Robthebob wrote:we're scientists, we're in the business of logic and reason.
Robthebob wrote:I'm pretty much giving up my life for fusion, more specificly polywell, but before they have results, im not holding my breath.
I still think it's frick up that they wont let anyone help them, there's at least 2 legit groups that wants to help do research, and they're just like, nah, our (the US navy)'s face is too important.
"I have a dream" (c)
"I'm pretty much giving up my life..."
Are these two declaration either logic or reason?
To what are those much closer - to poetry or to science?
Why simply not to answer on quite reasonable questions without any poetic allegories?
1. Is it possible to achieve in Polywell beta=1 or close to 1?
2. Is plasma in Polywell thermal or cold? And do particles in Polywell move "strongly radial" as Dr. Nebel declared in correspondence with US Patent Office?
...do research, and they're just like, nah, our (the US navy)'s face is too important.
Yes, it's important. If feasible to achieve producing net power on base of Polywell concept. As Navy is interested in nuclear propulsion for warships with sizes much less than aircraft carriers too.
But I am not sure that your and Navy's point of views on Polywell are the same.
As I know total financing of Polywell does not exceed 10 millions USD.
For note this is the cost of about 5 Harpon or 5 Standard of 5 Tomahawk missles used by Navy.
For note: If to believe Wikipedia, only one Ticonderoga class cruiser has ready to fire 122 vertical launch positions and additionally 8 slant launch for Harpoon.
So, 130 ready to fire missiles (if even not considering stored) make 260 millions dollars.
All missiles have their life-cycle after end of which they have to be renewed.
If Polywell is so important for Navy, why not to buy on 50 missiles less each year and to finance better the Polywell’s program?