Go to original

Tension mounts between faculty members regarding controversy
By Andrea Thomas, Editor-in-Chief
The [PurdueUniversity] Exponent

Friday, October 5, 2007

In the Nuclear Engineering Building at Purdue, the tension between many faculty members is palpable.

It's been this way for a while, said Victor Ransom, professor emeritus of nuclear engineering. Ever since scientists began hurling allegations of research misconduct against Purdue professor Rusi Taleyarkhan, the department has been divided.

Taleyarkhan published research in 2002 that stated he had created bubble fusion, a process that expands and collapses tiny bubbles, generating ultra-hot temperatures. At temperatures hot enough, these atoms can fuse and release a type of energy that produces little nuclear waste.

This claim sparked speculation after other scientists, including some at Purdue, could not reproduce Taleyarkhan's work. Even a congressional panel chided the University for not doing a more thorough investigation of his research.

"The rift has never been so bad as it has now," said Ransom, who worries the divide among nuclear engineering faculty could be polarizing graduate and undergraduate students. "They have hurled accusations back and forth, which has only widened this rift."

Taleyarkhan stands behind his claim, despite allegations of research misconduct and possible fraud. He accuses his critics, some of whom work feet from his office, of conflict of interest and jealousy.

But the real victims, Ransom said, are the students – they depend on faculty cooperation.

"It behooves Purdue to either get to the bottom of this and admit that mistakes were made or prove that (Taleyarkhan's claims) are true," Ransom said.

Moreover, Purdue's reputation in nuclear engineering is as important as it's ever been, he said. With enrollment numbers at an all-time high and an increasing interest in nuclear power, the job market in the field is booming.

"At the same time, it takes a lot of work to keep the reputation of the school up nationally," Ransom said, "and the school right now doesn't have a head."

Lefteri Tsoukalas, the former head of the School of Nuclear Engineering, resigned from the headship almost a year ago. Since then, no permanent head has been appointed, leaving the school in what one professor calls "suspended animation." The students, however, avoid the topic, unless they are behind closed doors where their comments and jokes about the controversy can't be heard.

For most students, though, it's easiest to ignore the tension between faculty members. Students don't want to be involved, especially because taking sides could throw them in the pit of the conflict. It's better to stay under the radar, one graduate student said, but he was too afraid of potential consequences to give his name.

Steven Krivit, editor of The New Energy Times, said the controversy has shown there is much room for improvement in how scientific claims are handled within a university and in the science media.

"The situation has highlighted several aspects of academic science that have been in need of better care and attention," Krivit said. "I'm sure that nobody wants to repeat the mistakes from the past.

"We need new answers, and they're not going to come from just reexamining the same old stuff that we already know."

(In accordance with Title 17, Section 107, of the U.S. Code, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. New Energy Times has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of the original text in this article; nor is New Energy Times endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)

"Go to Original" links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted on New Energy Times may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the "Go to Original" links.