benf wrote:

asymmertic_implosion – 08 November 2011 09:02 AM
I agree that no issue I mentioned is insurmountable, but it takes time, money and most importantly, data. Data on fusion systems with gain is in short supply at the moment.

I presume you’ve reviewed the monthly reports from LPP, found on the same page I directed you to before, or on their website. The reports over the years have shown the difficulties that are being faced as well as the progress made along the way. There is an array of diagnostic tools being employed to quantify and qualify the results. All this takes time, money and expertise to enable. The funding of the research is vital to keep receiving the data to help guide the way toward future improvements. It’s not only hard data that drives the future, it’s also our ability to make the project known and appreciated. This is a task that can be taken on by those of us with no technical background as well as from the scientific community.

I have reviewed the progress updates and some of the technical data. I appreciate you pointing me to the link. It changes nothing I’ve posted. FoFu-1 may be the best chance to produce fusion energy but it hasn’t yet. It might some time in 2012. Progress has been made. However, the D-D fusion yield is on par with other plasma focus devices at similar current levels. Despite the progress, it hasn’t done anything new in terms of the fusion output. This is not to say it won’t, but for people not aware of the state of art in plasma focus research, FoFu-1 just caught up. Now it has to go ahead of the other machines by leaps and bounds. It is my sincere hope that it will.

I agree that marketing and PR are important but I suggest staying away from textbooks and regulators. FoFu-1 has a great deal to prove before either should be approached. The ‘fusion is ten years away’ claim is already trademarked by so called main stream fusion researchers. I advise staying away from that trap. It will not be warmly received by technical folks. Show fusion gain and people will mutter. Let someone else repeat your experiment and people will talk. Show you can do it day in and day out for a week, people will throw money at you. However, fusion gain is still the dream yet to be achieved. FoFu-1 has to produce roughly 57,000 J of fusion yield to breakeven. According to LPP’s last report, it had a fusion yield of 1 J or less. I remain optimistic that FoFu-1 can do better, but I’m not sold on it yet.

My comment about being zealous was a warning, not a criticism. I think people should be optimistic. Hope is a good thing. Hope is a driving force behind science. However, you can’t go blindly into it. Skepticism is also a driving force of science. To challenge the old you first have to doubt it. When you doubt, you perform experiments in new and different ways that challenge the old. LPP is doing that now. However, they have not proven the old incorrect. The hater says they never will. The optimist says its only a matter of time. The skeptic says I don’t know yet. The zealot says… well read a cold fusion forum and it pretty much explains itself. I consider my self a skeptic. All I ask is show me the data before claiming fusion will change the world. I’ve heard it too many times before. 🙁