Sabine Hossenfelder - 2022-10-08
Try out my quantum mechanics course (and many others on math and science) on https://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: https://www.nature.com/articles/160525a0 https://journals.aps.org/pr/abstract/10.1103/PhysRev.106.330 The papers about electron shielding in lattices are here: https://www.publish.csiro.au/ph/PH540373 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF01289572 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 https://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: https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/71612 The report from the follow-up experiment that failed to reproduce the laser modulation results is here: http://coldfusioncommunity.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/1_JCMNS-Vol20.pdf The paper from Edmund Storms is here: https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/BiberianJPjcondenseds.pdf#page=86 Arvin Ash's video about the strong nuclear force is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WF2c_jzefKc The recent paper with hypotheses for how low energy nuclear reactions might come about is here: https://arxiv.org/abs/2208.07245 💌 Sign up for my weekly science newsletter. It's free! ➜ https://sabinehossenfelder.com/newsletter/ 👉 Support me on Patreon ➜ https://www.patreon.com/Sabine 📖 My new book "Existential Physics" is now on sale ➜ http://existentialphysics.com/ 🔗 Join this channel to get access to perks ➜ https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1yNl2E66ZzKApQdRuTQ4tw/join 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
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 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
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 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 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)
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.
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.
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.
Sabine's video is probably one of the most balanced and enlightening discussions on cold fusion that I've seen. Well done!
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!
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?
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.
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!
“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! 😁
One of the clearest technical presentations I've ever listened to.
Thank you! It's refreshing to see you are willing to say something maybe possible because of things we do not understand.
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...
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.
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 ❤
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 I love your style. Keep it up. Eagerly watch your videos.
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.
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.
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."
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.
The studio lighting in this video is superb, really makes your eyes pop. And the scientific content is great, of course.
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.
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. :)
Sabine has an incredible pessimistic comedic sense of humor. Subscribed after 2 vids.
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.
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.
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...<insert any applicable military aphorism>"
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
Thank you for the clarification, I was looking all internet about that topic.❤
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. 🤓
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 😂
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 enrolled in Brilliant three days ago then saw your video today, by chance. Great video, thanks!
Thank you. This is the most informative video I have seen in a long time.
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.
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.
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.
ΜΠΡΑΒΟ ΡΕ SABINE ΜΠΡΑΒΟ! Μπράβο για την έρευνά σου και για την υποδειγματική επιστημονική και ανθρώπινη προσέγγισή σου. Είσαι ΑΞΙΑ!
Sabine is literally one of the most respectable creators on the platform
With "Mutti" gone she is the next star to make waves!
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."🙂
@lubricustheslippery5028 - 2022-10-08
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.
@RuneDrageon - 2022-10-08
Yeah, it won't save the world, but careful funding and experimentation is likely to produce some new knowledge.
@graealex - 2022-10-08
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.
@robc1952 - 2022-10-08
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,
@tiger.98 - 2022-10-08
@@graealex Fusors use hot fusion
@pauleohl - 2022-10-08
@@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.