Problem with Cold Fusion: How Small Can a Nuclear Reaction Be?

World Wars: Intellectual property theft from Germany in the billions of dollars


Editor Note:  One of the great secrets of the two world wars is the theft from Germany of countless billions of dollars worth of intellectual property. We are slowly discovering, as time goes by, that a lot of the technology taken from Germany by the victorious allies was suppressed.

I have written before about the German atomic experiments and how the widely known program lead by Heisenberg to build a reactor in order to produce weapons-grade plutonium was far from the only research project in Germany at that time was aimed at developing atomic explosives.

Here, Jeff explains why the German atomic explosives research has returned to the forefront of modern nuclear science and why cold fusion research has long been suppressed; in short, cold fusion devices will eventually blow up in an atomic explosion and it is not at all difficult to do, therefore the powers that be do not want anyone messing with this stuff.

The problem with Cold Fusion and How small can a nuclear reaction be?

by Jeff Smith

How small can a nuclear reaction be? Through hydrodynamic experiments for triggering fusion, extremely low yield nuclear explosions have been generated on the magnitude of “several Pounds of TNT.” .018 kt was unveiled in 1961 and in 1996, the Tamalpais test with a yield of 0.072 kt was declassified:


HARDTACK II was the continental phase of Operation HARDTACK. The oceanic phase, HARDTACK I, was conducted in the Pacific from 28 April through 18 August 1958. Phase II, conducted at the Nevada Test Site from 12 September through 31 October 1958, consisted of 19 nuclear weapons tests and 18 safety experiments. 

This program produced the following information for a regular 0.01 kt yield, air ignition: Fireball max light radius = 25.4 meters, Max time light pulse width = 0.011 seconds, Max fireball air burst radius = 10.6 meters, Time of max temperature = 0.0032 seconds, Area of rad. exposure = 0.12 sq. miles; Blast wave Effects: Overpressure = 5 lb/sq. inch (160 mph) radius = 0.09 km, 1 lb/sq. inch radius = 0.26 km; Underground ignition: Crater diameter = 56 feet with a Richter magnitude of 3.52.

note that this declassified video has been ‘sanitized’ and portions still classified (1997) were removed.

The thermal radiation damage range is significantly reduced by clouds, smoke or other obscuring materials. Surface detonations are known to decrease thermal radiation by half. A neutron bomb produces much less blast and thermal energy than a fission bomb of the same yield by expending its energy by the increase in the production of neutrons.

Even the older neutron bombs produced very little long-term fallout, but they made considerable induced radiation in ground detonations. The half-life of induced radiation is very short and is measured in days rather than years for a neutron bomb.

According to the work of Walter Hermann Nernst, 1929, Zeitschrift magazine, Germany. “Hydrogen will dissolve into cretin metals as if the metal was acting like a dry sponge absorbing water.” (The cold fusion debate circa 1929).

If Uranium is electrically charged with deuterium (a form of hydrogen) and it is properly dissolved into the metal. Beyond a certain point, a critical threshold will occur and it will explode causing a controlled nuclear {fission-fusion} reaction.

1929……. This was known by the Germans in 1929. Bohr knew it too. This is why they stopped cold fusion. Mini-nukes………

If you place a uranium shield around an explosive core that is properly tampered and compress it, the radiation produced is no longer a secondary effect imposed by the need of a critical mass but it becomes a primary effect.

These small new weapons have a very limited radiation effect so they load down the outer layer with extra uranium that increases the explosive effect. These new devices eliminate the need for a critical mass. (Ted Taylor, Ph.D., DOE) The Curve of Binding Energy. 1973.

As you can see the concept of the mini-nuke dates back to 1973 or even earlier. There is no more need to form a critical mass in order to make a small cheap nuclear weapon under 3kt. in blast effect.

The problem with cold fusion is that all metals will absorb hydrogen, some much better than others. Uranium and other fissile materials will absorb it uncontrollably and at some point, it will explode with a force greater than what a molecular explosive of the same mass will produce.

This is the problem with cold fusion; runaway explosive force that cannot be stopped. It is not a matter of if but when.

At first you get a simple catalytic reaction but once it reaches a critical threshold it will explode; you cannot stop the reaction from occurring and it can happen with any metal, not just fissile material.

This is the fundamental principle that takes place in a hydrogen bomb but on a much grander scale. The hydrogen plasma attacks the fissile material in a very rapid nuclear reaction, producing fusion on a grand scale. Cold fusion just does it on a much smaller scale.

This is why it will never be commercially viable. You can never predict when it will go bang.

It may be days, weeks, months, or years but eventually, it will go bang. Cold fusion is a ticking time bomb just waiting to go off and in some labs, it has already.

This is why DOE shut down all unauthorized research into it. Home-made Mini nukes.

Most likely they will regulate the sale of deuterium next. You will need a license to have it.

Keshe knows this stuff and it is the basis for his so-called ‘Magrav’ home reactor technology.

Some old cold fusion experiments from 1920’s Germany

This Uranium filled Crooks/Geissler tube was an early prototype of the so-called Farnsworth Fussier of the early 1960s that use electrostatic confinement and compression of the gas plasma. The Germans were playing around with this stuff back in the late 1920’s early 1930’s etc. When they used a uranium target and deuterium gas it threw off massive amounts of neutrons. So the Germans in certain ways were more advanced than their WW2 US counterparts. With the US team, it was “how big can we make it”. But with the German’s restricted resources it was “how small can we make it”.

Bohr even suggested this concept as the preferable route to making a weapon because implosion was too complex and plutonium production from reactors would be unnecessary for a small working weapon. As he said – how big does it need to be in order to be effective.

Making an A-bomb by means of forming a massive critical mass and imploding it was the hardest and crudest way of splitting the atom that I have ever seen.

The German route was slower but from a pure physics standpoint much more elegant and far simpler in it’s design. Being a hybrid fission fusion-fission process it truly was the way to go. Now over 75 years later et voila – back to the future again.

Now, this is the route to modern weapons design and not critical mass implosion of the 1940s.

It’s funny how history repeats itself.

9-11 Syllabus and VT Nuclear Education Series – 2016

  1. The Problem with Cold Fusion and How small can a Nuclear Reaction Be?
  2. The B-61, the more Usable Nuke
  3. VT Nuclear Education: North Korea Fission-Fusion (Hydrogen bomb) Device Claim Doubted

9-11 Syllabus and VT Nuclear Education Series – 2015

  1. The Secret of America’s Doomsday Waste
  2. VT Nuclear Education: The History of Nuclear Weapons Design 1945 to 2015
  3. VT Nuclear Education: The Uranium Hydride Bomb
  4. VT Nuclear Education: Subcritical and micro fission explosives
  5. VT Nuclear Education – Freon and the Hohlraum
  6. The Secret Nazi role in Building the Atomic Bomb
  7. How the Nazi A-Bomb Worked
  8. VT Nuclear Education: Critical Mass
  9. VT Nuclear Education: Laser and Nuke Weapon Calculator
  10. VT Nuclear Education: Germany
  11. 9/11 Science: Craters and Explosive Damage
  12. Neutron Bombs and Other Toys
  13. NEO: Building Nuclear Case Against Saudis
  14. VT Nuclear Education: The Secrets of EMP Weapons
  15. VT Nuclear Education: Explosive Properties of Reactor Grade Plutonium
  16. Nukes on Yemen, Confirming Proofs: Yield Estimation from Illumination Time
  17. Nukes on Yemen, Confirming Proofs: Introduction to Nuclear Operations
  18. Nukes on Yemen-Confirming Proofs: Calculating Nuclear Blast Yield from the Flash
  19. How Israel Was Busted Nuking Yemen
  20. Saudis Have Israel Nuke Yemen for Them
  21. VT Warning of EMP Plot Confirmed by Guardian
  22. VT Nuke Education: Thorium Warnings
  23. VT Nuclear Education: CIA/Iran Trial and more disclosure
  24. NEO – CIA Torture Report Ties Cheney/Bout to 9/11 Nukes
  25. The DOE Defends Nuclear 9/11

9-11 Syllabus and VT Nuclear Education Series – 2014

  1. Too Classified to Publish: Bush Nuclear Piracy Exposed
  2. Nuke Cancer from 9/11 Revealed
  3. 9/11 NUKE DEMOLITION PROOF: Firefighters Radiation Cancers “Off the Scale”
  4. Doc Submitted By Russian Intel
  5. Constructing the Nuclear Child
  6. VT Nuclear Education Series
  7. Nuclear Education Series: Dimona Classified
  8. VT Nuclear Terrorism Education Series
  9. VT Nuclear Education: Undeniable Proof of 9/11 as a Nuclear Event
  10. VT Nuclear Education: As the Hammer Drops
  11. VT Nuclear Education: Mossad/N. Korea Links, MOX
  12. Nuclear Roundtable: America’s Nuclear Arsenal
  13. Officials Cite “Thermo-Nuke” in 9/11 Demo
  14. VT Nuclear Education: Fission Based Thermobaric Weapons
  15. IAEA investigators: Audit reveals the US, not Iran the Problem

VT Supporting Material on 9/11, Nuclear Physics and Disclosure Issues

  1. VT Nuclear Education: Antigravity
  2. NEO – Mini Nukes and M16: The Economy of War
  3. VT Nuclear Education: Nukes in Iraq, Confirmation UPDATED
  4. VT Flexing Its Nuclear Muscle
  5. Nuclear 9/11 Revealed: Theories and Disinformation, the Misguided and the Inhuman
  6. VT Nuclear Education: Tactical Nuclear Warfare
  7. VT Nuclear Education: Early Reactors
  8. IAEA investigators: Audit reveals the US, not Iran the problem
  9. VT Nuclear Education: History of Mini-Nukes
  10. VT Nuclear Education: Answering the Hype
  11. VT Nuclear Education: A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Atom Smasher
  12. VT Nuclear Education: LENR Neutron Distribution
  13. Einsteins Theory on Magnetic Buoyancy
  14. VT Science: Fuel Cell Technology
  15. VT Science: The Farnsworth Fusor
  16. VT Science: HAARP
  17. Fusion: Junk Science For Rubes
  18. NEO – Nuclear Threats Enter the Mainstream
  19. VT Science: NASA’s Low Energy Fusion VooDoo/DooDoo
  20. The Connection Between Aurora and Black Triangles (Redux)
  21. Jeff Smith on Upcoming Able Danger Leak
  22. VT Nuclear Education: Japan
  23. VT Nuclear Education: Detonations and Deceit
  24. 9/11 Hokum: Deconstructing Christopher Bollyn and Steve Jones
  25. Why are the Commanding Generals being Sacked?


We See The World From All Sides and Want YOU To Be Fully Informed
In fact, intentional disinformation is a disgraceful scourge in media today. So to assuage any possible errant incorrect information posted herein, we strongly encourage you to seek corroboration from other non-VT sources before forming an educated opinion.

About VT - Policies & Disclosures - Comment Policy
Due to the nature of uncensored content posted by VT's fully independent international writers, VT cannot guarantee absolute validity. All content is owned by the author exclusively. Expressed opinions are NOT necessarily the views of VT, other authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, or technicians. Some content may be satirical in nature. All images are the full responsibility of the article author and NOT VT.