Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

letter to the editor



My letter to the editor of The Physics Teacher was
published in June of 2003. It is a comment on a
student question about cold fusion. The editor, Karl
Mamola, wrote to me: “This is the second summer
that we have published letters on our website
during the break in our publishing cycle, so that
readers do not have to wait until September to read
our Letters to the Editor.” I would prefer the letter to
be published on paper; it would then be seen by at
least ten times more people. But the fact that the
editor decided to publish my letter, considering the
negative attitude of many, is significant.

Please, help to publicize the letter. The best way to
do this is to reply with another letter. I do not think
that The Physics Teacher is the right place to argue
for or against the validity of various cold fusion claims.
This should be done in scientific conferences and in
peer reviewed papers. But TPT is a perfect place to
let our establishment (AIP, NSF, DOE, Academy of
Science, etc.) know that teachers and students would
welcome a second formal evaluation of the field by
appointed experts. Below is the content of my letter.
The Internet reference is:

http://ojps.aip.org/journals/doc/PHTEAH-home/letters/jun2003.pdf

It is easy to submit a reply to a letter to the editor; e-mail
your comments to Dr. Karl Mamola at: tpt@appstate.edu
In doing this please indicate what you think about my
appeal. Is a new evaluation of cold fusion claims
desirable or should we stick to arguments found in the
official 1989 evaluation? Also share examples of what
students say or ask about cold fusion. Tell others how
you personally deal with the subject.
********************************************************
(TPT, JUNE 2003)

ANSWERING QUESTIONS ON COLD FUSION

Let me begin by quoting a recent email message from a student.

“Dear Mr. Kowalski,
Help! My name is Maggie Johnson and I am a sophomore at
Saratoga High School.  In my chemistry class, I am doing a
project on Cold Fusion.  I was looking on the Internet for
websites on Cold Fusion, and I came across links to your
Cold Fusion items.  I was wondering if you could give me
some advice or information?”

How should a physics teacher answer questions about cold
fusion? I am no longer comfortable saying that “cold fusion
is voodoo-science.” Can a nuclear reaction be triggered by a
chemical process? The answer, based on what we know about
nuclear phenomena, is negative. On the other hand many
experiments seem to indicate the opposite. Some of these
experiments have been described in refereed journals, others
are available over the Internet. I am referring to papers published
long after the first evaluation of “cold fusion” made in 1989 by a
board of experts appointed by our Department of Energy. Their
authoritative report (1) was based on data available nine months
after the initial announcement by Fleischmann and Pons. Many
objections found in the report are still valid but some are at odds
with new data. Accumulation of helium, for example, confirmed
by several investigators, was not known when the report was
released. How can progressive accumulation of helium be
explained?

New findings about “cold fusion” phenomena are available to
students over the Internet, for example, at www.lenr-canr.org .
Many articles downloadable from that site were published by
scientists associated with prestigious institutions. What should
a physics teacher tell students about phenomena reported by
these scientists? I have no clear answer to this question. That is
why I think that a new authoritative evaluation of the “cold fusion”
field, by a panel of competent investigators, is needed.

Ludwik Kowalski
Montclair State University,
Upper Montclair, NJ, 07043.
********************************************************