To the editorial board of the magazine
УUspekhi fizicheskikh naukФ
Dear editorial staff,
There was published a notice in your magazine, No.6, v. 169 of this year, by A.V.Arzhannikov, G.Ya. Kezerashvili and E.P. Krouglyakov, named УOn the Russian Conferences on Cold Fusion and Nuclear TransmutationФ. That publication along with a constructive criticism of both the methodology of the УCold FusionФ (CF) and some works represented in the proceedings of the Russian CF Conferences has inaccessible, no correct attacks regarding the named scientific direction resulting in the tendentious talking the phenomenon and presenting it as a Уpathological scienceФ.
Unfortunately, since year 1993 your magazine has not been publishing any surveys on CF (the last one was prepared by V.A.Tsarev in 1992). That is why the Russian physical public is not simply aware of the status of the researches in the field of CF that have been carrying out both in our country and abroad over the last seven years. In the attached short article being sent to your magazine we considered it necessary therefore to take a prompt look at the up to date status of the CF as well as to reply to unfair accusations. Also we assume that do demonstrate the balanced position of the Magazine it is indispensable taking into account the opinion of the criticized party, that is of the specialists who have been dealing the CF phenomenon over the long time.
We hope the publication of our reply in the УUspekhi fizicheskikh
naukФ magazine would benefit to objective and balanced approach to the CF
phenomenon from the side of the broad physical societies of
With respect,
The Coordination Council Members on the problem ofа УCold Fusion Ф:
аааааа Bazhutov Yu. N., PhD, As.Prof., MADI (
аааааа Goryachev I.V., DS, Deputy Dir., HTI at
Russ.
аааааа Lipson A.G., PhD, Senior Researcher, Phys. Chem. Inst., RAS,
аааааа Samsonenko N.V., PhD, As.Prof.,
Reply to the notice УOn
the Russian Conferences on Cold Fusion and Nuclear TransmutationФ by
A.V.Arzhannikov, G.Ya. Kezerashvili and E.P. Krouglyakov, УUspekhi fizicheskikh
naukФ, No.6, v. 169
In the notice by the above-mentioned authors, which is devoted to the
survey of the Russian Conferences on the so called УCold Fusion (CF) ProblemФ,
together with a constructive criticism (to
which any new non-traditional scientific direction may
be subject, though) there is a number of not quite fair attacks regarding the
methodology of the CF, resulting sometimes to
a tedious understanding of experimental results.
For example, the erzion, mentioned in the note, is not actually Уa
mythic particle that had never been considered seriously by any of the
physicists engaged in professional investigations of the elementary particlesФ
but a new introduced hypothetic heavy hadron ( Izvestiya
Akademii Nauk USSR, 1982)а that has
nothing to do with the A. OkhatrinТs УfantasticФ microleptones.
Than, in the report, devoting to the work with the УUSMARФ device,
which was carried out by the team of the УERZIONФ S&R Center of Phys. Tech.
Problems, Nuclear Physics Institute of the Moscow State Univ. and the УENERGIAФ
Space Corp. there was no exceed heat registration announcement.
In the course of that work the neutron and tritium generation was not being
observed when using the regular УsinkФ water, but only after significant adding
of the heavy water, with the resulting deuterium concentration exceeding
natural concentration by as muchааа as 30
times. And, finally, one cannot see at all where the authorsТ conclusion thatа У in theааааааа Yu.N.Bazhutov model the ancient
alchemistТs dream of the usual atoms transmutation into the atoms of the
precious metals is quite possible to come true in the common kitchenФ derives
from.
It is not clear what are the authorsТ reasons
to claim that physicists are more than modestly represented among the
organizers of the Conferences, and that the Organizing Committee has no one
nuclear physicists, while, actually, 80% of both the Organizing Committee and
the Coordination Council on the Cold Fusion Problem is represented by
professional physicists (see, say, Introduction to the Proceedings of the
RCCFNT-3).
We shall leave to the authorsТ conscience unfounded stamping of the
professional scientists from the main
institutions of the
Now get down to the essence of the Problem. Apart from the non-correct
definition of the Уcold fusionФ term given by M. Fleishmann and S. Ponse in
1989, as Уthe effect of a massive DD-reactions triggering in a metal lattice
resulting to the excessive heat generationФ absence of the effect
reproducibility and as well as involving into the problem ignorant (in some
rare times) researchers unskilled in the field of the nuclear physics, the main
reason of rejecting the CF phenomenon by certain part of the physical society
is as follows.
To ensure the stimulation of the nuclear reactions by, actually, the
electromagnetic resource of the lattice
(Уnuclear energy generation in the atomic latticeФ Ц the CF definition given by
J.Shwinger, the Nobel Prize Winner) one should get through the 7 orders of the
value gap between the energy of chemical bound and the nucleon bound energy in
the nucleus. In the absence of the known mechanisms for the concentration of as
much high-leveled energies, the process of the lattice energy transformation
into the nuclear one is the most criticized conceptual part of the CF problem.
It should be emphasized, that initial period of ungrounded hopes for soon
settling the CF problem, immediately followed the wide-spread announcement of
theаааааааааааааааа CF discovery in 1989
was replaced with a period of systematic researching works being performed in
hundreds laboratories all over the world.
Up to the date the term УCold Nuclear FusionФ may stand for the complex
of the anomalous from the nuclear vacuum collisions point of view, stochastic
low-temperature nuclear processes (which are being accompanied sometimes with
heat phenomena of the unknown origin) that are developed in the essentially
non-equilibrium solids, and appeared under the
phase transitions, mechanical actions,
hydrogen (deuterium) sorption and desorption and so on. It is quite clear even
from the definition above that the CF phenomenon is the sophisticated process,
which is in the intersection point of the nuclear physics, the physics of the
solids and the physical chemistry of the condensed matters.
Concerning the auto isolation of the CF society, - the results got in
the worldТs research laboratories regularly have been being discussed on the
International CF Conferences (in USA - 90, 93 years, in Italy Ц 2000, in Japan
Ц 92, 96 in France Ц 95, in Canada Ц 98) as well as on the national CF
Conferences in the USA, in Italy, in Japan, in Russia. Professor Vladimir
Tsaryov in 1991 and 1992 years in UFN magazine published the revew on some of
these Conferences.
In 1991 the All-union Conference on CF was held in the Nuclear Research
United Institute (NRUI) and in the
Information concerning the arrangements on CF is being spread out
through the Bulletins of the Russian Physical Society, Russian Nuclear Society, it is regularly published in the УElektrokhimiaФ
(УRuss. ElectrochemistryФ) academic magazine as well as in
the magazine of the American Nuclear Society УFusion TechnologyФ. And
the last, which is the most important Ц apart from the current publications the
results of the CF works in the proceedings of both the Russian and
International Conferences on CF, the basic reports of the Russian researchers
are regularly published in the Russian and foreign magazines after having been subjected
to preliminary revew.
So, the Russian CF Society is completely opened for contacts, which may
be obvious from the list of the well-known foreign and Russian scientists who
took part in our Conferences on CF: J.P. Vigier,а J.P. Millout (France),а M. Mc Kubre (USA),а J. Kasagi,а
A. Takahashi (Japan),а X.Z. Lee,
V.F. Zelenskiy (Ukraine), V.B. Belyaev (JINR), B.Ya. Guzhovskiy, Yu.V. Savin (VNIIEPh) and many others.
We hope the publication of our reply will benefit to more objective and
weighted approach to the CF phenomenon from the part of the wide physical
circles.
The Coordination
Council Members on the problem ofа УCold Fusion Ф:
Bazhutov Yu. N.,
PhD, As.Prof., MADI (
аааааа Goryachev I.V., DS, Deputy Dir., HTI at Russian Scientific
Center УKurchatov InstituteФ,
аааааа Lipson A.G., PhD, Senior Researcher, Phys. Chem. Inst., RAS,
аааааа Samsonenko N.V., PhD, As.Prof., Russian Friendship University
а
Editorial board
To: Yu. N. Bazhutov, I.V.Goryachev,
A.G.Lipson, N.V.Samsonenko
Dear authors,
Your note Reply to the note УOn the Russian Conferences on Cold Fusion and Nuclear TransmutationФ by A.V.Arzhannikov, G.Ya. Kezerashvili and E.P. Krouglyakov was examined on the assembly of the editorial staff of the magazine УUspekhi fizicheskikh naukФ on January 19, 2000. Taking into account the opinion of the editorial staff members it was decided not to open the discussion on the question mentioned by you.
In view of above said we send you back your note.
Respectfully,
On behalf of the name of the editorial staff
УUspekhi fizicheskikh naukФ magazine
M.S.Aksentyeva
Executive Secretary