Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google revives controversial cold-fusion experiments

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 162 posts

Re: Google revives controversial cold-fusion experiments

#41

Post by devoply »

usaphp wrote: post #36
microtherion wrote: post #9

This seems to be in keeping with Google's "Moon Shot" philosophy — investing in some projects with potentially high payoff, but low probability of success. If Tesla were pursuing a project like this, they'd probably announce that they were expecting all their cars to ship with cold fusion reactors by 2020 — and then start hiring a team ;-)

I know you are joking, but unlike Google, Tesla at least tries to finish whatever they start and actually deliver stuff, while google quickly jumps the ship if the thing does not work out and abandoned all their customers

Please don't call willing experiment participants customers.

Re: Google revives controversial cold-fusion experiments

#43

Post by Analemma_ »

usaphp wrote: post #36
microtherion wrote: post #9

This seems to be in keeping with Google's "Moon Shot" philosophy — investing in some projects with potentially high payoff, but low probability of success. If Tesla were pursuing a project like this, they'd probably announce that they were expecting all their cars to ship with cold fusion reactors by 2020 — and then start hiring a team ;-)

I know you are joking, but unlike Google, Tesla at least tries to finish whatever they start and actually deliver stuff, while google quickly jumps the ship if the thing does not work out and abandoned all their customers

The problem with Tesla is when they take your money promising to deliver something, when they can't. Full self-driving capability is never, ever coming to the current-gen Teslas, no matter what Elon says - the sensory capability just isn't there. Google at least says "we can't support this profitably, so we won't" while Tesla engages in fraud.

Re: Google revives controversial cold-fusion experiments

#44

Post by jayalpha »

microtherion wrote: post #9

This seems to be in keeping with Google's "Moon Shot" philosophy — investing in some projects with potentially high payoff, but low probability of success. If Tesla were pursuing a project like this, they'd probably announce that they were expecting all their cars to ship with cold fusion reactors by 2020 — and then start hiring a team ;-)

I am excited. Worth looking into. Even if it violates (current) physical laws. Potential payoff to big.

But I have also seen google projects that did not look scientific sound to me. Measuring blood glucose with contact lenses? How? Lag time is around one hour for eye liquid. Your are dead and the sensor does not know it yet. Your need to be below 10 min lag time.

Re: Google revives controversial cold-fusion experiments

#45

Post by ars »

mikejulietbravo wrote: post #34

Is there an ELI5 of why cold fusion is so difficult to achieve?

The simplest answer is: It's not real. There is no such thing as cold fusion.

It's not a matter of "so difficult", it's not actually possible.

Are you asking, why is there no such thing as cold fusion? If so then in the simplest way I can explain it:

Atoms are like little magnets that repel each other.

To get fusion you need to get the atoms to touch - but you can't, they repel. So you have to press them together really really hard, to force them.

The only way we know to do that involves lots of temperature and pressure. Cold fusion simply doesn't press them together hard enough.

The idea of cold fusion was that certain metals would act like magnet-shields, stopping the atoms from repelling. But all known science says that that is not actually a real thing.

Re: Google revives controversial cold-fusion experiments

#46

Post by peterlk »

The cynicism in this threads hurts.

> “This is not just a chase for cold fusion,” says Matthew Trevithick, a research programme manager at Google in Mountain View, California. “If it were, I don’t think we would have maintained an interest of this calibre of team for so long.”

Here's what I see: fusion power would be a step function in human civilization. Such step functions are pathologically hard to achieve, because new modes of thinking are hard for humans to do. Calling it cold fusion is a calling card to scientists who are serious about researching novel approaches to fusion instead of playing the politics of the research paper game. Will it work? Probably not. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't try. Also, from Google's perspective, if they're the company that owns the IP for fusion energy, that's a pretty massive win. Additionally, if they push just a few other companies into funding fusion research, then the odds that we see viable fusion energy production (not cold fusion) in our lifetimes probably increases. I would love to see a private industry race for fusion research, though, the financial requirements of such endeavors mean the game would only be open to a very small number of global megacorps. Still it would be better than not doing it.

Re: Google revives controversial cold-fusion experiments

#47

Post by markrages »

jayalpha wrote: post #44
microtherion wrote: post #9

This seems to be in keeping with Google's "Moon Shot" philosophy — investing in some projects with potentially high payoff, but low probability of success. If Tesla were pursuing a project like this, they'd probably announce that they were expecting all their cars to ship with cold fusion reactors by 2020 — and then start hiring a team ;-)

I am excited. Worth looking into. Even if it violates (current) physical laws. Potential payoff to big. But I have also seen google projects that did not look scientific sound to me. Measuring blood glucose with contact lenses? How? Lag time is around one hour for eye liquid. Your are dead and the sensor does not know it yet. Your need to be below 10 min lag time.

An idea that violates physical laws is just wishful thinking, no matter how big the potential payoff.

Re: Google revives controversial cold-fusion experiments

#48

Post by dmckeon »

Back when Pons & Fleischmann made their claims, the best indicator of widespread acceptance was the commodities futures market for platinum (and perhaps palladium - don’t recall if there were Pd contracts then). It was interesting to compare news coverage from various media - science, serious, popular, and tabloid - with the markets.

Re: Google revives controversial cold-fusion experiments

#49

Post by smt88 »

usaphp wrote: post #36
microtherion wrote: post #9

This seems to be in keeping with Google's "Moon Shot" philosophy — investing in some projects with potentially high payoff, but low probability of success. If Tesla were pursuing a project like this, they'd probably announce that they were expecting all their cars to ship with cold fusion reactors by 2020 — and then start hiring a team ;-)

I know you are joking, but unlike Google, Tesla at least tries to finish whatever they start and actually deliver stuff, while google quickly jumps the ship if the thing does not work out and abandoned all their customers

Alphabet doesn't seem to abandon moonshots as easily as it does consumer SaaS products like Reader.

They still have massive, on-going investments in anti-aging and self-driving vehicles. I don't know of any moonshots they've killed yet.

Re: Google revives controversial cold-fusion experiments

#50

Post by jsty »

usaphp wrote: post #36
microtherion wrote: post #9

This seems to be in keeping with Google's "Moon Shot" philosophy — investing in some projects with potentially high payoff, but low probability of success. If Tesla were pursuing a project like this, they'd probably announce that they were expecting all their cars to ship with cold fusion reactors by 2020 — and then start hiring a team ;-)

I know you are joking, but unlike Google, Tesla at least tries to finish whatever they start and actually deliver stuff, while google quickly jumps the ship if the thing does not work out and abandoned all their customers

Let's be fair, Google does usually deliver a working product, even if they take it away just as everyone starts using and liking it.
Post reply on HN