I always wondered if he is a troll/muse who got a little carried away
but serious or not AP plays a somewhat useful role in suggesting or
pretending "controlled" fusion wasn't possible and he could prove it.

One of the best ways to find solutions is to try to prove the problem
is inherently unsolvable. Maybe something intrinsic is being
overlooked. Devil's advocacy is the SOP thought experiment of choice
when problem solving.

On the other hand he could have been a serious numerology nut case. He
never really made the case for any connection between spheres and
cylinders and the "activation" energy of a fusion reaction.

Instead of just using geometrical analogies I asked him to write out a
formal proof using gradient, divergence and curl operators. He
refused.

Even worse, when it was pointed out net energy "controlled" fusion was
already possible by setting off thermonukes in salt domes to heat
boiler water -- the problem with this idea is political; a lot of
people balk at H bombs going off in their county on a routine basis --
he claimed that much more energy could be obtained running the same
fuel through a conventional fission reactor.

From what I understand an H bomb can be quite efficient at extracting
energy from both fission and fusion "fuel."


Bret Cahill

I actually purchased pure platinum/tungsten tiny wire, cleansed it and
did his experiment to show that high currents through higher noble metal
alloys would produce mass loss. It does, but it's contained within a
weird mechanism that is easily explainable - measuring light bulb's
weights before and after they "burn out" is not a test of the synergisms
of alloys and nuclear forces.

I must admit that AP has a huge Brain that gives me a lot of puzzling
fun from.

I hope he's doing OK.

Hugs AP,

Rick





Bret Cahill wrote:
I always wondered if he is a troll/muse who got a little carried away
but serious or not AP plays a somewhat useful role in suggesting or
pretending "controlled" fusion wasn't possible and he could prove it.

One of the best ways to find solutions is to try to prove the problem
is inherently unsolvable. Maybe something intrinsic is being
overlooked. Devil's advocacy is the SOP thought experiment of choice
when problem solving.

On the other hand he could have been a serious numerology nut case. He
never really made the case for any connection between spheres and
cylinders and the "activation" energy of a fusion reaction.

Instead of just using geometrical analogies I asked him to write out a
formal proof using gradient, divergence and curl operators. He
refused.

Even worse, when it was pointed out net energy "controlled" fusion was
already possible by setting off thermonukes in salt domes to heat
boiler water -- the problem with this idea is political; a lot of
people balk at H bombs going off in their county on a routine basis --
he claimed that much more energy could be obtained running the same
fuel through a conventional fission reactor.

From what I understand an H bomb can be quite efficient at extracting
energy from both fission and fusion "fuel."


Bret Cahill