengo desprecio hacia el mortal que se anima
con esperanzas vacías".
Sófocles. ('Ayax')
Todas las horas son CEST. Hora actual 05:57 am.
- Tópico normal
- Tópico Pegado
- Tópico bloqueado
- Mensaje Nuevo
- Tópico pegado con nuevo mensaje
- Tópico bloqueado con nuevo mensaje
- Ver mensajes anónimos
- Los usuarios anónimos pueden enviar
- Se permite HTML
- Contenido censurado