Topic: Nuclear economics: Thorium is Bitcoin - Holy Grail Moment (Read 4546 times)

Definition of govern: to hold in check; control

I was lucky enough to talk to a very high-level network engineer that was assisting the building of a super computer to do theoretical fluoride-thorium reactor computations in China, must have been directly related to this project.  Just to think if we had a real president and a energy and science program we would already have these and the energy crisis would be over.

It's over in off-topic. Should still be on the first page.

Link? 

Cold fusion so far has been either fraud or error.  These guys so far look the same as every other cold fusion claim.  Nothing even close to workable cold fusion for a power plant has been demonstrated.  There is no cold fusion 'plant' going online if a plant is defined as something that puts commercial scale energy into the grid. 

Thorium... now that is possible and should be pursued like our lives depended on it. 

I ain't come from no monkey!

This.

Everything heavier and more complex than hydrogen has only one source, so all nuclear waste as well as we creatures who produce it are the long-term byproducts of the death of stars.

We are, as Carl Sagan put it, "star stuff contemplating the stars, organized collections of ten billion billion billion atoms, contemplating the evolution of nature, tracing that long path by which it arrived at consciousness here on the planet earth, and perhaps throughout the cosmos."

O rly?

Give it time. Nothing generates more radioactive elements than stars. The sun will itself easily generate far more radioactive elements than will all the nuclear fission reactors earth will ever use, combined. Just give it a chance.  

With limited access to palladium, I can neither prove nor disprove their claim.  I am aware that some people are brave enough to examine this model one more time, but I do not expect to be one of them.  Hope for the best, plan for the worst.

Cold Fusion is much more efficient. Check out the device by Rossi and Focardi. There is a plant going online in October in Greece (Defkalion).

Electric fields have no theoretical limit, anymore than light frequencies do.  We as observers are subject to rules of scale. To bring it down several orders of magnitude, we have found bacteria living quite comfortably in clouds.  Bacteria are not subject to gravity in any way that they can notice because of their scale.  You and I are not subject to immensely high voltages and currents outside of certain specialized technologies and thunder storms, because of our scale.  99.99+% of the measured universe outside of our scale seems to consist of plasma.  Plasma is not a gas anymore than gas is a diffuse liquid.  Different rules.  Different math.  Electric forces are 10 to the 39th power stronger than gravity.  Current scientific consensus cosmology says that gravity and relativity are the best model for cosmology.  Astrophysicists are not generally studying either EM or plasma disciplines.  They are working out of nuclear models that rely on gravitational models as assumptions. If the Bussard / Farnsworth Fusor works as last advertised before the U.S. Navy removed it from the public domain, then it is equally likely that the fusion in stars is electrical in nature.   And fusion is a byproduct of vast electrical currents through plasma that are too diffuse for you or I to measure directly.  I am not working in that field.  But it echoes some of the things I noticed when I dicked around with high voltage toys I made from Radio Shack parts.  Plasma follows unintuitive rules.

Fusion... as a... byproduct?

Boggled.

There is a distinct possibility that the fusion of the sun is an effect of another energy source, not a prime source.  See Alfven, Arp, Birkelande, Faraday (seriously, weird math about current generation in spinning conductors and magnetic fields that works quite nicely  in a rotating plasma disk), Peratt and, of course, IEEE publications on the subject.  History shows that most scientific consensus turns out to be crap.  Experience shows that most proposed alternatives to the current consensus are even worse crap.  But at least its all self-correcting in the long run....

Interesting and true.

The sun is powered by fusion which generates less radioactive waste. The reactors here on earth are powered by fission.

I wonder if the anti-nuclear-power folks realize that the sun (source of all energy and life on earth) is itself a gigantic nuclear reactor.

Granted I'd be much less comfortable with the sun's presence if it weren't so far away but still 

lol wut?

Classic? Yes. Recognized or even taken as a necessity in designing systems? No.

Holy grail moment? It's a classic self correcting mechanism.

Examples include:

O²:CO² atmospheric balance
The thermostat in your air conditioning unit
Toilet tank refill mechanism


There are practically thousands of examples out there

If we don't develop public and commercial uses, there will only be military uses. Evil succeeds because the good guys have no influence on the market.

Actually i am was impressed by Kirk Sorensen. It is obvious that our atom industry are to much depends on military use.  And we have all that catastrophes due to that.