CFRL English News No. 75 (2011. 4. 20)
Fusion Research Laboratory (
(Back numbers of this News are posted on the above geocities and/or PSU site of the CFRL Websites)
CFP (Cold Fusion Phenomenon) stands for “nuclear reactions and accompanying events occurring in open (with external particle and energy supply), non-equilibrium system composed of solids with high densities of hydrogen isotopes (H and/or D) in ambient radiation” belonging to Solid-State Nuclear Physics (SSNP) or Condensed Matter Nuclear Science (CMNS).
This is the CFRL News (in English) No. 75 for Cold Fusion researchers published by Dr. H. Kozima, now at the Cold Fusion Research Laboratory, Shizuoka, Japan.
This issue contains the following items:
1. Complexity, Earthquake, and Cold Fusion Phenomenon
1. Complexity, Earthquake, and Cold Fusion Phenomenon
１．１ Success and its Limitation of Modern Physics
Since its birth in the 16th century, modern physics had prospered using the ideology of the so-called “reductionism” and served the modern industry in the modern capitalism world. The reductionism rests on the following steps; (1) aim at an event or phenomenon in a simple system extracted from others in a complex system composed of combined components entangled with each other, (2) describe the event logically or mathematically as precisely as possible based on the established principles, (3) arrange the situation around us to have a reduced pure simple system at our discretion to discard other events than the one picked up from a real system, (4) check the consistency of the description with the fact obtained or observed in the simple system, (5) adjust the description of the event to keep the consistency if necessary, and (6) substitute one or more principles if necessary to keep the consistency.
The heritage of the modern science served the modern industrial society to prosper establishing the worldwide capitalistic system thus forming a conglomerate of science and technology. The main driving force of the science at present is materialistic gain.
The success of the modern science using the simple system deduced from the whole complex outside world is guaranteed by the sound existence of the residue after the extraction of the simple system. Fortunately, this condition has survived for several hundred years until the last century. The situation changed drastically with destruction of the original harmony of our globe by the end of the last century. The model of our activity based on the simple system has lost its effectiveness for our existence in the world.
The science has noticed the limitation of the modern science for about 30 years using the complexity concepts looking for a new approach to our intellectual world. However, the real world could not follow the new intellectual world. The harmful influences of the simplification of thought are prevailing in various fields of our social activity. We show some examples in this article below.
We have suffered the Higashi-nihon Daisinsai (The Eastern Japan Big Disaster by Earthquake) induced by the M9.0 earthquake which occurred at the coast of Sanriku area on March 11, 2011. It was known that the area suffered from the tsunami caused by a similar earthquake 1200 years ago on July 13, 869. Some seismologists including Prof. R. Geller of Tokyo University noticed this fact and warned people in Japan to prepare for the possible occurrence of an earthquake at the area and also to change their mind for the “prediction” of the huge earthquakes expected around pacific coasts in Japan. His papers on this problem had been published already in a journal Nature in 1991 (Vol. 352, No. 6333, pp. 275 – 276) and “Kagaku” (in Japanese) in 2003. After 3.11, he published a paper in Nature (2011) discussing again the “prediction” of earthquakes in Japan http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature10105.html.
Dr. Geller discusses the problem of “prediction” in Japan mainly from his seismological point of view, he cites the Gutenberg-Richter(G-R) in the seismology, the inverse-power law specific to complexity, in his paper in Kagaku as a general background of the impossibility of prediction of earthquakes. Unfortunately, the paper in Nature (2011) did not contain this part due to the editor’s opinion to make the paper rather compact.
The Japanese system for the “prediction” of earthquakes may be revealing a lack of scientific thinking in Japanese society. If we accept the common sense of seismology earlier, our measures for huge earthquakes including the system at atomic power stations may be a little different from those we had before 3.11.
One of scientist’s responsibilities for society will be our practice based on scientific minds. In this relation, our effort to establish the science of the cold fusion phenomenon is valuable not only to explore new energy source but also to practice scientific endeavor in the frontier of the science in the interdisciplinary field between solid state physics and nuclear physics.
1.3 The Cold Fusion Phenomenon
Our commonsense of scientific minds in researches of science has been sometimes betrayed by biases in the minds of scientists as the above example of seismology shows. As Dr. Geller has discussed in his papers and we have known from several examples in science history(1), scientific activity have been apt to be biased by secular demands.
(1) W. Broad and N. Wade, Betrayers of
the Truth – Fraud and Deceit in the Halls of Science-, Simon and
Twenty two years after the discovery of the cold fusion phenomenon, we feel the lack of scientific foundation of research in this field. This is a cause and also an effect of the neglect from main stream scientists of our research field. We could not fix the name of our field, for instance, the most appropriate one. Many names have been proposed but they have defects to express characteristics of the field. For instance, the “Low Energy Nuclear Reactions” is relative and unclear as the Editors of the Proc. ICCF14 point out(2). Actually, this name is used to specify the nuclear reactions in the energy region up to about 10 MeV in nuclear physics.
(2) D.J. Nagel and M.E. Melich, Proc. ICCF14, ISBN: 978-0-578-06694-3. http://www.infinite-energy.com and also http://www.geocities.jp/hjrfq930/Cfcom/Histry/ICCF/iccf14his.htm
We have used the name the “Cold Fusion Phenomenon” for more than 15 years from 1995 when a paper “On the Cold Fusion Phenomenon in a Ni-H System” appeared in Cold Fusion Vol. 8, p. 5 (1995). We like this name, not noticed in the above Preface by Nagel and Melich, because it covers the original name “Cold Fusion” used by our pioneers and also this unexplored field without unknown causes for various effects in the interdisciplinary field between solid state (or condensed matter) physics and nuclear physics.
As we know well, the cold fusion phenomenon (CFP) occurs in complex systems characterized by several natures. The systems are open to particles and thermal energy, are composed of hydrogen isotopes (H and/or D) and metals/carbons, and have inhomogeneous structures for distribution of H/D. The effects or products of the CFP are new elements and enormous amount of excess heat inexplicable by chemical (or atomic) reactions except nuclear reactions.
There have been discovered several laws between amounts of these products(3 – 7).
(3)H. Kozima, “Complexity in the Cold Fusion Phenomenon,” Reports of
CFRL (Cold Fusion Research Laboratory) 8-1, 1 - 22 (August, 2008).
http://www.geocities.jp/hjrfq930/Papers/paperr/paperr.html. And also Proc. ICCF14, pp. 613 – 617 (2010). ISBN: 978-0-578-06694-3. (4)
H. Kozima, The Science of the Cold Fusion
Phenomenon, Section 2.12, Elsevier (2006). ISBN-10: 0-080-45110-1. (5) H.
Kozima, W.W. Zhang and J. Dash, “Precision Measurement of Excess Energy in
Electrolytic System Pd/D/H2SO4 and Inverse-Power
Distribution of Energy Pulses vs. Excess Energy,” Proc. ICCF13, pp. 348 –
358 (2008). ISBN 978-5-93271-428-7.(6) H. Lietz, "Status of the
Field of Condensed Matter Nuclear Science", Working Paper,
Especially, the inverse-power law between the amount of excess energy and the frequency of their observation expresses the complexity of the CFP telling us the lack of the quantitative reproducibility such as we expect in simple systems. We have to do research in this field presuming this fact which has been almost ignored in this field and outside causing unnecessary confusion of quantitative reproducibility.
It should be recognized that there are many examples of the qualitative reproducibility in nuclear and elementary particle physics. One of these examples is the radioactive decay of unstable nuclei, e.g. 226Ra with the half-life of 1.60×103 y. We do know only the average number of 226Ra after this life time not knowing which one decayed or which one remained. Recognition of the nature of the CFP will help us in the research and in the communication with researchers in other fields.
2. On the Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation
CONCLUSIONS (of the report “Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation: BEIR VII – Phase 2”
Despite the challenges associated with understanding the health effects of low doses of low-LET radiation, current knowledge allows several conclusions. The BEIR VII committee concludes that current scientific evidence is consistent with the hypothesis that there is a linear dose-response relationship between exposure to ionizing radiation and the development of radiation-induced solid cancers in humans.
The committee further judges it unlikely that a threshold exists for the induction of cancers but notes that the occurrence of radiation-induced cancers at low doses will be small. The committee maintains that other health effects (such as heart disease and stroke) occur at high radiation doses, but additional data must be gathered before an assessment can be made of any possible connection between low doses of radiation and noncancer health effects. Additionally, the committee concludes that although adverse health effects in children of exposed parents (attributable to radiation-induced mutations) have not been found, there are extensive data on radiation-induced transmissible mutations in mice and other organisms. Thus, there is no reason to believe that humans would be immune to this sort of harm.
We know the health effects of external causes on the human body depend strongly on the character of individuals in common sense. The most notable example may be the allergy to certain substances, such as pollens, foods, or microorganisms. It may be safe to say that we do not know well the effect of low level ionizing radiation yet. However, it may be scientific response and is better to accept the above report of NAS not to risk exposure to radiation ourselves.
We have stressed this apparent point now due to the situation in Japan after 3.11 disaster where some people insist there is a positive effect of the exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation based on the assumption of the so-called hormesis. There are too many assumptions on the cause of diseases, as we know, appealing to the demands to escape from sufferings.