Page history
September 15, 2019
April 9, 2019
September 2, 2016
July 13, 2016
June 9, 2013
October 25, 2012
October 24, 2012
September 26, 2012
→Nuclear Fusion: true for all nuclei
-10
→Nuclear Fusion: other forms *are* possible
-12
→Nuclear Fusion: add
+481
September 5, 2012
→High Temperature Fusion: This source is not really a general source on hot fusion and is not in any way authoritative
-78
→Fleischmann Pons: clean up
-4
→Low Temperature Fusion: rm cap
m
September 4, 2012
→Low Temperature Fusion: muon-catalyzed fusion is a known and accepted efffect, not controversial
+12
→Low Temperature Fusion: remove hidden assumption by supplementing
+70
→High Temperature Fusion: self-sustaining isn't a direct consequence of achieving hot fusion. On earth,hot fusion isn't self-sustaining, generally.
-170
→Nuclear Fusion: more accurate
+269
August 13, 2012
August 7, 2012
August 5, 2012
I poke the eye out of the URL to avoid the spam trap, those captchas often are illegible. Here goes it the restoration.
+9
Undo revision 998343 by Brenden (talk)This edit restored poor text copied from another wiki. Please respect the request on the Talk page.
-1,150
August 4, 2012
August 2, 2012
August 1, 2012
Reverted edits by Abd (talk) to last revision by DorMouse
m+1,141
clean this up. better. Remove weak source, refer to definitive recent review.
+660
July 31, 2012
→References: fix cat
+9
→References: Stereotypically, chemists say cold fusion is not chemistry, and physicists say it's not physics. The experimental work is chemistry, though.
+13
→References: It can be argued that Cold fusion is "fringe." Not that it is "pseudoscience." It's testable, it doesn't meet the pseudoscience characteristics at all.
-1,823