Talk-Polywell.org

I did. Numerical method full of hypothesis and semplifications based on older works. Might be all good or all bad as far as we can say now. Recognizing that a kit to test it against might be available when ELI gets online (anytime between 2015-2017). For the one who do not know what ELI is: http://w...

As per the debate on the other thread ['theory' versus 'discovery']; it seems a bit of an oxymoron 'theoretical... breakthrough'. One has a breakthrough, or one does not. Indeed. If you think you have a breakthru but are not quite sure, is that a "theoretical" breakthru or just a "hypthetical" brea...

Beautiful launch. If you think about how young this company is and how many bureaucratic obstacles they had to overcome, what they have achieved so far is truly amazing.

chrismb wrote:As per the debate on the other thread ['theory' versus 'discovery']; it seems a bit of an oxymoron 'theoretical... breakthrough'. One has a breakthrough, or one does not.

Indeed.

ladajo wrote: They try pretty much everything else they see.

China traditions at their best

I'm not all that up on Archimedes the scientist. He was a pretty good naturalist, but... Archimede was the greatest scientist of his era, we can say that he was the maximum expression of science of his cycle, and he laid the bases for the next scientific cycle. Among the many contributions, he was ...

Your logic is correct if we talk about an existing theory. Than you can disproof it either with a new theory or a new experimental result. Hmmm. Please show me one instance where new theory disproved old. New finding (discoveries, experimental results...) can provide contradictions that disprove ol...

Theory ALWAYS precedes proof. I do not agree. Ideas preceed experiments and experiments generate Theories. It has been like this for most of human discoveries. "Discovery" is not theory nor is it proof. Discovery is DISproof. Disproof generates the need for new theory, but if you believe that the f...

Any experiment seeking to PROVE the effect is scientifically inconsequential. It may be valuable for commercial purposes (indeed will be very good for that if it works), but if it can't disprove, it ain't scientific. As I said, science never proves anything. It merely disproves the alternatives. Ex...

Lord Jesus, please give us some new physics with an experimental proof before the theoretical model instead of the other way around. Theory ALWAYS precedes proof. I do not agree. Ideas preceed experiments and experiments generate Theories. It has been like this for most of human discoveries. Think ...

Lord Jesus, please give us some new physics with an experimental proof before the theoretical model instead of the other way around.
I might even start believe in you if it happens during my lifetime. I might even believe in Santa Claus if it happens during this holiday season.

Thank you.

What a delusional, bizarre and fantastically arrogant dismissal of an excellent report. I suppose you can do better in your sleep than these extraordinarily accomplished PhD's who are at the very top of their field. Shame you're not the one filing for grant monies and demonstrating to the world how...

Paper:
http://www-pub.iaea.org/mtcd/meetings/P ... xc_1-3.pdf

and slides from latest talk:
http://www.psfc.mit.edu/research/alcato ... a_talk.pdf

some interesting ideas and results. I wonder if they will be able to keep the stability at higher powers.

chrismb wrote:

Giorgio wrote:Wasn't you sustaining that they was actually selling licenses to electrical utility companies?

M'be GIT is the pen name for Randall Mills? It would be consistent with my last post that he forgets what he writes....

I am starting to think it the same way as you.

I still don't see any motivation for them to be funding such studies if they are anywhere close to where they claim to be. The motivation is they need to convince and compel an electrical utility. Any/all evidence that they're correct goes to the issue of warrant for belief, and they need the prope...