Macro Fusion Approaches May Not Be the Best Way To Go

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Bret Cahill - 20 Aug 2005 19:22 GMT

They can now image orbitals and use electron beam microscopes to
maneuver single molecules. All the current approaches to fusion,
however, are macro and don't/can't take advantage of these new
techniques.

It would seem at least as promising to develop more of these
micro/nano/quantum tools to play around at the single reaction or
quantum level and, after enough has been determined, scale up.

I'm wondering if the original relatively quick success in bomb building
got everyone on the wrong track, didn't grandfather in some bad
misconceptions. An H-bomb is certainly impressive in a lot of ways but
that doesn't necessarily mean we want to go macro everywhere.

Bret Cahill

Reply to this Message

Rick Nelson - 24 Aug 2005 02:02 GMT

Hi Bret,

Well Einstein understood p very well.

p is the immovable constant. E actually equals p * v where p is the
more fundamental quantity.

But everykook knows that superfictionalky.

I hate to tell you humans this, but you can p radialll spa

It helps t make TF richer.

Why is p0 a spatial constraint>

OK, now I[m goin back to fromage the pri UFU.

> They can now image orbitals and use electron beam microscopes to
> maneuver single molecules. All the current approaches to fusion,
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
>
> Bret Cahill

Reply to this Message

Natural Science Forum / Physics / Fusion / August 2005

Macro Fusion Approaches May Not Be the Best Way To Go