Exercise 1.2

Part 1:

Description of the events:

On March 23 of 1989, two electrochemists, Pons and Fleischmann, announced to the world through a press conference at Salt Lake City that they achieved cold fusion. 

On March 23 of 1989, after the press conference, Nature received a paper by a team of physicists led by Stephen Jones regarding cold fusion.

On March 6 both group of scientists agreed to submitted their papers simultaneously to Nature on March 24; However, Pons and Fleischmann submitted the papers on March 11 to the Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry, which after the revision, published the paper on April 10 of 1989.

On April 26 of 1989, the Utah University asked for $5 million, and Pons and Fleischmann asked for $25 million to keep working in the research of cold fusion.

On April 27, Jones’s paper got published by Nature.

On May 1 and 2, American Physical Society reported negative results from cold fusion experiments.

On May 8 at the American Electrochemical Society meeting Fleischmann reported failures in some of Pons’s and his original results.

On May 8, the first critique of Fleischmann and Pons’s paper appear by Nature.

In 1996, Pons and Fleischmann got in a libel suit against an Italian Journalist. The judge involved in the case ruled against the scientists because he found that the view from the journalist was justified. Regarding the scientific community opposition to the scientists’ paper, but also how the experiments were conducted, and the way data were divulged.

In 2004, DOE conducted a second committee to evaluate research in cold fusion.

In 2006, the Cold Fusion session for the American Physical Society (APS) got sponsor thirteen papers by the Naval Research Laboratory.

In 2008, India got back to review the cold fusion research by the Indian Atomic Energy.

Why do you think Pons and Fleischmann did what they did?

Explain the reaction of the scientific community

What principles of science are involved?

What principles of scientific communication did Pons and Fleischmann violate?

.

Were justified in doing so?

Can you think of a scenario in which scientists would be justified in doing so?

SuperTutor

(15)

Status NEW Posted 30 May 2017 12:05 AM My Price 15.00

-----------

Attachments

file 1496106123-Solutions file.docx preview (51 words )

S-----------olu-----------tio-----------ns -----------fil-----------e -----------Hel-----------lo -----------Sir-----------/Ma-----------dam----------- T-----------han-----------k y-----------ou -----------for----------- yo-----------ur -----------int-----------ere-----------st -----------and----------- bu-----------yin-----------g m-----------y p-----------ost-----------ed -----------sol-----------uti-----------on.----------- Pl-----------eas-----------e p-----------ing----------- me----------- on----------- ch-----------at -----------I a-----------m o-----------nli-----------ne -----------or -----------inb-----------ox -----------me -----------a m-----------ess-----------age----------- I -----------wil-----------l b-----------e q-----------uic-----------kly----------- on-----------lin-----------e a-----------nd -----------giv-----------e y-----------ou -----------exa-----------ct -----------fil-----------e a-----------nd -----------the----------- sa-----------me -----------fil-----------e i-----------s a-----------lso----------- se-----------nt -----------to -----------you-----------r e-----------mai-----------l t-----------hat----------- is----------- re-----------gis-----------ter-----------ed -----------onÂ----------- th-----------is -----------web-----------sit-----------e -----------Tha-----------nk -----------you----------- -----------

Not Rated(0)

• Buy Answer