It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Bubble Fusion Technology Suppressed? Taleyarkhan Maliciously Maligned?

page: 1

log in


posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 01:26 AM
The possibility of a desktop generator capable of nuclear fusion has recently come to light with the research of a scientist named Rusi Taleyarkhan. In a documentary being aired on the Science channel called An Experiment to Save the World, the bubble fusion experiment of Taleyarkhan is discussed in detail, along with the reaction of the scientific community.

Just recently, on the 28th of August, 2008, Taleyarkhan was stripped of his professorship at Purdue University based on allegations of misconduct that were upheld. Out of twelve allegations, only two were upheld. According to a Purdue University press release, the US Dept. of Naval Research, the "funding agency" in this matter, has accepted the report and referred the allegations to Purdue.

Taleyarkhan's first experiment and a follow-up were published by major, reputable scientific journals. Attempts to duplicate the results of his experiment have yet proved unsuccessful, but before any attempts were made, Taleyarkhan's findings were the source of extraordinary controversy.

Let's pause to talk about the implications of his experiment. This technology, if it actually works, would bring the power of the stars to a reatively small desktop generator! So there are profound implications to this, like solving our energy crisis for one. But also consider that such technology could potentially benefit billions of people on our planet - including third world countries. Essentially it could tip the balance of power away from the select few and into the hands of many.

It is no secret to many of us on this board that the US government has tight reigns on the prevailing science of the day. Its scientific knowledge probably exceeds everything else by at least a couple of decades. Is it then no suprise that the US Dept. of Naval Research was so involved in this? Could the powers-that-be have orchestrated this maligning of Dr. Taleyarkhan? It appears to me to be a very distinct possibility. Look at the number of allegations - twelve in total. Like I said, only two stuck, but think about it for a minute: if there were only two allegations, and they stuck, then you've made your case 100%. Two out of twelve allegations being upheld means that only 17% of their case was satisfied, or it could mean that 83% of their case was based on false allegations, or at the very least unprovable allegations. It smells of an attack.

What's really important though? Scientists have tried to duplicate Dr. Taleyarkhan's experiments to no avail. Did they have an agenda to disprove Dr. Taleyarkhan? It's possible. But that's not what's important - trying to duplicate or disprove an experiment. In many areas of science it is, but in this case the main focus should be on trying to validate the experiment by harnessing the energy provided for by the suspected nuclear fusion. The results and the data provided so far are compelling enough to warrant taking this experiment to its ultimate conclusion - to its fruition. Furthermore, doing so is warranted by our current energy crisis. That's the true test, is it not? That's at the heart of the matter - getting usable energy out of this thing - and I haven't heard one other person mention that in this entire issue. They're too busy trying to discredit this man, or so it seems. What do you think?

Do a little research, let me know. I appreciate your responses and your attention to this matter.

Your friend in truth,

[edit on 1-9-2008 by maatunidy]

[edit on 1-9-2008 by maatunidy]

posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 02:14 AM
duplication is verification. Actually you cant verify, only falsify. Doesnt work a second time? First time was just a coincidence. Or something is missing. Without trying to duplicate you dont find out the "something missing" or "coincidence" part.

Anyway: The government technology is years ahead of us? I always wondered about that statement... How do you measure progress in years? was the IC a 10 year leap? or 8? Fire was a week? The wheel a month? Switching from hunting and gathering to farming? Is that 15 years worth of progress? A 30 MHz Computer chip vs a 3Ghz? how many days of progress is that?

posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 02:33 AM
Yeah I saw that tonight on Science channel.. and I kind thought to myself that Seth Putterman should have collaborated with Rusi Taleyarkhan more closely. Taleyarkhan claims at the end of the show, that perhaps Putterman's lab did not properly replicate the experiment correctly. Instead of their being a doubt, Putterman should have send the neutron detector he had to Taleyarkhan's lab. It would appear to me that on the surface, there is some phenomena occurring with the "star in a jar" thing, and that rather bashing the scientific data, perhaps it should have been researched a little more. If there was success at Oak Ridge, then they should have at least investigated that particular experiment. I agree that science should be reproducible, however one never knows if there was one small detail left out.

Secondly, is the fact that peer review is quick to trash these scientist when their work is shot down. I am trying to figure out what kind of example they are setting for young scientist who may never publish their on theories and experiments because they fear the same ridicule. They should be promoting and encourage rather and shooting people down in flames. Maybe someday, a young gun will come along and solve this fusion issues once and for all.

posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 03:05 AM
reply to post by debunky

You make some interesting points. To say that the government is a couple of decades ahead in scientific knowledge is of course a guess-timation. The point is that knowledge is being witheld, and that it will take some amount of time before it is either disclosed or "re-discovered".

As to your other comments, I mostly agree with you. I can expand upon what you've said by pointing out that even with scientific experimentation that attempts to duplicate results, the degree of verification or falsification can be very subjective. In the case of bubble fusion, if experiments were to provide results that harnessed energy from this process, then that would be far easier to verify/falsify - it would be far more clear-cut. Unfortunately, due to the repercussions of the actions taken against Dr. Taleyarkhan, the experiment will probably grind to a halt. Based on the profound implications of this experiment, it deserves a far greater amount of scientific testing and scrutiny. We cannot cast judgement based on what we have so far - the results are promising yet inconlusive.

posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 03:22 AM
reply to post by mapsurfer_

I agree. What's interesting, as always, is what isn't revealed. In the Science Channel program, nothing is mentioned about the allegations against Taleyarkhan, even though they had been raised well in time for them to report on it in the documentary. It's a very important part of the entire issue. What it reveals, to my best judgment, is a personal attack on Dr. Taleyarkhan. It's an attempt to discredit him. It's one thing to pit science against science, it's quite another thing to pit legal action against science!

posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 04:52 AM
It worked exactly the same way in the reproduction. What was wrong was the original interpretation of the results. He counted hits from his own neutron generator as coming from experiment.

The reproduction used more accurate sensor and showed no correlation between the bubble events and the neutron detections.

Also showed neutron count matching the neutron generator output. No extra neutrons. None.

He got carried away with hopes of a Nobel Prize. Sad but true.

He basically shut down the entire avenue for credible research in the future by failing to go all the way to shake out his own research.

You only go in to reproduce when you hope for success. No one intentionally wastes their time and funding.

[edit on 1-9-2008 by Cyberbian]

posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 05:18 AM
Yeah, I hear ya.. Taleyarkhan actually blew it twice... which makes it all the more bizarre. You would have thought that Oak Ridge would have paid for the proper validation after the 1st results were questioned. There was that one segment that the experiment was done at Texas and yielded some results which lent some credibility to the claim. The interesting thing about this story (to me anyway) was the fact that sound causes light to occur under these conditions. I had never heard of that phenomena before, so it caught my attention. Seems to me, that even if it did not yield neutron emissions, it is still producing some form of energy there. My gut feeling is that they are onto something there, and that even if it isn't a solution to the world's energy needs.... it would still be of scientific interest. But, like you said.. I guess its dead issue.

posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 05:37 AM
On the Talyarkhan Wiki page, it says:

This board judged him guilty of "research misconduct" for "falsification of the research record" in July, 2008[2] and on August 27, 2008 he was stripped of his named Arden Bement Jr. Professorship, and forbidden to serve as a major professor for graduate students.

I am sure all of that was post production of that program, yet they aired it anyway. Interesting decision that Science channel made, but I am really glad we got to see the story.

posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 09:55 AM
I don't get why a neutron source was needed?

Also like mapsurfer said perhaps it does produce energy, it produces light and is believed that it can get far hotter than the sun for goodness sake, surely they should really study and experiment with it further?

I also think that perhaps under these conditions the neutrons are absorbed or converted directly to energy, we can't be sure, i also wonder if the bubbles were ever big enough.

BBC Documentary on it...

posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 02:27 PM
reply to post by Cyberbian

Y'know, I really can't be so sure. As mapsurfer pointed out, Putterman didn't collaborate very closely with Taleyarkhan in the reproduction. It's possible that something was done differently and the results hinged on that factor. If two chefs follow the same recipe, they may very well bake two different cakes. Has Taleyarkhan had a chance to peer review the results to Putterman's experiment? Has the scientific community at large? In any regard, we have two opposing scientists with conflicting results, so any non-scientist would be wise to conclude that we need further testing - we need a third opinion (and possibly a fourth and fifth). Even a hint at success in this matter warrants further exploration.

Did Taleyarkhan get "carried away with hopes of a Nobel Prize"? Possibly, but you seem so sure. To me you are simply making an unfair assumption based on Taleyarkhan's personal character and ambitions, which are known only to Taleyarkhan and those closest to him. When fielding a question about the Nobel Prize on the Science Channel program, he kind of shrugged it off. This is so beside the point anyway, again I have to point out the profound implications of this experiment. For something so potentially groundbreaking and beneficial to the human race, we can't let our assumptions about someone's ambitions and/or personal character cloud our judgment.

I contend that Taleyarkhan be allowed to continue his research. I don't believe he's even scratched the surface yet. The ultimate question in regards to this experiment is whether or not it can be used for energy production. Scientific verification/duplication becomes a moot point if someone slaps a patent on a new fusion generator and it hits the market. Certainly I respect the scientific process of duplication and verification, but it should not hinder or in this case halt the progress of the scientist at the forefront of the research.

There are a lot of hidden factors to this that we can only speculate about. But I strongly caution everybody that there could be a sinister element to this. It wouldn't be the first time that profound new technology was squelched by the powers-that-be. Understand that this man's career is going down the drain before our eyes when he believes he's on the verge of one of the most profound discoveries in decades! I find that very troubling. Very troubling indeed.

[edit on 1-9-2008 by maatunidy]

posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 02:44 PM
Oh GOD, spare us.

It is the GM electric car EV1 all over again.

Dr Royal Rife's cure for Cancer.....kill the parasites. Crushed by the USFDA and the failed trials by Govt appointed scientists.

WTF is going blind are we?

When will this madness stop?

Why are made to be such puppets?

Is the toxic effect of parasite waste causing us to be oblivious to all the manipulation?

Are corporate profits more important than human beings?

posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 04:00 PM
reply to post by win 52

If I am interpreting your comments correctly, you seem to be saying that my theory in regards to this issue is akin to the other examples you mentioned, and therefore constitutes the "same old tired argument". You lump it all together and dismiss it en masse. You do not speak directly to the issue at hand, which has its own weight and autonomy. With respect to you, I believe that your comments betray a high degree of ignorance.

You seem fed up with this type of discussion, yet you were drawn to respond. That's interesting. Anyway, I do thank you for adding your energy to the discussion.

posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 04:04 PM

Originally posted by just theory
I don't get why a neutron source was needed?

First of all, thank you for the link to the documentary. In regards to this question, I believe the neutron source is somehow used to form the tiny bubbles in the acetone. That's at least what I seem to remember from the Science Channel doc.

posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 05:06 PM

Originally posted by win 52

Are corporate profits more important than human beings?

Now that is a loaded question... You know these sayings..
"Money is the Root of All Evil" and "Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely"

Back in 1998, There was an article on Sonoluminescence: the star in a jar was basically the beginning of Putterman's story. In that, the history of the controversy is born. Says that the science is pretty easy to reproduce for a few hundred dollars, but the testing of the science costs hundreds of thousands.

The reason this is worth mentioning is that Putterman knew ful well some 10 years ago that he was unable to prove anything other than a phenomena that would puzzle theorist on this topic. You think about how these guy's egos get inflated and have to wonder if Putterman perhaps didn't see Taleyarkhan as a threat to his work. I am not suggesting this is actually the case here.. but If Putterman believed that Taleyarkhan stealing his thunder and could possible win a Nobel prize for it... at the very least there exists the possibility for bias. I did not see these guys working together, it actually looked more like spy v. spy.

Yeah, admittedly this might not be thermonuclear fusion but there is obviously something profound about this science that needs further investigation. I lump it in there with that of Hawking's Blackholes, Lene Hau's Stopping light and mostly likely whatever experiments science accomplished with the LHC. I believe there exists some real potential for these applications, but scientists working on the projects are being subjected to ridicule by their peers simply because of jealousy and ego. Yeah so what if a scientist makes a particular claim, they should be left to carry those claims to their natural conclusions.

Another thing I want to mention.. Most of these type of experiments occur in a vacuum.. that is in some lab somewhere. There is a huge problem with people working together to accomplish a common goal. For what reason?? Yes Ego/Pride and Money. Any particular group of scientists wants their fame and fortune. It shouldn't be like this, but it is. In some of these cases, it costs hundreds of thousands of dollars to set up these experiments, only to operate in a vacuum. Some of these young sharp kids from around the globe could probably solve the problems of the world if given half a chance to collaborate in these experiments. They are in instead, shut completely out of the picture. I have always had the idea that the goverment should fund such fundamental research and solicit the best experiments from individual scientists to rotate thru these labs to perform their own experiment. In this way we all benefit from the best minds working on the projects that suit them and we don't end up with a renegade scientist making claims like this.

I know things will never change, but I hope they do.

posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 10:12 PM
If I could produce an electric/solar vehicle and market it for a few hundred dollars, would people buy it?

It may never be provable that I could make a car like that, however should one come available and work like I said, that would be the proof.

I have no idea of the technology to make a claim as to whether it works or not. I just saw a battle where none should have been.

It seems like the money stream is the determining factor as to whether a product works or not. Should it rather not be whether the product can save people money and make the earth less polluted? No, it ends up being who will lose out. It is fair game if the people loose out and the corporations enjoy huge windfalls of cash. The status of the planet is slightly less important than the well being of the general public, both being slaves to corporate profits. The very same corporations who control government policy.

I am glad this sic charade will soon be a thing for the history records.

I just freaked at the perception of stupid decisions made by authorities/governmental policy makers.

new topics

top topics


log in