New Poll: What Should the ‘Effect’ be Called?

I have just put up a new poll on a topic that is already being discussed here — what should the ‘effect’ that causes excess heat be called? There are a few names being used at the moment, and new ones being proposed.

Please feel free to explain your preference in the comments section below. Some other questions to discuss are: does it really matter what the name is? Should there be a uniform name used when we discuss the ‘effect’? Will the chosen name affect the way the topic is dealt with in the media, by regulators, public perception?

Also, if you think none of the names suggested are satisfactory — propose a new one!

  • Tony


  • Lamaan

    “Nuclear Catalysis” seems to me to be the obvious name for it.

    • Lamaan

      On second thoughts, though scientifically accurate “nuclear catalysis” will probably scare people as “nuclear magentic resonance imaging” soon lost the “nuclear” word to make it more palatable.

      The name “Catalytic Fusion” is probably better.

  • Kevin O

    Hydrogen Adsorption Low Temperature Lattice Assisted Pons Fleischmann Heat Effect Reactor

    He who lafphs lasts, laughs loudest

  • G. E. Start

    Coulomb Field Conversion

  • jeffsmathers

    Debunkers Energy Paradigm Failure

  • Phil Lang

    Id like to call it the “QuarterMuffin” effect. Don’t know why.

  • I agree with others who have said that ‘cold fusion’ will most likely be the popular name, while a new formal term will be needed to describe all varieties of ‘CF’ and CF-like reactions – the new science occupying a space between chemistry and nuclear physics.

    I like ‘nucleonic’ (also suggested by Freethinker earlier). It’s already occasionally used to mean ‘in connection with nuclear (fission)’ but deserves a rebirth, as in ‘nucleonic energy’ or ‘nucleonics’ for the field of study.

  • Levi Strauss

    I’d say “COLD FUSION” is as good as any name because the anomaly has not been properly diagnosed as yet. Besides, just like a lot of other phenomenon, one of these days, the relevant society will decide to honor one of their own , the name will change and it will become the “peafob unit” or something else that Hurtz the tongue. ‘;-)

  • JonathanD

    Ecological Nuclear Energy (ECONE).

  • KeySmash

    CERN – Controlled Electron Capture Reaction – GO Brillouin~!!!

  • CALL IT.
    Low-Energy Elemental Reaction Systems
    I think it will work….

  • CALL IT.
    Low-Energy Elemental Reaction Systems

    • CALL IT.
      Low-Energy Elemental Reaction Systems

  • richbo

    Fleischmann Effect

  • evleer

    What about calling it the FLAME (Forbidden Lattice Assisted anoMalous Energy) effect?

    ‘Forbidden’ because we all know what happened to F&P and efforts to research the effect up until this very day. I think it’s a nice touch to remind those, responsible for the suppression, in this subtle manner. After all, it’s shameful how they have misused their position to hold back progress.

    Also notice the metaphorical meaning: the flame of hope, holding the promise to ignite.. well, no need to elaborate on that.

    • MikkaMakka

      I like the concept behind the name!

  • Ivan Cevallos

    “F&P Anomalous heat effect”.
    Yes physicist discredited to retain funds. They even cover up successful replications, But the science of this heat is no yet understood, so for the time being this name should help to minimize conflict and interest the less closed minded scientists.
    Later when a theory is successfully proven the name could change to Anything, at the end of the day if is fusion will be called “Cold fusion”.
    But at the moment to be truthful is just an “Anomalous heat effect”.
    Some as Rossi even try to say is diff than F&P effect and that F&P only inspired their work. time will tell.
    Try to get the road with the least resistance. and the phenomena will gain general attention.

  • Jim Johnson

    “Cold Fusion”

    It wasn’t F&P’s name (see below), however it will be forever linked to them, as it should be. Someone else pointed out on this blog that the semantic sense of the two words is quite, controlled power. That will appeal to the marketing people. The press will choose Cold Fusion *because* of the controversy. Any hold-back scientists can eat raw muons, for all their opinion will matter.

    Wikipedia, “Cold Fusion”:

    In 1988, Fleischmann and Pons applied to the United States Department of Energy for funding towards a larger series of experiments. Up to this point they had been funding their experiments using a small device built with $100,000 out-of-pocket.[23] The grant proposal was turned over for peer review, and one of the reviewers was Steven E. Jones of Brigham Young University.[23] Jones had worked for some time on muon-catalyzed fusion, a known method of inducing nuclear fusion without high temperatures, and had written an article on the topic entitled “Cold nuclear fusion” that had been published in Scientific American in July 1987. Fleischmann and Pons and co-workers met with Jones and co-workers on occasion in Utah to share research and techniques. During this time, Fleischmann and Pons described their experiments as generating considerable “excess energy”, in the sense that it could not be explained by chemical reactions alone.[22] They felt that such a discovery could bear significant commercial value and would be entitled to patent protection. Jones, however, was measuring neutron flux, which was not of commercial interest.[23] To avoid future problems, the teams appeared to agree to simultaneously publish their results, though their accounts of their March 6 meeting differ.[24]

  • Since we are converting matter to energy and heat, let’s just call it “Evaporation”, something we already know and love.


  • Jacob

    “Rossi’s Demon”

  • Omega Z

    A different take

    Call this field of Research- COLD FUSION-the P&F Effect.

    georgehants post- “Science will try to bury Cold Fusion behind some crazy complicated misnomer.”

    Got me to thinking. Mainstream Science will do exactly that. They will do everything they can to distance it from P&F work. To cover-up the Fact that they squashed this research & the careers of these 2 men 23+ years ago.

    This needs to be in your face shame on you! They shouldn’t be allowed to hide from this disgrace. They didn’t just say it doesn’t appear feasible or doesn’t work. This was a full scale onslaught of P&F and their work. A total cover up for their own personal gains. The Name shall remind People of Mainstream Science Shame!

    We, The People Must Never Forget!!!

    • Tassyfrog

      I agree with you that P&F were badly treated by the scientific community, but they jumped the gun when publishing results that could not be reproduced consistently by colleagues or peers. They could have continued researching until they achieved this and then published.
      We may have saved decades in the development of this technology.
      I release it is not as simple as this as “the system may have forced them to do this to try and get the prestige and funding by being first in the field”
      food for thought….

      • NJT

        Tassyfrog, their work was immediately replicated, successfully, by NASA and MIT. NASA hid the result and MIT Lied about it – shameful indeed!

        • Tassyfrog

          Didn’t know that, but not surprised. This sort of thing gives credence to the “new world order” conspiracy theory with those behind the scene controlling the flow of technology according to their agenda

    • Ivan Cevallos

      In the future a unit of this energy defined some how will be called Fleishmans.

  • Tassyfrog

    How about CBBR ( coulomb barrier breaching reaction )

  • Jay

    Fleischmann-Pons effect which rightfully credits the two researchers that introduced the world to the phenomenon.

  • Morgan

    Cold Fusion to honor Fleischmann and Pons.

  • CFL (Cold Fusion Like): to respect the historical
    context of this excess of heat.

  • freethinker

    I would go for something relating to lattice, as it appear to be tightly coupled to such structures. Also it appears to be hinged on distortions in tje lattice structure or by manipulating it with phonons or related quanta. So:
    Lattice Distortion Induced Nuclear Energy, LDINE.

    • Shhh – we need to lose the ‘N’ word….

      • freethinker

        what if we say nucleonic or just remove it all togerher 🙂 LDIE

    • Ivan Cevallos

      Latice Cracks effect, this will suit storms

      • Ivan Cevallos

        Most scientists, like Storms, Mckubre, Celani, etc talk about the effect being caused by defects in the environment, like Celani Wire and its nano sponge like structures in the surface of the wire.
        Now Rossi uses nano powder and a catalyst. Are this completely different effects. (in fissures the effect could be produced by resonance) in Power is just the big area? each grain has more provability of cracks?.
        I will love Rossi does a real demo like heating a Olympic size swimming pool, or just heat tanks of water, his twilight demos and reports are killing me.

  • wolfgang gaerber

    I would call it the Awesome Effect.
    The Awesome Effect