Reply To: Some about a fusion dispute in Sweden.

[Joseph Chikva]

Breakable wrote: This is certainly an exciting approach.
What would you want to do next with it?
From your perspective I would probably get a provisional patent, design an experiment and approach some universities for funding or alternatively and try to raise VC for patenting and research.
Of course you don’t have much time after filing the provisional patent – only 12 months, so you should move quickly.
It depends on your credentials and connections which way is more approachable.
I don’t want to discourage you, but dealing with beams seems to require more advanced technologies than the current DPF approach, so definitely you would need a much better funding as well as a larger technical base. That might seem like a disadvantage, but on the other hand the complicated ITER approach has many times the funding than much simpler DPF, so I would believe if you estimate results in more than 50 years, you will get no resistance from fossil fuel think tanks and that means easier access to funding.
Good luck and keep us posted.
PS:I would also suggest to visit http://www.talk-polywell.org/ to find more friends.

Thank you very much for your kindness!
Yes, the Method is rather expensive in realization. As I know electron accelerator for commercial application with energy 1MEv and power in the beam 100 kW costs 7 millions USD. Method requires a bigger power.
But it is not impossible. ITER project for injecting of neutrals requires the constant current ion accelerator 1MEv with current 10 A. We need less energy but bigger current. And now is developed the modular multi-aperture concept for this http://epaper.kek.jp/e88/PDF/EPAC1988_0470.PDF
My publication here has a purpose to push interest to the Method and also to hear opinion of people really interested in fusion problems (especially criticism).