Martin Fleischmann, co-discoverer with B. Stanley Pons of a phenomenon they initially attributed to nuclear fusion, is dead at 85.
Martin Fleischmann, Edmonton, Canada, 2005 (Photo Credit: H. Rees)
Fleischmann died Aug. 3 at his home in Tisbury, U.K., in the presence of his family. He suffered from numerous health problems for many years, including Parkinson’s disease, diabetes and heart disease. He was bedridden for the last few months. He is survived by his wife, Sheila, son, Nicholas, daughter, Vanessa, and eight grandchildren. A third child, Charlotte, died several years ago.
Today, Nicholas told me, “Until the very end, my father remained stoic, as ever, not a word of any complaint.”
“He might shout and carry on about topics of science but not about himself,” Nicholas said. “It’s the end of an era.”
Fleischmann was regarded as one of the world’s top electrochemists. He was known for his driving passion for discovery and for breaking new ground, which other scientists then followed to great commercial success.
He was a Fellow of the Royal Society and by the age of 40 was named chair of the Electrochemistry Department at the University of Southampton. Fleischmann won the Royal Society of Chemistry’s medal for Electrochemistry and Thermodynamics in 1979. He was president of the International Society of Electrochemistry (1970-1972). In 1985, he was awarded the Palladium Medal by the U.S. Electrochemical Society.
When he and Pons claimed to discover a new, cheaper way to create controlled nuclear fusion energy in a test-tube on March 23, 1989, everything changed for him. The personal and scientific fallout from the announcement was a burden he bore for the rest of his life.
I met and interviewed Martin for the first time Aug. 24, 2003.
“Have you always been a heretic?” I asked.
“Oh, yes, I’ve always worked on the outside,” Fleischmann said. “Very frequently, my things have been taken over by other people and become mainstream – but not a thing of this magnitude.”
Here is a link to the audio recording of that interview and his biography, excerpted from my book, The Rebirth of Cold Fusion.
On Aug. 19, 2004, Fleischmann told me about his family background. He was born on March 29, 1927, in Czechoslovakia. His mother was a Roman Catholic.
Steven B. Krivit with Martin Fleischmann, ICCF-11, Marseilles, France, 2004 (Photo Credit: F. Gordon)
“There is a considerable mystery about my paternal grandfather,” Fleischmann wrote. “I have heard him described both as a Slovak and a Hungarian. There is no doubt that he came from Banska Štiavnica in Slovakia (or its environs) and that he was an orphan. He was adopted by a Jewish family called Fleischmann; his first name was Maximillian.”
The last time I spoke with Martin was June 3, 2009. He expressed his regret about calling his and Pons’ discovery “cold fusion.” He acknowledged for the first time that neutrons must be the key to understanding low-energy nuclear reactions, rather than the hypothesis of deuterons or protons somehow overcoming the extremely energetic Coulomb barrier at room temperature.
Here is a link to that interview and audio recording.
Thank you, Martin. It was an honor and a privilege to know you and learn about science from you.
Postscript: Fleischmann stayed involved in the field, to the best of his ability, to the end. He followed developments, went to conferences and openly discussed LENR science with many people.
Pons left the field in the late 1990s and elected to remain out of the public spotlight and unaffiliated with the field. For this reason, their followers during the past decade looked at Fleischmann as the inspirational leader. To my knowledge, Pons is well and living in the south of France teaching mathematics for chemistry.
Martin Fleischmann: March 29, 1927 – August 3, 2012
Photo Credit: Steven B. Krivit
How sad that this great man left us at the dawn of the Fusion Era, what a pity he was unable to receive the praise for the greatest discovery of modern times.
I am sure that his discovery will save the Human race and give us a new era of cheap Energy and a better standard of living for all Mankind.
My condolencies to his Family, and Thank You for your amazing work, Steven Johns, Chesterfield,UK.
Sometimes new developments require decades to fully understand and apply. I think the history of chemistry and the periodic system in the first half of the 19th century are a case in point. You don’t convince the skeptics, you outlive them.
Rest in the Peace of knowing that your work CHANGED THE WORLD, Dr. Fleischmann! Now if only the world would get over itself long enough to come to grips with this fact!!!
This is the end of an era, Steve. It has been a time when the personal convictions of researchers about the possible mechanisms behind the excess heat have proved to be the main thing that pathological sceptics have used to decry the reality of the effect itself.
Thus, sceptic A says: “it can’t be fusion because of the Coulomb barrier therefore the reported effect must be a mistake or fraud”. Sceptic B says: it can’t be ultra low momentum neutrons (Widom-Larsen) because we don’t know how they could arise in the numbers required therefore the reported effect must be a mistake or fraud” and so on and so on.
Perhaps the world of physics just needs to see bare experimental results reported to “change its mind” without all the controversial theorising bolted on that seems to ruffle so many feathers.
Nick Palmer
On the side of the Planet – and the people – because they’re worth it
Blogspot – Sustainability and stuff according to Nick Palmer
http://nickpalmer.blogspot.com
Received via e-mail:
Dear colleagues,
We present the deepest condolences to all of us and relatives of the great scientist of the present, not waited general recognition of the epoch-making discovery of the new phenomenon in the Science, Cold Fusion named by him, and have understood by us now, as the Cold Nuclear Transmutation (CNT). Memory of him will remain in the History of the Science and in our hearts.
On behalf of all Russian CNT Community,
Yury Bazhutov.
Received via e-mail:
Purtroppo ieri è morto Martin Fleischmann.
E’ un vero peccato che non abbia avuto il tempo di vedere le sue innovative idee realizzarsi.
ONORE al coraggioso Pioniere!
Bastavano pochi altri mesi!
Francesco Celani
Farewell Dr. Fleischmann.
“Once in the history of each planet”.
Tim Maloney
Steven Johns expresses my thoughts precisely. Thank you Dr. Fleischmann!
The so-called Cold Fusion controversy, triggered by Fleischmann and Pons in 1989, will be remembered as the most important episode in history of science, no matter what the final verdict (about validity of their claim) will be. I participated in CF research since 2003.
Ludwik Kowalski, Ph.D. (see Wikipedia)
Rest well, Dr. Fleischmann. Your efforts towards a limitless energy source for mankind will define your legacy. As someone who once sought excess heat with nickel and potassium carbonate (an amateur experiment in my kitchen), I can attest to the struggle of working with limited resources towards an elusive goal.
Bob Park’s remarkably tame obit on Fleischmann:
WHAT’S NEW Robert L Park Friday, 17 Aug 2012 Washington, DC
3. MARTIN FLEISCHMANN: DIED AUGUST 3, 2012 AT AGE 85.
This is what I wrote in What’s New, 24 March 1989, the day after Cold Fusion was announced. “The remarable report from the University of Utah that researchers had achieved deuterium fusion in an electrolysis cell was initially provided only to the Financial Times of London and the Wall Street Journal. From what little is known, the claim seems to be that deuterium ions from heavy water diffuse into the lattice of a palladium cathode at sufficient concentration to fuse. Palladium is well known for its ability to take up large quantities of hydrogen. Indeed, solid-state storage of deuterium in metals such as titanium and scandium is standard practice in nuclear weapons, where dihydrides and even trihydrides do not result in fusion. Whatever the technical merits of the Utah claim, however, serious questions of scientific accountability will certainly be raised. The press statement is devoid of any details that might enable other scientists to judge the strength of the evidence.