From Terence Tarnowsky, Purdue University
I found David Nagel’s statement comparing our understanding of cold fusion to that of superconductivity before it was explained by John Bardeen, Leon Cooper and Robert Schrieffer to be misleading (19 March, p 30).
Prior to their theory the phenomenon of superconductivity was an experimentally proven result that could be reproduced in many different materials. The main problem that cold fusion research suffers from is the non-reproducibility of expected observables.
The general opinion of the US Department of Energy review was that the evidence presented was inconclusive in establishing an experimental basis for cold fusion. It was proposed that well-designed, peer-reviewed experiments should be considered for funding, but there was no recommendation for a federally funded cold fusion programme. This is hardly the ringing endorsement that “bulletproof” experimental results would receive.
West Lafayette, Indiana, US
