Posted on 01/31/2006 10:41:43 PM PST by Tyche
bttt
By bombarding a special mixture of acetone and benzene with oscillating sound waves, the researchers caused bubbles in the mixture to expand and then violently collapse. This technique, which has been dubbed sonofusion, produces a shock wave that has the potential to fuse nuclei together, according to the team.Sonofusion. Yeahright. Someone telephone the neologism police. Scientists should stick to science. Destroying our beloved mother tongue should be left to the experts: Television and Texans.
This would make more sense:
"By bombarding a special mixture of acetone and benzene with oscillating sound waves, the researchers caused bubbles in the mixture to expand and then violently collapse. This technique, which has been dubbed Hip-Hop, produces a shock wave that has the potential to fuse nuclei together, according to the team."
There. Thats better
Maybe Frank Hebert was on to something? DUNE!
File this away under the heading, "Cold Fusion May Be Sound Theory".
Impossible! Fusion power will never work.
Of course, that's what they said about the airplane, air brakes, the steamboat, space travel, the light bulb, the laser, a Republican congress, democracy, etc. etc.
I can see the headlines now:
"Exxon lays off 10,000; stock delisted."
"Oil falls below $20 per barrel."
"Energy companies fail as cheap fusion power gluts market."
"Last coal mine closes in West Virginia; no work for miners."
"Environmentalists question long-term entropy effect of fustion power; may accelerate proton decay."
"Greenpeace warns of impending heat death of universe; fusion power the culprit- 'We may only have a billion years left' says Nader."
Excellent<:o))
Ya'll be right bout dat.
Oops, that was Carville Cajun.
What about "World awash in surplus neutrons"?
So what descriptive term do YOU suggest to replace it???
Would you object if we called it....
"Wonder Warthogtivity" ??
Actually, yes. Scientific/tech terms are supposed to be descriptive of the process. Since "sonoluminescence" is already an accepted term, I'm happy with "sonofusion".
Actually, yes. Scientific/tech terms are supposed to be descriptive of the process. Since "sonoluminescence" is already an accepted term, I'm happy with "sonofusion".My (counter)question would be this: what about the other kind of "fusion"? Why isn't it called "nuetro-fusion" or something like that? How is this fusion different than the other fusion?--answer: only because of the perturbing force or cause. Why is combustion in gasoline engines not called "sparkcombustion" as opposed to "compressioncombustion" for diesel engines?
For the simple reason that for many decades, it was the "only" type of fusion even considered as possible. Then there was "cold" fusion to distinguish it from "hot" fusion. And now there is "sonofusion" to distinguish it from either of those.
Semantics aside, this is really exciting news.
Don't tell Iran.
|
Bookmarked for when someone explains it to me. |
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.