Talk-Polywell.org

Source? Did you look up the wrong EMC again like last time? 8/23/12 the modified the contract and changed the funding lines by up 1.2 mil dollars. so they got another slug of money and that should pay them for a while. 4.7 mil to be used or that is the amount that would signal WB8.1 unless the 1.2 ...

Source? Did you look up the wrong EMC again like last time? 8/23/12 the modified the contract and changed the funding lines by up 1.2 mil dollars. so they got another slug of money and that should pay them for a while. 4.7 mil to be used or that is the amount that would signal WB8.1 unless the 1.2 ...

ScottL wrote:

polywellfan wrote:I am so sad it doesn't seem to look good for polywell.

Source? Did you look up the wrong EMC again like last time?

Last time? Wrong EMC?

I am so sad it doesn't seem to look good for polywell.

Joseph Chikva wrote:
So, Mr Zapkitty saying nonsense "breakeven on DT is so easy for Focus Fusion team"

Last comment to you: Here you have your straw man! And it is your straw man!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man That is about you? Yes, the second statement does not follow from the second. But LPP has well seen problems and and following not first statement but from declared by them problems very unlikely that they will ever reach breakeven. Understand? It is about you...

You are mixing up two statements: 1. We haven't breakeven yet, Then you conclude 2. all today's approaches will never reach break-even. Logically the second statement does not follow from the firs. But their fans e.g. Mr. Zapkitty state that achievement of breakeven on DT is a matter of course. Doe...

D-T fusion sets also the highest safety requirements, highest need for neutron containment etc. 80% of the process energy is released as 14.1 MeV neutrons. Right, but this is much easier problem than reaching break-even using any fusion aproaches. As neither approach provides today breakeven. Even ...

Why you are so naive? Much easier to achieve temps required to burn DT with Q>1. They can? Answer is "no". Of course they can't do it. They are trying to achieve pB11 in the future. Really? Do they not do the real fusion experiment? Do you want to be taken seriously? Research needs time. Will the a...

Joseph Chikva wrote:

Kahuna wrote:They say it gives them more confidence that they will achieve temps required to eventually burn PB11.

Why you are so naive?
Much easier to achieve temps required to burn DT with Q>1. They can? Answer is "no".

Of course they can't do it. They are trying to achieve pB11 in the future.

"The experimental results to date were consistent with the underlying theoretical framework of the Polywell fusion concept and, in the opinion of the committee, merited continuation and expansion." It is in section 5 of the J&A, hope that helps somewhat. Best regards wow, just read it again, thank ...

... Tri Alpha?


I mean, Tri Alpha have got large investments ( larger then 100 Million $), why can't EMC2 (Polywell) oder LPPX (Focus Fusion) acquire more investments?

Is there any way to make spending in these approaches more popular?

Joseph Chikva wrote:

vernes wrote:KitemanSA has a point...

I see. Now he states that company with two full time physicists works simultaneously on two different projects.

I don't think he said this.

Joseph Chikva wrote:

polywellfan wrote:

Joseph Chikva wrote:ting that 5.52m aneutronic reactors need not less than 50 m length Direct Energy Converters.[/u] While neutronic reactors needed 0.7-1m of thickness blanket. And who from us is a fantazer?

Interesting.
Your source for this claim?

Which claim? first or second?

First.