[escepticos] Arthur Clarke y la fusión fría

["Victor R. Ruiz" <rvr@...>]

  Hola:

  En la conocida revista Science hay un artículo de opinión escrito por
Arthur C. Clarke en el que se puede leer: "Una de mis dudosas
predicciones: Pons y Fleischmann serán los únicos científicos que habrán
ganado el Premio Nobel y el Premio 'Ig Noble'" -supongo que serán los
antinobel-. 

  El artículo completo lo pueden encontrar en http://www.sciencemag.org,
pero aquí les pegoteo el trozo en el que comenta la fusión fría: 

· · · · · ·

ESSAYS ON SCIENCE AND SOCIETY:
Presidents, Experts, and Asteroids

  [...]

  Even more controversial than the threat of asteroid impacts is what I
would call perhaps one of the greatest scandals in the history of science,
the cold fusion caper.  Like almost everyone else, I was surprised when
Pons and Fleischmann announced that they had achieved fusion in the
laboratory; and surprise changed to disappointment when I learned that
most of those who had rushed to confirm these results were unable to
replicate them.  Wondering first how two world-class scientists could have
fooled themselves, I then forgot the whole matter for a year or so, until
more and more reports surfaced, from many countries, of anomalous energy
production in various devices (some of them apparently having nothing to
do with fusion).  Agreeing with Carl Sagan's principle that "extraordinary
claims require extraordinary proofs"  (spoken in connection with UFOs and
alien visitors), I remained interested, but skeptical. 

 Now I have little doubt that anomalous energy is being produced by
several devices, some of which are on the market with a money back
guarantee, while others are covered by patents.  The literature on the
subject is now enormous, and my confidence that "new energy" is real
slowly climbed to the 90th percentile and has now reached the 99% level. A
Fellow of the Royal Society, also originally a skeptic, writes: "There is
now strong evidence for nuclear reactions in condensed matter at low
temperature." The problem, he adds, is that "there is no theoretical basis
for these claims, or rather there are too many conflicting theories."

 Yet recall that the steam engine had been around for quite a while before
Carnot explained exactly how it worked. The challenge now is to see which
of the various competing devices is most reliable. My guess is that
large-scale industrial application will begin around the turn of the
century--at which point one can imagine the end of the fossil-fuel-nuclear
age, making concerns about global warming irrelevant, as
oil-and-coal-burning systems are phased out.

 Global warming is another area where politicians cannot be blamed for
being confused.  Although most scientists agree that warming is occurring,
some, such as Fred Singer, who headed the U.S. meteorological satellite
program, do not. We may need global warming, after all, as the current
interglacial period draws to a close. As Will Durant said many years ago,
"Civilization is an interlude between ice ages."* If this is true, the cry
in the next millennium may be "Spare that old power station--we need more
CO2!" 

 Finally, another of my dubious predictions: Pons and Fleischmann will be
the only scientists ever to win both the Nobel and the Ig Noble Prizes. 

· · · · · · 

  El pobre ya está muy viejo y chochea de vez en cuando, pero me gustaría
oir comentarios (¿Estás ahí, Ferrán?).

---------------------------------------------
Víctor R. Ruiz                rvr en idecnet.com
    Agrupación Astronómica de Gran Canaria
   Sociedad de Meteoros y Cometas de España
 Asociación de Variabilistas de España - AVE
info.astro  http://www.astrored.org/infoastro
http://ccdis.dis.ulpgc.es:8086/AAGC/aagc.html
---------------------------------------------