The Guardian Publishes Fleischmann Obituary by Brian Josephson

The Guardian newspaper has published an obituary of Martin Fleischmann written by Nobel prize winning physicist and public supporter of cold fusion technology, Brian Josephson. In addition to outlining the life and work of Fleischmann Josephson also attempts to explain some of the controversy surrounding his cold fusion claims.

He tells the story of how in early experimentation with hydrogen and palladium:

returning to the laboratory after one weekend, when the apparatus had been turned off, the pair found that so much heat had been produced that a large hole had been melted into the bench and concrete floor.

Josephson also explains that while some attempts at replication were unsuccessful, others, such as those done by Michael McKubre of SRI International, and at Los Alamos National laboratory did succeed.

The Guardian is one of the world’s most widely read newspapers with an online presence that takes its influence far beyond the United Kingdom where it is published, and a fair and positive article Martin Fleischmann’s work with cold fusion could spur some new interest in the topic.

Josephson concludes by saying that due to recent research cold fusion is now showing signs of being a promising source of practical energy: ‘It may well transpire that, in the words of one cold fusion entrepreneur: “The market will decide.”‘

If you don’t know who he is quoting, watch this video.

  • Roger Bird

    I think that it is time to break out the heavy, profound music: Martin Fleishmann was not just an infinitely precious soul, he was also the father of the New Economic Order (NEO), at least on a par with the Industrial Revolution, which was the harnessing of chemical energy. A thousand years from now, people will remember the name Martin Fleishmann. All of those who slammed him will be forgotten even by their own families and probably even by historians.

  • Tony76

    Of particular interest to georgehants:

    Scientific American Contest for Fringe Scientists

    “The goals of the Foundational Questions Essay Contest (the “Contest”) are to:

    – Encourage and support rigorous, innovative, and influential thinking about foundational questions in physics and cosmology;

    – Identify and reward top thinkers in foundational questions; and,
    – Provide an arena for discussion and exchange of ideas regarding foundational questions.”

    • GreenWin

      NOTE: deadline for this contest has passed. Too bad it wasn’t suggested earlier.

  • Filip47

    Other newspapers worldwide will pick this up. For sure.

    • GreenWin

      In the future, a science AND art contest would be even more exciting. Who can create an art project that introduces a leading edge scientific query? Make it accessible to the layman and the science community simultaneously.

      That would be fun. And effective schooling.

      • georgehants

        GreenWin, science and art, sacrilege, science only knows that anything beyond a steam engine is called magic and Dogma dictates it cannot exist.
        Art is nothing to do with science regardless of Penrose tiles and a million other clear connections.
        Science is at the moment being amazed by the realisation that animals have consciousness, something the entire population of the Earth has known for probably millions of years.
        They will probably give prizes for the great work done to tell us something that only totally incompetent science could possibly have ignored and denied for so long.

  • georgehants

    A little recognition that Brian Josephson is about the only “famous” scientist to voice an argument, that research into any subject where the Evidence is clear for a possible phenomenon, should be undertaken.
    Every other “name” is to busy telling us all, that they have been in touch with their personal god who helpfully informs us that there is no creator and other such completely unscientific rubbish.
    If a few of these “worthies” where to start worrying about the Truth in this World and not coming out with pointless unprovable statements, for purely personal purposes, then they may gain some real respect, instead of the usual media led following of crackpot “expert opinions”
    The quality of these well known “names” can be judged in the future, for how much they have used their “fame” to encourage and lead their Dogma following lesser colleagues, to get behind and support worthwhile science, such as the research of long proven Cold Fusion.

    • georgehants

      Sorry Frank could you change “then” to “us” in the sentence —
      helpfully informs then that there is no creator.

    • georgehants

      I may just add that Brian Josephson’s reward for being Honest, Truthful and speaking up for the only scientific method — follow the Evidence and fair theory and do the research, is to be only the second U.K. Nobel Laureate to not receive a Knighthood.
      As corrupt as the honours system is, just a club for awarding high honours to the boys, with a few OBE’s thrown in to satisfy the plebs, like a nurse who has served society faithfully all her life, it is remarkable that the establishment is able to so blatantly get away with such clear discrimination against a brilliant scientist.

      • GreenWin

        The message is: you cannot come to my party unless you kiss the ring.

      • Alan DeAngelis

        This is intriguing. Who was the other U.K. Nobel Laureate who didn’t receive a Knighthood?

    • GreenWin

      At some point someone or Brian needs to document the hell he was put through (his life was threatened) when he tried to obtain funding for cold fusion in the UK. It is an intriguing story and it should be told if only to reinforce the need to clean out the old school fiefdoms that have blocked scientific progress for so long.

      • 1) I have never tried to obtain funding for CF research — the above comment is fictional
        2) I have asked for a link to be added to the source of the quote

      • GreenWin

        Apologies to Dr. Josephson. My error not to fact check and rely on recollection. The incident was described by Gary Vesperman in his “History of New Energy Suppression Cases” – where Dr. Josephson allegedly was convinced to lay low re: a Gene Mallove video.

        Regardless, it is apparent there has been a cost to support cold fusion:

        “Why do you speak out about these things when you know it causes difficulties for your own research career?

        They are important for various reasons. For example, cold fusion may contribute significantly to solving the problem of generating clean energy. Had it not been ridiculed back in 1989, we’d probably all now be using energy generated by cold fusion. So it’s really important to speed up the process. I reckon that cold fusion will be accepted in the next year or so.

        If the evidence about cold fusion is so convincing, why do so few people believe in it?

        You have to look properly at the evidence typically blocked from publication by journals such as Nature, and few people are willing to put in the effort to do that. Even better, go along to a laboratory where the work is being done. It’s also hard to change how people think. People have vested interests, and their projects and reputations would be threatened if certain things were shown to be true.” Brian Josephson, Interview with Sue Young, August 30, 2007

        • I’m doubtful if that source has got it right. However there have been attempts at suppression not related to CF but I don’t have the time to list them right now.

          I’m pleased to report that the brilliant obituaries editor has updated the links as per my suggestions, including a link to the source of the quote about the market deciding.

  • alexvs

    This is the real LENR effect. The question about calling it CF or otherwise is irrelevant. The reactions expected and confirmed at hot fusion tentatives, i.e. 1H+1H->1D, D+D->2He, 1H+1D->1T do not (or not only) take place in F&P experiments. Other nuclear phenomena happen under unknown trigger or environemental conditions.
    It is a pity that the holes in experimental bench and floor in F&P laboratory as well as thorough measurements and analysis of matter surrounding the holes were not documented.

  • Hammerskoj

    Cures strikes back: new post on Cobras leaking e-Cat ‘secret recipe’!

    • Venno

      link please

    • +1

    • georgehants
      • Thanks George. Just ‘Cures’ having a bit of a moan then!

        Interesting that in other posts he seems to be saying that the hot cat module ceases functioning as soon as the resistance (heater) is turned off. This really doesn’t seem to make much sense at all, unless the ‘heater’ is in fact a direct current flow through the nickel powder or matrix, analogous to the Celani set-up. Even then some ‘heat after death’ reaction might be expected to continue if Celani’s experiment is anything to go by.

        • Hammerskoj

          No hypothesis. It is a [very] short summary of the ‘Rossi procedure’ as described in the new applications.

          • Ivan Mohorovicic

            Is this new patent(s?) application public?

            • Hammerskoj

              NO. Timing depends from the formal rules of Patent Office. News seems straight, no hearsay. Cobras entries should be read entirely.

          • @Cures – 16:58 20/08/12

            “To stop just off the resistance. The reaction ceases immediately.”

            Why would it do that if heat is all that’s required to keep the reaction going. If the reaction can run at 800C – 1200C there is plenty of heat around. There is clearly some other factor involved.

  • daniel maris

    Yes, it’s a little step forward, but significant. Surely this is an issue that needs to be addressed in a free society…