> Kevin wrote: > Which is why I thought Gruss's quips about > Marseilles were odd.
Because the piece said the following about a $13 billion project: "Fusion is the process of atoms combining at extraordinarily high temperatures that not only provides the energy of the sun and stars but also gives hydrogen bombs their enormous power. The challenge faced by the international project is to control that energy in a self-sustaining reaction in which the heat released by fusion can be used to generate electricity, an engineering feat of daunting complexity." A $13 billion experiment of "daunting complexity" that will attempt to harness the energy source that powers the Sun doesn't sound like making cotton balls to me. What seems odd is that you and Jochem speak as if the whole thing is all worked out, the risks are all locked down, and all they have to do is flip the switch. Um, no. Anything to do with fundamental particles is based on a known flawed theory (Standard Model) and while many of our predictive frameworks have proven accurate for our uses, they are still based on a flawed theory. Put another way, we're messing with something of enormous power that we don't fully understand and therefore can't fully predict an outcome. I hope your confidence in our understanding of fundamental particles passes the $13 billion test, but I'd say the risks are FAR from negligible. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble Ticket application http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:162424 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
