MIT and Cold Fusion: A Special Report - Infinite Energy Magazine

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Letter by Julian Schwinger Re: Eugene Mallove’s Fire from Ice Letter of February 5, 1991 from physics Nobel Laureate Julian Schwinger (Nobel Prize for physics in 1965, shared with Sin-Itiro Tomanaga and Richard P. Feynman “for their fundamental work in quantum electrodynamics, with deep-ploughing consequences for the physics of elementary particles”). This handwritten letter was sent to John Wiley & Sons, Inc., concerning the manuscript of Eugene Mallove’s book, Fire from Ice: Searching for the Truth Behind the Cold Fusion Furor, which would soon be published in May 1991. [Note: Italics and square brackets have been added by E. Mallove.] Dear Judith McCarthy [John Wiley & Sons]: Thank you very much for sending me Mallove’s typescript. For almost two years, I have been muttering: “Someone has to write a book about this!” “This”is the bizarre story of cold fusion—its bizarre science, and its bizarre human behavior. The author of that book would need some familiarity with the relevant physics (atomic and nuclear), chemistry (electrolysis, at least), and should have had first-hand experience of some of the events and their participants. But, most of all, he must have a balanced view that incorporates an understanding of what the “scientific method” really means. I have just finished reading every word of 470 pages of typescript. (In modest proof thereof, I offer two ‘Typos. . .etc.) I enjoyed it very much. Eugene Mallove, in my book, is the right one to write about “the truth behind cold fusion.” I have enclosed two recent articles of mine, one delivered the day before December 7 [1990], in Tokyo, the other a short supplement that has been submitted to a Japanese journal. Please send them on to E.M. (beyond MIT, I am unaware of his address) for his possible interest and, at least, amusement. I should also like to add, vis-a-vis his recognition of the absurdity of the Editorial note on p. 435, that its promise— ”duty to give him the opportunity to explain his ideas and present his case. . .” was a lie. Only the short introductory note, Part 1, was published. When Part 2 and the much more substantive Part B were submitted, they received the usual vituperative reviews and were rejected; they have never been published. Incidentally, the other paper of mine cited on p. 551, Cold Fusion: A Hypothesis, which was published after more than a year’s delay, went first to PRL [Physical Review Letters]. Although I anticipated rejection, I was staggered by the heights (depths?) to which the calumny reached. My only recourse was to resign from the American Physical Society, (APS). You ask for “. . .a few words. . .” Perhaps they can be found above. If not, how about: Eugene Mallove has produced a sorely needed, accessible overview of the cold fusion muddle. By sweeping away stubbornly held preconceptions, he bares the truth implicit in a provocative variety of experiments. Yours, Julian Schwinger P.S. I am grateful for E.M. for quoting A.C.D. [Arthur Conan Doyle] on p. 216. I have long been conscious of that bit of sherlock Holmes wisdom, but could not recall the particular story in which it appears. J.S. Other Comments on Fire from Ice by MIT-Affiliated People (from the book jacket) “Mallove brings dramatically to life the human side of this important scientific controversy, which has tapped the emotions of its scientific participants in a way usually typical only of major scientific revolutions. Fire from Ice is highly recommended reading for anyone who is interested in the nature of scientific controversy and scientific change. I frankly could not put the book down once I had started it.” —Dr. Frank Sulloway, former MacArthur Fellow, science historian, MIT Program in Science., Technology, and Society “Fire from Ice is a masterpiece of scientific documentation. Progress in deciphering the cold fusion effect is now stalemated by an establishment pressure for conformity. An authoritative book needed to be written, and it had to come from someone with roots in both the science and journalism communities; there are very few people in the world as qualified as Eugene Mallove is to write it and give the story the meticulous attention it required.” —Dr. Henry Kolm, co-founder of MIT’s Francis Bitter National Magnet Laboratory Dr. Petrasso, Prof. Hagelstein, and Prof. Fleischmann at First International Conference on Cold Fusion, 1990, Salt Lake City. Photo by E. Mallove Prof. Peter Hagelstein lecturing on cold fusion theory at MIT April,1989. MIT Photo 18 Infinite Energy • ISSUE 24, 1999 • MIT Special Report
A lecture by cold fusion theorist Nobel Laureate Julian Schwinger, November 11, 1991, at MIT celebrating the 60th birthday of Professor Kenneth Johnson—a former student In Nobel Laureate Julian Schwinger’s eloquent talk at MIT, he compared the possible theoretical foundation of cold fusion with that of the much more accepted but equally mysterious phenomenon, sonoluminescence. Julian Schwinger had resigned from the American Physical Society (APS) to protest its censorship of his theoretical work on cold fusion from APS publications. It was an honor for me to have become a good friend of Schwinger’s due to my involvement with cold fusion. His praise for my book, Fire from Ice, was a very great honor (see prior page). Unfortunately, Schwinger’s 1991 message at MIT was not absorbed by the assembled MIT physicists.—EFM A Progress Report: Energy Transfer in Cold Fusion and Sonoluminescence by Julian Schwinger, University of California Birthday celebrations are inevitably somewhat nostalgic. Appropriately, then, I found the cover title for this lecture in my own distant past. I first came to Berkeley on the day that World War II began. Not long after, Robert Oppenheimer gave a lecture—perhaps on cosmic ray physics—which he called “A Progress Report,” in the sense, he explained, that time had elapsed. A similar expression of modesty is in order here. I have no great discoveries to announce; only feelings, hypotheses, and programs. As Mort Sahl once proclaimed: The future lies ahead. —sanity, I submit, is not a canon of science. Indeed, isn’t it a goal of physics, specifically, to push at the frontiers of accepted theory through suitably designed experiments, not only to extend those frontiers, but, more importantly, to find fundamental flaws that demand the introduction of new and revolutionary physics? 19 Infinite Energy • ISSUE 24, 1999 • MIT Special Report I am sure that my first topic, cold fusion, has caused many eyebrows to levitate. Cold fusion? Isn’t all that nonsense dead and buried? How can anyone be so insane as to talk about this totally discredited subject? Well, to the extent that sanity implies conformity with the mores of a society—didn't the Soviets clap their egregious dissidents into insane asylums?—sanity, I submit, is not a canon of science. Indeed, isn’t it a goal of physics, specifically, to push at the frontiers of accepted theory through suitably designed experiments, not only to extend those frontiers, but, more importantly, to find fundamental flaws that demand the introduction of new and revolutionary physics? The seemingly bizarre behavior of some key players in the cold fusion melodrama has managed to obscure a fundamental challenge that this episode presents. Whether or not the reality of cold fusion has been demonstrated experimentally, one must ask if any conceivable mechanism now exists, or might be devised, whereby nuclear energy could be extracted by manipulations at the atomic level. One is mindful of the high temperature superconductivity story. Despite the assurances of theorists that superconductivity could not exist much above absolute zero, that barrier was broken experimentally. Although it took time to get reproducible results, the reality of the phenomenon is completely established, despite the absence (to my knowledge) of any accepted theory. High temperature superconductivity is an atomic process. Cold fusion is that too, but also involves the much shorter space and time scales of nuclear physics. It should therefore be much more difficult to control this phenomenon by manipulations at the atomic, perhaps better said: at the chemical, level. More difficult, but not necessarily impossible. Despite my earlier qualification of the established reality of cold fusion, one cannot ignore the evidence accumulated in many laboratories—of excess heat production, of tritium production—all of which is characterized by irreproducibility and by uncontrollable emission in bursts. But, from what has just been said, that kind of behavior is expected; it is not a basis for rejecting the reality of the phenomena. This brings me to study the validity of the case against cold fusion, as seen by a hot fusioneer—henceforth known as HF— who rejects the possibility that new physics is involved. In the hot fusion of two deuterons—the D-D reaction—the formation of a triton ( 3 H) and a proton proceeds at about the same rate as that for the creation of 3 He and a neutron. But, given the claims of tritium production in cold fusion experiments, neutrons at the expected intensities are conspicuously absent, although low levels of neutrons, appearing in bursts, have been observed. To HF the conclusion is obvious: No neu-
Page 1 and 2: MIT and Cold Fusion: A Special Repo
Page 3 and 4: esult was used to influence the U.S
Page 5 and 6: PARTIAL CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS RELATI
Page 7 and 8: inexhaustible energy source for the
Page 9 and 10: Ronald Parker and others at the PFC
Page 11 and 12: ly canceled by an outraged Congress
Page 13 and 14: William Broad’s 1991 front-page n
Page 15 and 16: not deemed important. After all, ha
Page 17: teen others) has signed his name. N
Page 21 and 22: the pd fusion reaction may undergo
Page 23 and 24: The result of this unsatisfactory s
Page 25 and 26: a deadline and it may be six hours
Page 27 and 28: Exhibit C MIT News Office Deceptive
Page 29 and 30: Nobel Laureate Julian Schwinger sai
Page 31 and 32: Fall 1991 (NASW’s)* Newsletter (
Page 33 and 34: esident skeptics waiting for govern
Page 35 and 36: Prof. Herman Feshbach MIT News Offi
Page 37 and 38: lished MIT paper and show the exces
Page 39 and 40: Exhibit P Transcript of WBUR (90.9
Page 41 and 42: the truth or falsity of cold fusion
Page 43 and 44: over a 100 h period, Figure 6, indi
Page 45 and 46: e seen in several reviews and compi
Page 47 and 48: Mark Wrighton Exhibit V Prof. Morri
Page 49 and 50: canard used by those who have tried
Page 51 and 52: a useful impression to give if one
Page 53 and 54: For its own good, and to restore so
Page 55 and 56: exhibits.—EFM OFFICE OF THE PROVO
Page 57: Key Cold Fusion Publications of MIT

MIT and Cold Fusion: A Special Report - Infinite Energy Magazine

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?