Even
in Translation, Richter's 'Science'
Unimpressive
January 2005, page 14
Having read the exchange of let- ters about the
value of Ronald Richter´s nuclear fusion work
in Bariloche, Argentina, in the early 1950s (Physics
Today, August 2003, page
12, and March 2004, page
14), I thought it unfortunate that most challenges
to Richter's results are in Spanish. Analyses appear
in two reports from the scientific panel that Juan
Perón's government appointed to evaluate the
project after Richter's erratic behavior became apparent.1
The first report, by physicist José A. Balseiro,
challenges Richter's physical ideas and shows with
order-of-magnitude calculations that the proposed
method is unfeasible. Perhaps more to the point regarding
the plasma physics involved is the second report,
written by electrical engineer Mario Bancora, which
describes the apparatus Richter used. I have translated
the last paragraphs of Bancora's report:
The device used by Dr Richter is the singing arc
discovered by [William Du Bois] Dudell2
about 50 years ago. The negative resistance of this
arc neutralizes the positive resistance of an oscillating
circuit, which is completed by a "control"
impedance and two condensers of one microfarad each,
connected in parallel, which are close to the reactor.
This gives rise to a series of sustained oscillations
whose frequency depends on that of the resonant circuit.
These oscillations could be at a frequency low enough
to be in the audible range (hence the singing arc)
or they can be supersonic (which is the origin of
the ultrasounds claimed by Dr Richter). By incorporating
a magnetic field, and adding gas, hydrogen for example,
to cool the arc, it is possible to enhance the frequency
considerably, to around 300 000 Hz. With exactly this
setup, [Valdemar] Poulsen, in the early days of radio
communications, could achieve transmissions over more
than 500 km.3
These arcs emit light high in the ultraviolet, as
well as centimeter-wavelength sound, which together
with the intense electromagnetic perturbations produced
are particularly effective in activating the Geiger
counters. The increase in response obtained when introducing
hydrogen is simply due to the increase in frequency
produced by this means, according to Poulsen’s
experiments.
To be absolutely sure, I have repeated this experiment
in my own laboratory and have obtained the same results,
that is: a) the same type of oscillations in the screen
of an oscilloscope connected to an exploration coil
and b) detection by a recorder connected to a Geiger
counter located 1.5 m from the arc.
The report concludes that “there is therefore
no serious scientific content to Dr Richter’s
assertion that he has achieved a controlled thermonuclear
reaction, and I deeply regret having had to reach
such a conclusion.”
Bancora’s description is based on an on-site
inspection of the fully operational device demonstrated
by Richter himself in 1952. Wolfgang Meckbach’s
account, mentioned in the previous Physics Today Letters,
may have referred to an already dismantled apparatus
seen when Meckbach arrived in 1955. I took his course
in experimental physics in Bariloche; he was an ingenious
and resourceful experimentalist and an inspiring teacher.
I never heard him discuss Richter’s work, but
I have few doubts that he regarded the subject as
closed.
Apparently, then, far from using imaginative new
plasma physics, Richter was reproducing well-known
technology. The fact that Bancora could obtain similar
spectacular results without being misled as to their
relevance is significant. According to Mario Mariscotti’s
account,4 Richter did
not do any follow-up experiments. This implies that
he acted under his own delusions and was helped by
the fact that no scientist questioned his early results.
There were a few competent physicists in Argentina
at the time, perhaps the most prominent being Enrique
Gaviola, mentioned in Santos Mayo’s letter,
but the secrecy surrounding the project and the physicists’
politically motivated distrust of the government conspired
against an early dismissal of Richter’s adventure.
Now, however, there should be no doubt that it had
no sound scientific basis.