[benf]

Another good reason to write letters is that President Obama has just put forward his new candidate for Energy Secretary Ernest Muniz, who will have to go through confirmation hearings. It would be nice to have the congress asking questions like…what about the aneutronic fusion idea?

Folks that send letters should CC Webmaster that they’ve written. No need to send us the letters, we just would like to know how many have been sent. 🙂

[benf]

Here’s some more info from smartplanet.com, which also favorably links to LPP articles. It would be nice if Steve Jurvetson would consider diversifying his investments in fusion research, as other Silicon valley VC funders with interests in green and clean technology have done.

[benf]

zapkitty wrote:
Well, if it’s the skunkworks…

… (or is it?)…

… how would one tell?

I don’t think you can go around using Lockheed’s name without really representing it.

When I display the video full screen, the device looks rather Whiffleball-like…v.9?

[benf]

@oldjar

Personally, I would not want to be a first responder to a breach of containment and loss of coolant at a fission power plant. One has to admire and respect the bravery of those that do.

Focus Fusion wouldn’t require a life or death struggle with runaway fuel rods. In event of a failure the call to answer to would be…Why did the generator turn off? A much better scenario in my view.

[benf]

A couple of related news items on pulsars I find fascinating. One is from NASA’s Chandra X-ray Observatory, a movie view of the Vela pulsar.

Another is research on the Chameleon pulsar with different wavelengths. Could you mitigate bremsstahlung by altering radio frequency production in the plasmoid? I remember Eric mentioning the LPP lab’s shielding requirement for radio frequency. edit: Are charged particles diminished when there is more radio frequency output?

[benf]

Great to hear of your accomplishment James! The preparation time has been arduous but you’ve made it! I have just been reading about disruption mitigation studies (you’re probably familiar with) and some of the proposed solutions to control instabilities, such as injecting fractured cryogenic pellets into the plasma! The problems of “controlling” instabilities appear daunting.

Your research lends greater clarity to the processes going on in tokamak generated plasma fields, glad you were also able to incorporate Eric’s research as well.

[benf]

And here’s another problem. It seems that the popular dark energy theory doesn’t fit the new data…

[benf]

asymmetric_implosion wrote: Livermore tried to ride that pony back in the 70’s…

It seems that LLNL is still in training with the pony. Does the back of your envelope calculation look anything like what LLNL presented in 2009? It’s completely over my head, but it’s good to know calculations are being considered. They have access to advanced simulation and diagnostic capabilities, so maybe there’s something to be gained by their research?

The Charles Siefe article is destructive in any case because it adds fuel to the conversation about cutting funding for fusion. This affects people who are on appropriations committees as well as venture capital risk taking. The need for new energy sources is not diminishing however. Charles Siefe seems to opportunistically lump together the entire fusion community as failures with the easy tapping on his keyboard.

The lightbulb developed from a short lived dim glow to a useable source of illumination in around seventy five years. It then went on to vacuum tubes and cathode ray tubes. The electronics industry took off from there. People need dreams and inspiration to help pursue their goals, not just dwelling on difficulties and failures which are inevitable.

[benf]

If you have better images, can you try sharing them?

I can envision the apple core in the second image of the report. See attached two images…Look closely at the second image.

Maybe a stronger lens magnification would help, but you can’t get too close. Questar Corp. may have a solution with their LDM microscope, though not cheap.

edit: added link

Attached files

[benf]

@BSFusion
One hopes that the thrust of broadening the sphere of research options would also transfer over to fusion energy research for peaceful purposes…

[benf]

Sorry you missed the meeting Zapkitty. There has been an announcement about the meeting posted on the home page of this website by Breakable since Oct. 24. Also we have brought you into past meetings, working around the technical difficulties with other options. Breakable has gone to some good effort to make that happen. We are a new team picking up the ball and running with it. Let’s keep on trying to work this out.

[benf]

zapkitty wrote:

Yeah, I wouldn’t want to see the moon with a sad face >:(

The folks on Earth looking up will notice lunar space stations and perhaps lights from the surface installations of lunar cities and not much else.

That could well be, unless they’re using fossil fuels to power the mining. In which case, if there were a problem, people might see a giant smoke ring! :coolcheese:

Question; (because it’s Friday eve.) What would be the better way to mine Jupiter? With humongous light weight blimp(s) filled up at lower pressure? Or a high strength smaller metal/composite tank filled at high pressure (using FoFu-1 to drive the suction pumps, of course). Or some hybrid version?

[benf]

Yeah, I wouldn’t want to see the moon with a sad face >:(

[benf]

It sounds like we better get cracking on the development of Fo-Fu-1 as a fast rocket propulsion system, so we can begin mining Helium from Jupiter!:)

[benf]

Yes, very glad to hear the news that all are OK. Communications are still sketchy….

[Author]

Posts