Flagged Revisions installed. Unapproved pages display a Red unchecked notice under the title. Trolls attack here by creating and archiving pages with offensive content. To verify an archived page, check the original URL. Questions about administration? Contact User talk:Abd. Limited privacy on this site, see CFC:Limited privacy

Wikiversity/Cold fusion/Current Science/McKubre

From CFC
Jump to: navigation, search
Crystal discussion philosophy.png An editor has expressed concern that this article may not fit into the scope of Wikiversity. Do not use this template unless you have read and understand the Wikiversity project proposal.

You may wish to:

  • Move this page to a site where is is more appropriate.
  • Find a school or topic that this article belongs under.
  • Move this page into your userspace.

If a use cannot be found for this page on Wikiversity, then it may be deleted by a custodian after a period of 5 days. It may be deleted immediately if it meets speedy deletion criteria. If the deletion is contested, then please list the page at requests for deletion for discussion instead.

Tagged by This page is under review per recently closed WV:RFD. Please ignore the 5 day deadline above, as the review will take longer than that. Mu301Bot (discusscontribs) 21:05, 28 December 2017 (UTC) (signed on behalf of User:Mu301)
PrirodneNauke.svg Resource type: this resource may consist of Fringe science.

Cold fusion: comments on the state of scientific proof

Abstract

Early criticisms were made of the scientific claims made by Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons in 1989 on their observation of heat effects in electro- chemically driven palladium–deuterium experiments that were consistent with nuclear but not chemical or stored energy sources. These criticisms were premature and adverse. In the light of 25 years further study of the palladium–deuterium system, what is the state of proof of Fleischmann and Pons’ claims?