Well, understand that I was being rather hyperbolic. Most of that came from a science-fiction story. However, it's based on the concept of a fusion reactor (working much like a nuclear reactor, but with cold fusion as the source), and what would happen if the reaction that creates the power wasn't "contained".

A fusion "bomb" would produce similar results. Of course, all of that is mostly abstract theory, as most scientists seem to be dismissing cold fusion as illegitimate.

Any time scientists tap into potential power sources like this, fears arise. Sometimes reasonable fears, sometimes not. There were some fears about uncertainty of the explosion range of the first atomic explosion. Some thought it might "perpetuate" itself, feeding on matter like fuel, causing a much, much larger explosion than planned.

IIRC, there were a few that even thought it might be endlessly perpetual, that it would never end (IOW destroy the entire world, perhaps more). Last I heard there was a sub-atomic experiment going on that had a minute chance of creating a "White Dwarf" star here, on Earth. That of course, would destroy the Earth, the Moon, and probably reek havoc with the rest of the Solar System as well.

At the risk of sounding like I'm trying to spread paranoia, be aware that the likelihood of these thing happening are extremely small. In the range of less than 1%, IIRC.

In any case, here's a link that discusses Cold Fusion that seams reasonable. I can't swear to that, however, as I get lost pretty quickly and it's an extremely "dry" document.

http://www.ncas.org/erab/

I don't think you intentionly try to create paranoia 😀

I was just interested since it was described in such detail, though I think you're wrong. Ofcourse I can't prove it 🙁

The concept of fusion is tought in physics at highschools in Europe, I was just wondering if maybe there was a story behind it.

We're thought that fusion, a natural process, happens constantly in the sun. Quite an efficient way of creating heat, with no "known" dangerously radiation / polution emission. I don't really recall the details, (like the required 3He gas (available at the moon, now U know why the russians where up there 😀 and barium and which element it will form etc.)

But cold fusion is just a fantasy theory of controllable fusion.. nothing more, atleast that was ofcourse told to me.

Sorry for my bad english.. or mistakes, it was really a while ago

Kyl3 wrote:

But cold fusion is just a fantasy theory of controllable fusion.. nothing more, at least that was ofcourse told to me.

Like I said, most scientists have dismissed it, but not all. Kind of like Tachyons.

Last I actually heard of cold fusion was long time ago on the radio (BBC radio I think) about an accident at a lab in Oxford (UK) that had been involved in a Cold Fusion experiment and that there were reports of a possible fatality. Never heard another word about it... (Cue X-Files theme...)

The actuality of anything happening can probably be correlated to the amount of empty space between atoms, which is something like 99.4-99.9%. That's just old chemistry homework speaking, though.

My only real concern is that the price of "being wrong" goes up as time goes by and experiments start dealing with forces that we barely comprehend. A long time ago, that would mean the injury or death of the scientist involved. Later that risk involved a defined area and all the people within that area. Like I said, the sub-atomic experiment that was being planned; if it did go wrong would annihilate all of humanity, the Earth, it's moon, and a chunk of the solar system in one fell swoop.

Unless that risk is 0, or there's a truly pressing need for the experiment to take place; I say we pass on such experiments until we have a lab on a space station around Mars. That's a "buffer" I can live with.

I am reminded of the debacle caused by the Brookhaven Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider:
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/general … estruction.html

As it turns out, we were not destroyed when it was switched on. 😀
http://www.bnl.gov/rhic/

Stiletto wrote:

As it turns out, we were not destroyed when it was switched on. 😀

Yeah. This time. The more often a risk is taken, the greater odds of the "very small odds situation" would actually happen.

My point is that if one of these experiments does go wrong, there is no recourse....at all. My fear is that the guy who thinks a .01% chance today, might accept a 1% chance in the future, and so on...on the basis of gains that he cannot be certain will ever be made by the experiment.

Like I said, when a risk, however small, could be catastrophic, you better have a really good reason for taking it.

As much as is known about the universe, we know precious little. Even recently, there have been events where the majority of scientists "knew" something was true, only to find they were wrong. We are no longer in the realm of "common science", where theories can be proved by an individual with a fifteen-minute slideshow.

We've entered a time where we're hitting barriers of what can be demonstrably be proven, and we now press on with the presumption that prior theories are relatively accurate. I understand the reasoning behind this, it's just that sometimes people can forget about the scale of the consequences of their actions.

Ok. I'll stop preaching now. I told myself that I wasn't going to this on this board as these things tend to distract from the boards primary purpose. I'll try not to do it again.

Hey, man. This is MILLIWAYS, man. A really groovy place, man! Don't not say stuff. 😀

Snover wrote:

Hey, man. This is MILLIWAYS, man. A really groovy place, man! Don't not say stuff. 😀

That's right, it's the restaurant at the end of the universe! Where better to talk about the world ending in horrifying ways.

Here's another one for Nicht to love. Men playing God again:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles … -2002Nov20.html