Bold and underlining added by me.
To: VadeRetro; Junior; longshadow; RadioAstronomer; Doctor Stochastic; js1138; Shryke; RightWhale; ...
SciencePing |
An elite subset of the Evolution list. See the list's description at my freeper homepage. Then FReepmail to be added or dropped. |
|
|
|
2 posted on
07/14/2005 3:34:18 AM PDT by
PatrickHenry
(Felix, qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas. The List-O-Links is at my homepage.)
To: PatrickHenry
The paper was written by Yiban Xu, a post-doctoral research associate in the School of Nuclear Engineering, and Adam Butt, a graduate research assistant in both nuclear engineering and the School of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
What's in a name? :D
3 posted on
07/14/2005 3:35:39 AM PDT by
Echo Talon
(http://echotalon.blogspot.com)
To: ahayes
4 posted on
07/14/2005 3:37:14 AM PDT by
ahayes
To: PatrickHenry
Holy ultrasonic cleaner, Batman!
5 posted on
07/14/2005 3:38:48 AM PDT by
Waco
To: PatrickHenry
This is really good news. I'm just waiting to see how the libs will try to demonize this energy source. After all, we can't have everyone in the world live like the US. We'll eventually run out of deuterium. Isn't that what the Nazis used in their early experiments with nuclear weapons?
Yada, yada, yada. . . .
To: PatrickHenry
To: PatrickHenry
w00t!
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this a different method than the widely reviled Utah research from over a decade ago?
8 posted on
07/14/2005 3:43:52 AM PDT by
AntiGuv
(™)
To: PatrickHenry
"1,000 million earth atmospheres"
Uh... wouldn't that be like one billion earth atmospheres.
To: PatrickHenry
it looks like a well conducted experiment, with isolated variables, and the switchup of D-acetone for acetone seems pretty conclusive.
however... unless I missed something... I see no mention of power output vs. power input.
were they not interested in this aspect in this round of experimentation?
24 posted on
07/14/2005 5:08:28 AM PDT by
King Prout
(I'd say I missed ya, but that'd be untrue... I NEVER MISS)
To: PatrickHenry
Correct me if I'm wrong. Why is it so screamingly difficult to confirm or deny any of these fusion experiments? If there's fusion, there's Helium.
We're able to detect Helium on the sun but can't detect it in a lab?
28 posted on
07/14/2005 5:41:42 AM PDT by
djf
(Government wants the same things I do - MY guns, MY property, MY freedoms!)
To: PatrickHenry
I suspect that we should be putting more federal funding into this and less into hydrogen powered autos which have enormous engineering show-stoppers.
34 posted on
07/14/2005 6:01:39 AM PDT by
darth
To: PatrickHenry
How "statistically" significant?
41 posted on
07/14/2005 6:33:03 AM PDT by
wotan
To: PatrickHenry
We had a freeper who was working on Cold Fusion when he was murdered. I know remember his name. Was this method different from what he was working on?
48 posted on
07/14/2005 8:35:01 AM PDT by
armymarinemom
(My sons freed Iraqi and Afghanistan Honor Roll students.)
To: PatrickHenry
Development of a low-cost thermonuclear fusion generator would offer the potential for a new, relatively safe and low-polluting energy source Sure. Unlimited free fuel, unlimited power. That's the template. A lot of con games are based on conversion of scarcity to surplus by converting what you have a lot of [dust in the desert] to something you have little of [water in the desert].
Philosopher's stone, convert pewter to gold--send $$$$$$
49 posted on
07/14/2005 9:50:47 AM PDT by
RightWhale
(withdraw from the 1967 UN Outer Space Treaty)
To: PatrickHenry; Squantos; Eaker; Travis McGee
Hey guys,
maybe we'll get good cheap night sights now.
To: Physicist
"The two key signatures for a fusion reaction are emission of neutrons in the range of 2.5 MeV and production of tritium, both of which were seen in these experiments," Xu said. I didn't see any mention of when the lithium was added to breed the tritium. Is there some other process for breeding tritium that doesn't require lithium?
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson