Though not OU, the most effective fusion is IMO from the Farnsworth Fusor. Rather than billions being put into it, it's a hydrogen fusion process anyone can make. (and get neutrons from)
Not that I'm disrespecting cold fusion, it is however unclear how to make it easily replicable IMO. (and I don't view it as conclusive that every apparent success is the result of fusion) On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 2:56 PM, thomas malloy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > Jed Rothwell wrote: > > At first I thought this was another dig at cold fusion alone but it also >> attacks plasma fusion. >> >> Sun in a Bottle: The Strange History of Fusion and the Science of Wishful >> Thinking >> >> > Did you read the book Jed? > > My nephew thinks that laser fusion projects such as the ITER, will work. > OTOH, he's savvy enough not to spend his own money on this research. He'd > happily spend your (tax) money on it however. As for the wrecked careers, > the hot fusion physicists have used this dream as a cash cow for over a half > century. AFAIK, there's no end in site. > > When the British announced their latest laser fusion experiment, I > questioned Ed Storms about it. Apparently their approach is different from > the magnetic confinement with a lithium blanket approach. I haven't read any > evaluations of it's feasibility. > > The book's attacks on LENR really irk me. It's clear that some results, The > Patterson Cell, and the heat after death, clearly show surplus energy. Then > there's the matter of the anomalous neculides. > > > --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- > http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html --- > >
