#8189
Rezwan
Participant

I think by downplaying it, it makes you look like you’re covering something up. And in this day and age, nothing can be covered up for long. It’s simply a matter of education – getting the facts out. The facts aren’t out there. Nobody even knows the difference. It’s all one thing. And, as noted, any opponents of the DPF will play it up and point out the “coverup” as proof that this is not a good thing.

Differentiation on the nuclear issue is important. Can’t skip this step. And I don’t think it hurts the cause as much as you think. People can handle it. My point is just that it takes a while to explain. But once explained – it’s pretty simple. Like learning a few phrases in a new language. It takes a bit of repetition, but then – voila! You sound like a native.

Also, we’ll be using these materials to educate about fusion in general, and to open up the aneutronic avenue of inquiry in particular. In the event the DPF doesn’t work – we’d still want people to pursue aneutronic fusion with other interesting ideas that emerge out there. So everything we do has to work for both the DPF, and for longer term contingency plans.