The dream of free-energy is still alive!

Get out your teleporting suit Rachna!

 

Science News Online

Week of Jan. 21, 2006; Vol. 169, No. 3

Thermonuclear Squeeze: Altered method extends bubble-fusion claim Peter Weiss A technique that some scientists claim generates thermonuclear fusion in a benchtop apparatus works even without its controversial neutron trigger. So say the researchers who, since 2002, have reported that nuclear-fusion reactions can occur in a vat of chilled solvent agitated by ultrasound (SN: 3/6/04, p. 149: Available to subscribers at http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20040306/fob5.asp). If this method of sparking fusion proves to be valid—a big if, critics insist—it could lead to a remarkably simple, cheap, inexhaustible power source. Fusion reactions take place in the vat because clusters of bubbles form and then violently collapse, explains nuclear engineer and team leader Rusi P. Taleyarkhan of Purdue University in West Lafayette, Ind. A neutron or another energetic particle triggers a bubble to form in a low-pressure trough of the ultrasound waves, he says. Then, high pressure from the wave crushes the orb to an enormous density and temperature that fuse some atomic nuclei of the bubble's gas. Taleyarkhan and his colleagues have measured neutron emissions as a sign of fusion reactions. Because the group had used neutron pulses to trigger the process, other researchers have been skeptical of its neutron readings. In an upcoming Physical Review Letters, Taleyarkhan's team presents evidence of fusion in bubbles initiated by a uranium-based trigger that emits alpha particles instead of neutrons. "We got away from the idea of using neutrons to produce neutrons," Taleyarkhan notes. Nonetheless, the findings still face intense skepticism. Criticisms range from doubts about experimental procedures to quarrels with interpretations of the data. "I simply do not find the results significant and/or believable," comments physicist Dan Shapira of Oak Ridge (Tenn.) National Laboratory. Critics note that Taleyarkhan's team admits in its report that its experimental outcomes vary greatly, many of them producing no evidence of fusion. Yet to D. Felipe Gaitan of Impulse Devices in Grass Valley, Calif., the uneven outcomes are encouraging. They "could explain our inability, and that of other researchers so far, to replicate [Taleyarkhan's] results consistently," says Gaitan. Impulse Devices plans to commercialize bubble fusion. Lawrence A. Crum of the University of Washington in Seattle says that the new work "increases the credibility" of bubble fusion. But "unless it's reproduced in someone else's lab, I'm not going to believe it," he adds. Taleyarkhan claims that his team's findings were independently verified last year by other Purdue researchers, whom he guided. Other physicists are unconvinced. A welcome consequence of the latest results, Crum adds, is that other researchers should find the uranium-based triggering method easier to reproduce than the neutron one. So, he says, the new work "is an important step toward determining if the results of Rusi's experiments are true." If you have a comment on this article that you would like considered for publication in Science News, send it to editors@sciencenews.org. Please include your name and location. To subscribe to Science News (print), go to https://www.kable.com/pub/scnw/ subServices.asp. To sign up for the free weekly e-LETTER from Science News, go to http://www.sciencenews.org/pages/subscribe_form.asp. References: Shapiro, D., and M. Saltmarsh. 2002. Nuclear fusion in collapsing bubbles—is it there? An attempt to repeat the observation of nuclear emissions from sonoluminescence. Physical Review Letters 89(Sept. 2):104302. Abstract available at http://link.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v89/e104302. Taleyarkhan, R.P., et al. In press. Nuclear emissions during self-nucleated acoustic cavitation. Physical Review Letters. Taleyarkhan, R.P., et al. 2004. Additional evidence of nuclear emissions during acoustic cavitation. Physical Review E 69():036109. Abstract available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.69.036109. Taleyarkhan, R.P., et al. 2002. Evidence for nuclear emissions during acoustic cavitation. Science 295(March 8):1868-1873. Available at http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/295/5561/1868. Xu, Y., and A. Butt. 2005. Confirmatory experiments for nuclear emissions during acoustic cavitation. Nuclear Engineering and Design 235:1317-1324. Further Readings: Weiss, P. 2005. Brutal bubbles: Collapsing orbs rip apart atoms. Science News 167(March 5):147. Available at http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20050305/fob1.asp. ______. 2004. Bubble fusion: Once-maligned claim rebounds. Science News 165(March 6):149. Available to subscribers at http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20040306/fob5.asp. ______. 2002. Violent chemistry saps sonobubble energy. Science News 162(Aug. 24):125. Available to subscribers at http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20020824/note15.asp. ______. 2002. Star in a jar? Hints of nuclear fusion found—maybe. Science News 161(March 9):147. Available at http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20020309/fob1.asp. Sources: Lawrence A. Crum Center for Industrial and Medical Ultrasound Applied Physics Laboratory University of Washington 1013 NE 40th Street Seattle, WA 98105 D. Felipe Gaitlin Impulse Devices, Inc. Grass Valley Corporate & Research Office 13366 Grass Valley Avenue, Unit H Grass Valley, CA 95945 Dan Shapira Oak Ridge National Laboratory P.O. Box 2008 Mailstop Code 6368 Oak Ridge, TN 37831-6368 Rusi P. Taleyarkhan School of Nuclear Engineering 400 Central Drive Purdue University W. Lafayette, IN 47907-2017

http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20060121/fob7.asp

From Science News, Vol. 169, No. 3, Jan. 21, 2006, p. 38.

Copyright (c) 2006 Science Service. All rights reserved.