Re: Review article on beam/accelerator driven fusion?
Posted: Tue Feb 14, 2017 12:17 pm
"Can be found in the part The Physics of Successfull Fusion." Already looked at that. The biggest things that are a red flag for me are:
One: He spends an awful lot of time trashing accepted physics and mainstream efforts at fusion for my taste. The difficulties and problems facing physics today are no secret- including the chasm between relativity and quantum mechanics. Trashing them infers those clowns are all barking up the wrong tree, but look at my great sounding theory- it must be right.
Two: Maybe if he spent as much time with details on his own theory, it would be a little more palatable. For proof, he claims a few experiments back up his theory- yet absolutely no details or references there! Apparently he has no experimental evidence of his own that any of his theory is sound either.
Three: Probably most important- the proof is always in the pudding. He hasn't so much as built a working prototype for proof of concept, yet he seems to have a sales pitch already. The reactors are completely scalable, completely safe (no radiation), have direct conversion to electricity and near 100% efficient, dirt cheap for the homeowner to purchase, and electricity from them will cost 1/800th of what the utilities are charging. And he has a cute name for it that's already trademarked. If that isn't putting the cart before the horse...I don't know what is.
He claims they will be for sale by 2001. And the copyright on the site is 1997; so 20 years have passed and still, apparently nothing so much as some experimental proof that there is something to his theories. Frankly, it all sends the needle high on my BS meter. The burden of proof is not on the skeptic, it is on those who would posit theories and make outrageous claims. I see nothing resembling proof in the entire site to think that he's onto something important- all indications point to the opposite.
One: He spends an awful lot of time trashing accepted physics and mainstream efforts at fusion for my taste. The difficulties and problems facing physics today are no secret- including the chasm between relativity and quantum mechanics. Trashing them infers those clowns are all barking up the wrong tree, but look at my great sounding theory- it must be right.
Two: Maybe if he spent as much time with details on his own theory, it would be a little more palatable. For proof, he claims a few experiments back up his theory- yet absolutely no details or references there! Apparently he has no experimental evidence of his own that any of his theory is sound either.
Three: Probably most important- the proof is always in the pudding. He hasn't so much as built a working prototype for proof of concept, yet he seems to have a sales pitch already. The reactors are completely scalable, completely safe (no radiation), have direct conversion to electricity and near 100% efficient, dirt cheap for the homeowner to purchase, and electricity from them will cost 1/800th of what the utilities are charging. And he has a cute name for it that's already trademarked. If that isn't putting the cart before the horse...I don't know what is.
He claims they will be for sale by 2001. And the copyright on the site is 1997; so 20 years have passed and still, apparently nothing so much as some experimental proof that there is something to his theories. Frankly, it all sends the needle high on my BS meter. The burden of proof is not on the skeptic, it is on those who would posit theories and make outrageous claims. I see nothing resembling proof in the entire site to think that he's onto something important- all indications point to the opposite.