Reply To: Military Effects

[BSFusion]

Joeviocoe wrote: Has any confirmed BSF experiment ever produced ANY neutrons and ANY energy level?

There has never been an experiment performed on a completed BSF device, because BSF is only an idea, having just recently been discovered; the necessary, interconnected parts, do not exist together, as a whole, in one place, but, nevertheless, each of BSF’s subsystems has been verified to work in isolation, at least conceptually, based upon examples of proven technology.

Joeviocoe wrote: Is there ANY peer-reviewed (non-discredited) research that suggests that ANY fusion (even DT) can be achieved using this approach?

BSF’s approach to ignition is similar to the concept of an “exploding pusher,” as explained in Phys. Plasmas, Vol. 2, No. 11, November 1995:

“…Higher implosion velocities are possible in certain types of high-entropy implosions, in which the high-density shell is heated rapidly to high temperature and then explodes. In a so-called “exploding pusher target,” the center of mass of the shell or “pusher” is almost stationary as it explodes. The radius of the boundary between the inner edge of the shell and the fuel typically converges only a factor of 3 or 4. Such targets are quite insensitive to asymmetry. The direct-drive, electron-conduction-driven exploding pusher target was the most common early ICF target and was the first type of target to produce thermonuclear neutrons…”

Joeviocoe wrote: …The BSF problems and limitations are not known because nobody in the scientific community has even looked at it yet. So to claim that a problem is “solved” is way too premature. A patent application cannot identify the shortcomings in the design or theory. You MUST write the paper…

I agree, patent applications are not held to the same standards as professionally written journal articles, and I pity the unfortunate patent examiner who’s job it is to process mine. I also agree with you that it would be easier for an outsider to scrutinize the key concepts of BSF if a peer reviewed paper were published. But, it would be foolish for me to start writing that paper. There are certain requirements, unknown to me, that must be adhered to if one wishes to write a such a paper. Perhaps if I had had more exposure to reading scientific articles, I might consider attempting to write my own, but my knowledge is limited to a few “Scientific American” magazine articles that I read many years ago at a local public library, before they stopped carrying that subscription. That said, I would still like to continue improving my patent application, filling in missing details and making it easier to read. You could assist with that project, by pointing out the things about BSF that you find questionable. I expect some mistakes will be found in BSF’s patent disclosure, because it is so complex. Perhaps someone with a special expertise or willingness to look at it with fresh eyes can examine it, because an opportunity for improvement may be more obvious to them. Please, let me know if any flaws or potential weaknesses are identified.

Thanks