Reply To: Iconography

[Brian H]

Aeronaut wrote: I’m forcing myself to be patient. I’m forcing myself to be patient. I’m forcing myself to be patient. 😆

What can, and should be accelerated, imo, is the authoritative confirmation process and the preparations to integrate FF so we don’t end up with a Ferrari with an empty fuel tank. Sure looks good, but how fast does it go?

The “”? I repeat: if there is a functioning prototype, producing power, that trumps all “authoritative confirmation processes”. Science requires only one thing: replicability. The protype and design fulfill that requirement, in spades. As for the theory, Eric has been carefully building that all along, and, as he says, there is really no new physics, just exploitation of some previously under-explored but known phenomena. (Specifically, the quantum gap in the X-ray cooling regime.) So I believe you are all afroth solving a problem that doesn’t exist.

As for the preparations to integrate FF, consider your utility CEO and his coal plant. He MIGHT be persuaded to hold off on making a final commitment on it until FF break-even is exceeded, or to two-step the process so that a smaller facility was started first, on the possibility that FF would make further capacity unnecessary (and, in fact, would moth-ball even existing plant, in the end.) But I suspect you will find that while they might appreciate the heads-up, no one will dare suspend or delay anything until a rather high level of certainty is reached. Probably about 4 or 5 years from now.

In any case, none of that has anything to do with how soon FF gets implemented; there will be demand and opportunity and need in excess from the moment it is available. You aren’t, in other words, doing anything to help FF along, just perhaps helping save some utilities and some politicians from overcommitting to soon-to-be-dead technologies.