Reply To: FUSION Power for SHIPPING [] NO Co,Co2 Emission;No Oxgen Depletion ;NOx is absobed[]No Damage to Environment.

[Brian H]

Aeronaut wrote: Big Type!

Brian, the easiest thing in the world is to think, and therefore act, precisely what those who think little, if at all, do. The product here is not the hardware, but the engineering services before, during, and after the sale. I mentioned these companies because several of their existing markets, such as MRI and CAT scanners, not to mention fission reactors and jet engines, give them a vested interest in leading the pack out of the starting gate.

But who’s to say if any of them can dominate any of the add-on markets?

What’s your point? What do they have to offer, and what would they want for it? Please take on board what Eric asserted in the video: throwing more money at the project than he has envisaged/requested is pointless, as each major datum uncovered in the RnD process determines which of several branches in a decision/exploration tree come next. Trying to force-march by exploring all branches of the tree at once is virtually un-do-able, and would yield very little in time saved anyway.

Once Eric has a licenseable design in hand, they can get one and leverage their existing markets and staff skills to their hearts’ content. What do you have to “sell” them now? Anything resembling the exclusivity which would be the SOLE benefit they would want or could use by “getting in early” is a major no-no, and desperately dangerous. Remember what happened to the EV1!

There are plenty of smaller outfits which would qualify as “early adopters” and would have a far more collegial approach to hastening and helping development.

(BTW, what in what I’ve said suggests that I thought marketing hardware was the point? :-S )

I remain convinced that you have not thought through Eric’s original plan, and the reasons for it. It is radical, hardly “what others think and do”. It means throwing the opportunity to make the “hardware” open to all qualified comers world-wide simultaneously. This guarantees vigorous competition in adoption, implementation and technological innovation, IMO.

The place where I believe “early adopters” and partners would help is in making sure that there is no “fund-raising gap” between the conclusion of the proof-of-science research and the onset of the generator RnD project. I suspect that Eric already has a number of qualified assurances in hand or close to it that such funding would flow quickly if his team can do controlled p-B fusion with the projected low-to-moderate X-ray emission and low neutron emission claimed. That’s the key.