&gt; &quot;_Currently_ there is no theory that explains how to do fusion without massive amounts of heat, ergo cold fusion IS (currently) theoretically impossible.&quot;<p><a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;scienceblogs.com&#x2F;startswithabang&#x2F;2011&#x2F;11&#x2F;25&#x2F;cold-fusion-is-it-possible-is&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;scienceblogs.com&#x2F;startswithabang&#x2F;2011&#x2F;11&#x2F;25&#x2F;cold-fusi...</a><p>&quot;Unfortunately, their results were hugely flawed, and their experiments were not reproducible, and cold fusion is now synonymous with ideas like perpetual motion machines: very appealing promises of virtually limitless energy, but that are unfortunately physically impossible.&quot;<p>&quot;Now, that’s not necessarily fair. While perpetual motion machines would violate known physical phenomena — like the conservation of energy — cold fusion is, in principle possible. If we go back to the Sun, where nuclear fusion definitely occurs, it isn’t like the temperatures there are sufficient to cause the individual nuclei to overcome their mutual electric repulsion and fuse together. Instead, something else remarkable happens to the two nuclei that are about to fuse.&quot;<p>&quot;Remember that instead of being solid particles, these nuclei are quantum mechanical objects, meaning they act both as particles and waves. The quantum mechanical wavefunctions of these nuclei — in the Sun, at any rate — wind up overlapping, so that there’s a small but finite (and important) probability that two of them will find themselves in a more energetically favorable state! When that happens, they can tunnel into that energetically favorable state, and fusion can occur!&quot;<p>&quot;Now, this has never been observed at cold temperatures, but from a theoretical physics standpoint, it may be possible.&quot;