A
BRIEF HISTORY OF THE ATOM, COLD FUSION AND COLD FISSION
ROBERTO
A.MONTI
Researcher
Istituto TESRE - CNR
SUMMARY
Part I : Between
1913 and 1921, Thomson, Parson, Lewis, Allen and Harkins made up the
essential elements to the definition of the "alpha-extended
model" of the atom. Whereas Thomson, Parson, Lewis and Allen
mainly dealt with the atom structure, Harkins specifically analyzed
the nucleus structure . Even though they were contemporary, these
scientists seem to have ignored their mutual researches ( in fact,
Rutherford can be considered as the cause of the "separation"
between Harkins, in particular, and the other authors ). As a result
the different contributions, given by the above mentioned scientists,
could not merge into a single, coherent model .
Part II : In 1937
Ferrmi designed an artificial neutron generator which he made by
means of a "semi-cold" fusion between heavy ice and
deuterium ions. In 1940 Borghi, apparently unacquainted with
Harkins's ideas, advanced again the hypothesis according to which
the neutron was a particular bound state of the hydrogen atom ; and,
between 1950 and 1955, he designed and made the neutron synthesis,
starting from a cold hydrogen plasma . From 1959 onwards Kevran found
and experimentally reproduced several cold fusion and cold fission
which he defined as "low energy transmutations" . In 1965,
following Kervran's example George Oshawa made a new series of cold
fusions electrochemically and biologically induced . In 1984 Rose and
Jones "rediscovered" cold fission. In 1990 the experimental
reality of cold fusion has been confirmed .
PART I : BRIEF HISTORY OF
THE ATOM
1815 Prout noted
that the weights of the several atoms appeared to be multiples of the
weight of hydrogen, and advanced the hypothesis that all other atoms
are composed of hydrogen atoms (1).
1860 Marignac
supposed the deviations of atomic weights from integral numbers to be
a consequence of the fusion process of hydrogen atoms (1) .
1863
De Chancourtois arranged the elements in a spiral in the order of
their atomic weights, and made the remark : "the properties of
substances are the properties of numbers" (1) .
1869 Mendeleef
built his Periodic Table of the Elements. The properties of the
elements are periodic functions of the atomic number (1) .
1897 J.J.Thomson
discovers that the cathode rays are material particles, charged with
"negative" electricity : the electrons (2) .
1898 W.Wien
identifies a particle which is "positively" charged, with a
mass equal to that of the hydrogen atom, in a beam of ionized gas:
the proton (3) .
1902-1904
Lord Kelvin formulates the first atom model,
which was so strongly supported and developed by J.J. Thomson
that it became known as the "Thomson (first) atom" .
According
to this model, the atom consists of a sphere of uniformly distributed
charge, about one Angstrom in diameter, in which the electrons are
embedded like raisins in a pudding (4), (5) .
1904 Hantaro Nagaoka
hypothesizes that the positive charge is concentrated in the
center of the atom and that electrons form a ring, around such a
nucleus, which is similar to that around Saturn (6).
1905
Albert Einstein formulates the theory of
Relativity. With the gradual "disappearance" of the Ether
the physical space where to place the atom and rebuild its structure
disappears as well. The establishment of the theory of Relativity
compromises the development of a model of the atom consistent with
the experimental evidence, and deviates the "natural course"
of Atomic Mechanics (7).
- J.J.Thomson definitely confirms the discovery of the proton, made by Wien
(8) .
- Ernest Rutherford gathers and develops the observations of Geiger an
Marsden,
two of his young assistants. He concludes that the atom has a
"nucleus"
where
the positive charge is concentrated.
In some way, around it, the electrons are
placed. Being excessively enthusiastic for the results obtained with
the "bombardment method", Rutherford directs Nuclear
Physics towards "high energies" .
Rutherford's model has a fundamental flaw : the
dimensions of the nucleus result to be "very small" (of the
order of 10-12 cm)
on the basis of the hypothesis that "the central charge…may be
supposed to be concentrated at a point", which allows the
erroneous exchange of the word "surface" of the nucleus
with the word "centre" of the nucleus (10) .
His model, moreover, does not answer three
major questions :
- Negative electrons are attracted by the positive nucleus: yet they appear as "distant" from the nucleus. Why don't they fall on it ?
- Electrons are supposed to be distributed and "moving" around the nucleus. Why don't they radiate electromagnetic energy ?
- Nuclear charge is an integer multiple of Wien's "elementary positive charge". How come doesn't the nucleus "explode" because of electrostatic repulsion ? (11).
1913 Niels Bohr
attempts an answer to the unsolved questions . These are his answers
: 1) The atom is a "planetary" system ; centrifugal force
prevents an electron from falling on the nucleus. 2) He simply
postulates that electromagnetic laws are not valid for nuclear
orbits. He then states that as a consequence of "its small
dimensions" the nucleus does not influence "the atom's
ordinary physical and chemical properties which, on the other hand,
depend on external electrons". 3) As far as the third issue is
concerned, he ignored it (12) .
1913 J.J.Thomson
observes that no one has ever demonstrated that electrons are
spherical and that the Coulomb field-at a micro level-has a spherical
symmetry . He builds Thomson's "second" atom : a "rigid"
atom and, consequently, a "theory of valence" (13) .
1915 Bohr's atom is
absolutely incapable of eliminating the fundamental
contradictions with the laws of electromagnetism. Above all, it is
incapable accounting for chemical phenomena (14) .
1915 A.L.Parson
introduces the magnetic field: the electron is not just an electric
charge, but it is also
a small magnet .
Position of electromagnetic stable
equilibrium of electrons in atoms are possible.
In 1911 Kamerlingh onnes even provided
a model of this "magnetic electron": a superconductive
ring where electric flux going into the ring generates a magnetic
field. Both are exceptionally stable.
Moreover Parson observes that the planetary atom
is irremediably inconsistent with chemical and stereochemical
evidence.
But his model has two flaws: 1) He does not
extend the same hypothesis he made about the electron to the proton .
2) He maintains the "uniformly charged
sphere of the Kelvin or Thomson atom" as a model of the nucleus
(15) .
1915 William D.
Harkins reconstructs the Periodic Table of the Elements, and provides
two models (a spiral one and a helicoidal one). He moves from the
hypothesis that every element's chemical properties essentially
depend on the nucleus structure, which is composed of the sum of
hydrogen and helium nuclei. He resolves the problem of the nucleus
stability by advancing the hypothesis that the hydrogen atom
"captures" its electron and, thus, gives raise to a neutral
particle: the neutron. Electrons which have been captured "cement"
(bind) the protons (16).
1916 G.N. Lewis
works on Thomson's and Parson's ideas and "stops" the atom:
"Bohr, with his electron moving in a fixed orbit, (has) invented
systems containing electrons of which the motion produces no effects
upon external charge . Now this is not only inconsistent with the
accepted laws of electromagnetics but, I may add, is logically
objectionable, for that state of motion which produces no physical
effects wathsoever may better be called a state of rest"
(17).
Lewis builds the theory of valence .
1918 H.S. Allen sees
how the "rigid" atom stands. He lists the remarkable amount
of experimental data in favour of a rigid structure, and he concludes
by observing that: "it will be necessary to revise the
prevailing view as to the small size and pure electrostatic field of
the nucleus", and that: "Bohr's theory as to origin of
series line in spectra may be restated so as to apply it to the ring
electron. The essential points of the quantum theory and of Bohr's
equations may be maintained, even if his atomic model be rejected"
(18) .
1919 J.J. Thomson
introduces magnetism and builds everything anew: series line in
spectra, ect. from the point of view of the rigid atom. But he does
not take into account the contributions of Parson, Lewis, Allen and
Harkins (19) .
1919 E. Rutherford
believes he has disintegrated nitrogen. As a matter of fact, he has
fused a helium nucleus with a nitrogen one, expelling thus a proton .
And, what is worse, he is convinced once and for all of the quality
of the "bombardment method". He hopes for the future that
growing energetic projectiles be available. It is the prelude to the
birth of High Energy Physics (20) .
1920 W. D. Harkins
publishes the first version "alpha extended model" of the
nucleus . But his theory has a fundamental flaw : he places the
"right" neutron and nucleus in the "wrong" atom
of Rutherford and Bohr (21) .
1921 J. J. Thomson
confirms that Bohr's planetary model - as far as atoms with many
electrons are concerned - would become "hopelessly intricate"
(22) .
1921 A. H. Compton
provides experimental evidence in favour of magnetic electron (23) .
1921 W. D. Harkins
further develops the "alpha extended model" of the nucleus
and finally introduces in current terminology the neutron as "sum"
of a proton and an electron (24) .
1921 Crehore points
out that the rigid atom is by now currently used in chemistry, where
it daily proves itself useful. He suggests that the entire field of
chemistry is not a silly thing to be lightheartedly neglected in
order to support Bohr's atom . He observes that those "useful"
results from Bohr's theory can be obtained from other atomic models -
i. e. rigid atom . And he adds that despite what Bohr did it is not
essential to assume things against ordinary laws of electromagnetism
. The rigid atom is based on the laws of electromagnetism : "So
long as there is strict adherence to the Bohr model, an understanding
of phenomena on the basis of electromagnetic theory will remain
difficul, if not impossible… The abandonment of ring of electrons
from an atomic model does not seem to be so revolutionary when viewed
in the light of these facts" (25) .
COUP DE THEATRE
1921 Albert Einstein
receives the Nobel Prize for Physics. He is given the Prize for the
"discovery of the laws of photoelectric effect" . But it
inevitably assumes the "political value" of an
"endorsement" of the theory of Relativity .
1922 Niels Bohr
receives the Nobel Prize for Physics. He is given the Prize for his
studies on "the atoms structure and radiation" .
RELATIVITY AND PLANETARY ATOM BECOME
"OFFICIAL SCIENCE"
On a theoretical level, physicists impose the
planetary atom on chemists.
Chemists "suffer" but, as a matter of
fact, do not give a damn. The theory of valence
is, and continues to
be, that by Lewis and Thomson (26) .
FINAL HOAX
1925 Bohr's atom
has some problems with the anomalous Zeeman effect. Uhlenbeck and
Goudsmit "discover" the magnetic electron . Before
introducing such a "revolutionary concept" they ask for
advice to the least apt person: Niels Bohr . Bohr takes the
opportunity of staging a clever "coup de main", that of
introducing the main argument adopted by Parson and Allen against
planetary atom at the basis of the "new Quantum Mechanics of
Heisenberg" and inside the planetary atom : the magnetic
electron. With a warm letter encouraging the "birth" of
Spin, Bohr gives them his approval (27).
1926 E. Schroedinger
presents his "An undulatory Theory of the Mechanics of Atoms and
Molecules": "The point of view taken here… is rather that
material points consist of, or are nothing but, wave systems"
(28) . Schroedinger does not ask himself what his "wave
systems" are made of. By paraphrasing Einstein, one could say
that "the ether took its revenge and ate matter" (29) .
1928 W. D. Harkins
attempts to produce gold by introducing an electron in a mercury
nucleus, but fails (30) .
1932 J. Chadwick
"discovers" the neutron (31) .
1932 W. D. Harkins
timidly lays claim to the neutron (32).
Heisenberg states that "Harkins's neutron"
(the sum of a proton and electron) is "different" from
"Chadwick's neutron", that is, a "new" particle
which "does not contain" electrons, but "creates"
them at the moment of its decay (33) .
As a matter of fact, as we have seen before,
Harkins placed the right neutron and nucleus in the wrong atom: "his"
neutron cannot be accepted because it is "incompatible with
Bohr's atom an Heisenberg's Quantum Mechanics" .
1935 Thus, it is J.
Chadwick who receives the Nobel Prize for Physics "for the
discovery of the neutron".
THE ATOM IS COMPLETED
PART II : BRIEF HISTORY OF COLD
FUSION AND COLD FISSION
- French revolution. May 8. Lavoisier is beheaded.
Lavoisier
introduced the "galilean method" in chemistry, contributing
to its "scientific foundation". On the basis of his
experiments he could observe that "in all chemical reactions the
same quantity of matter is present before and after the reaction".
Lavoisier consequently hypothesizes that in a chemical reaction
transmutations from one element to another do not occur (34).
- Vaquelin observes what Lavoisier had no occasion to observe: the
transmutation
from one element to another. The experimental method of Vaquelin is
as stringent as Lavoisier's method. But Lavoisier cannot take note of
it (35).
1792
- 1801 On the bases of his experimental
observations Herschel concludes that the sun has a solid, "cold",
nucleus (36).
1815
- 1847 The Restoration "excessively"
rehabilitates Lavoisier: the "intransmutability"
of the chemical elements becomes a dogma
instead of an experimental hypothesis. Alchemy (which, on the other
hand, admits transmutations of the chemical elements) is
"discredited".
However
the experimental results of Vaquelin are too stringent to be denied.
Therefore they are neglected. The last official trace of these
experiments can be found in Regnault's Course
de Chimie (1847). Then they disappear (37).
- Berzelius reports Vogel's experimental evidence for biological transmutations
(38).
- - 1900 Nineteenth century is the century of the steam engine. During its
second
half the sun becomes - contrary to experimental evidence - gaseous
and hot: a big steam engine (39).
- E. Rutherford obtains the fusion of the a helium nucleus with a nitrogen one.
Transmutations
are possible but - in his opinion - only "high energy
transmutations" ("hot" fusion - bombardment method)
(20).
- Nernst, Jeans and others suggest that "since the outflowing heat ( from the Sun
represents
the energy liberated by subatomic processes, the amount can only be
calculated if we know the laws of liberation of subatomic energy,
and any procedure which evades this difficult problem begs the
question". Eddington begs the question (40).
- Georges Ranque discovers the "Ranque Effect", which can offer an
experimental
answer to the problem of the formation and of the internal structure
of
the
sun. But nobody gives it the proper attention it deserves (41).
- While looking for "an artificial generator of neutrons", Enrico Fermi
accomplishes
a "semi cold fusion" between "heavy ice" and
deuterium (heavy hydrogen). But he does not give it enough attention,
as he should (42).
- Seemingly unaware of Harkins's work, Don Carlo Borghi makes the
assumption
again that the neutron is a peculiar "bound state" of the
hydrogen atom. His hypothesis is obviously refused because it
"contradcts Bohr's atom and Heisenberg's Quantum Mechanics".
Borghi does not realize the "danger" of his hypothesis. He
insists and is estranged (43).
1950 - 1955 D. C. Borghi
planned an experiment to synthesize neutrons starting from a cold
hydrogen plasma. Expelled from Milan, he moves to the Vatican. With
the money he is given - under the counter - by De Gasperi, he starts
his experiments in a Roman laboratory. Borghi succeeds where Harkins
failed: "cold" synthesis of the neutron shows that the
neutron really is "the sum of the proton and an electron".
De
Gasperi's death marks the end of Borghi's financial support. He
emigrates to Brazil in order to continue his experiments. In Recife
he founds the Centre for Nuclear Energy (CEN) (44).
- Borghi tries to present his experimental results at the Vienna Convention. But
Amaldi's
action prevents him from having his paper accepted. Estranged once
again, Borghi leaves the scene for good (45).
- C. L. Kervran discovers "low energy transmutations". He regrets the disastrous
effects
induced by the uncritical and univocal adoption of Rutherford's
method in the study on the atom's structure. He concludes that nuclei
are "rigid" structures and composed of "bricks".
He
lists a first series of ascertained low energy transmutations: cold
fusion and cold
fission examples; and provides some models of
"Kervran's atom". But contemporary physicists refuse to
believe in the experimental evidence in front of them because it
would question the interests, by now widely well - established, of
"High Energy Physics".
Kervran
is estranged (46).
- Following Kervran's studies George Oshawa, with some assistants, makes a
vast
number of "cold fusions", biologically and
electrochemically induced. Particularly important is the "cold
fusion" of iron 56, starting from carbon and oxygen; it is
electrochemically obtained with three different methods (47).
- Omero Speri and Piero Zorzi make a system to be used to obtain
"electrochemically
induced nuclear microfusions". The system works for two years
and is regularly patented (48).
- Moving from a model of the sun's internal structure which is radically different
from
the "thermonuclear" one, Renzo Boscoli advances the
hypothesis of a cold fusion experiment based on the "slow
bombardment" of lithium deuteride with neutrons and gamma rays
(49).
- Rose and Jones "discover" a "new kind of natural radioactivity" which is
Experimental
evidence for the alpha extended model of the atom (50).
- P. Armbruster, G. Munzenberg et al. work "on the production of heavy elements by cold fusion" (51).
- H. G. Clerc et al. "rediscover" cold fission (52).
- - 1989 While working at a new model of the atom, R. A. Monti comes to know
Boscoli's,
Kervran's, Speri and Zorzi's, Oshawa's and Borghi's papers. He
applies for a grant with the National Research Council (CNR) to
work on cold fusion. The grant is turned down. And since he is
"unemployed" as an experimentalist he works on History of
Physics and Theoretical Physics: "The criogenic model of nuclear
fusion (1988); "Historico - critical analysis of atom models"
(1988); "Reconstruction of the Periodic Table of the Elements
according to the Alpha - Extended Model of the Atom" (1989).
(53)
March
1989 Fleishmann and Pons realize a cold
fusion experiment which draws great attention. (54)
April
- May 1989 High Energy Physicists start a
huge campaign to "invalidate" cold fusion in front of the
public.
6
July 1989 J. Maddox, Director of "Nature",
believes "it is time to settle once and for all cold fusion as
pure delusion".
March
1990 Salt Lake City, First Annual Conference
on Cold Fusion. A year later researchers are able to publicly
"produce" a mass of experimental results which cover
forever with ridicule the "enemies" of cold fusion. Maddox
pretends nothing happened.
August
1990 Soviet - American Gallium Experiment
(SAGE) confirms that there is no experimental evidence for
Thermonuclear
reactions in the sun. (55)
June
1991 Second Annual Conference on Cold
Fusion, Italy.
Posts
