2007-12-31 07:43:35 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics ➔ Physics
There is a lot of suspicion that those still pursuing the possibilities of this, are influenced by the research money available. This money has largely come from one or two institutions in the mid-west of the USA.
There are serious doubts over both the basis of the theory and all claimed experimental results.
2007-12-31 08:01:26 · answer #1 · answered by ? 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
"conspiracy theory" is a convenient label given by a scientific establishment that resist change. There are a lot of good discoveries that don't fit the 'standard model'. That's what makes the frontiers of science exciting. The sad part is that a lot of good science gets surpressed, especially if it challenges the energy establishment.
2008-01-01 01:29:25 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Like all conspiracy theories, they rely on the story resonating with what people already wanted to believe, instead of relying on the data at hand.
Nobody has ever demonstrated cold fusion to have a net yield of energy. Even if someone claims to have done so, it is equally useless if it cannot be replicated.
2007-12-31 16:04:01 · answer #3 · answered by lithiumdeuteride 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The cold fusion theories were mathematically DIS-proven years ago by Caltech grad students and post-docs.
Want to read an article on it? See source below
2007-12-31 15:56:49 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
My opinion isn't really an opinion at all.
There is no known mechanism to allow "cold fusion" to happen. If fusion is the answer to our energy problems, it will come from such experiments as the JET and ITER projects. These are expected ultimately to lead to a working prototype fusion power plant, probably around 60 to 80 years from now.
2007-12-31 15:53:14 · answer #5 · answered by phoenixshade 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋