Terry, That is a good paper that I need to reference. I see it more like alot of different research/results are pointing us in a common direction. I am trying to piece together alot of observations and other theories, some from astro physics and some from nuclear physics and some from just plain old engineering sense & logic.
Unexpectedly, I have also scared myself a bit by what I think the reaction might be, what it implies and how to make it safe when you scale it up. There is a reason that it is taking taking decades to produce a device that is stable. Many very smart people have built devices that worked at one time and yet they were not able to make it to market. I also see some health issues that concern me with some of the people most involved in the past. Interestingly, I came across an article from around the year 2000 or so that mentioned Jed and also mentioned Frank Z. telling Ed Storms he thought there was a link between cold fusion, superconductivity and gravity. I think Frank was right and Ed is still looking primarily at a nuclear fusion reaction. Sometimes I think scientists seem so bent on one theory that fits their discipline that they close their eyes to others. Just the way I see it. Stewart On Thursday, August 30, 2012, Terry Blanton wrote: > On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 3:41 PM, ChemE Stewart <[email protected]> wrote: > > Those are pretty tough questions for a device that is generating fission, > > fusion, chemical and possibly some forms of collapsed matter, all with > > different reaction kinetics, time constants and instabilities... > > Someone is beating you to the draw: > > http://www.darksideofgravity.com/DG_neutrinos.pdf > > T > >
