How many more years till FUSION replaces FISSION?

Btw... There are numerous institutions who have claimed to have succesfully replicated the Pons & Fleischmann experiment.


Here is a site with lots of info and links:
freeenergynews.com...

Originally posted by vK_man
fusion energy will be help in:
for electrokinetic solar ships ..

We do not need any of that as we already have a wide range of technologies that could have accomplished that goal back in 1970. We are not busy

colonizing the universe ( and some say we already did most of the solar system ) because the people don't care about that and the countries who do have the ability would much rather do it in secret in with military personal.

for restarting magnetic cores of planets like mars or moons like ganymede and terraforming them ... massive tokomak fusion reactors could be used ....
for powering space stations and interstellar exploration platforms ....

Once again i agree that there is always room for improvement but you seemed to have been suggesting that we have to wait for these technologies before we could get started which is simply not the case.

i meant the specific processes in the core of sun ,or to harness the energy of the sun and the helium -3 generated by sun's core and photosphere...

Once again we know how to extract energy right from the active vacuum that will give you a million watts out for every watt 'in'. There really is no reason for all these supposed technologies of the future.

such processes (specific processes in the core of sun) be understood in great detail , it may be possible to achieve and sustain inertial confinement

Why bother at all? Do you have any idea of the scale of such projects and how much centralization of power and resources would have to take place before we could attempt to 'confine' the sun's energy?

Canadian astronomers announced today the first evidence of a magnetic field on a planet outside of our solar system which is also the first observation of a planet heating its star. In our own solar system, if Jupiter was just ten times bigger, it would have sufficient critical mass to ignite as a second star. detection
www.uta.edu.../news/AstroBioMag.htm

Why do we need a second sun? How much of life on Earth could deal with perpetual sunlight or nights lasting mere hours?

Jupiter takes 12 years to go around the sun, so it spends an entire earth year in each astrological sign. It spins on its axis much quicker than the earth... a day on jupiter is only 10 hours. The planet is so massive that it could hold more than 300 earths. Many scientists think Jupiter is a dormant sun.
www.divanet.com...

We might very well end up with 'global warming' if we added another sun to the mix...

People on this planet will be able to witness a similar process when Jupiter, the biggest planet of the Solar system, will become a star. In some parts of Jupiter the surface temperature reaches 1,000 degrees. Astrophysicists believe that Jupiter will become a star, move away from the Sun together with its 12 satellites and form a new planetary system

english.pravda.ru...

I would love to see the physics involved in this theory...

if by natural processes,it is believed that jupiter could be turned into a star , so with artifical high energy magnetic fields a lot of possiblities may arise ONCE WE create technocracy...

Technocracy is just fascism ( police state) that employs technology to exploit and control it's citizens and i do not see why we need it or anyone would want it. Why do you have such a need of 'strong' ( read dictator) leadership? Do you have a problem making your own decisions in life?

fusion reactors are the future , like it or not

Fusion technology , ESPECIALLY high spatial energy fusion, is a complete waste of time and general distraction to prevent us from exploiting the breakthroughs we have had in the LERN (or popularly called cold fusion) field. We do NOT need more centralized power distribution for all the obvious reasons.

[quote
freedoms will be a anicient vestige of democracies(shi-t-ocracies) once technocracy becomes possible

Freedom is certainly hard on the mind as all that choices and free will is certainly a chore for those who would rather not think for themselves.

always the problem ... a historical pattern based cycle as a philosopher ..
bondage-faith-courage-liberty(freedom-hedonism/selfishness-cowardice and fianlly bondage again..... to end this cycle , technocracy is the solution and not democracy as democracy(sh-i-tocracy) helps freedoms and makes society weak ultimately causing disintegration...

I'm sorry but i'm going to be with the crowd who attempts to educate people into understanding how to preserve the freedoms their parents fought and died to achieve. I don't see why democracy must decline into fascism and if anything it's in my opinion because we have so little democracy in our democracies and the powers that be that are always conspiring to take away whatever liberty is achieved.

what do yoy mean... a strange comment ..elaborate

It means that i do not respect people who want to give centralized governments any more power than we absolutely must.

"Only a few prefer liberty, the majority seek nothing more than fair masters."
- Sallust

Are you really just one of the sheep who perpetually toys with notion of giving away their liberty, since it takes so much responsibility to maintain and exercise, in the hopes that it will not be abused?

Stellar

Originally posted by TheBandit795
Btw... There are numerous institutions who have claimed to have succesfully replicated the Pons & Fleischmann experiment.

More than 600 experiments ( by the year 2000 ) have replicated the orginal results and there is no doubt that cold fusion is what they said it was. Here are some finds of my own...

www.wired.com...

en.wikipedia.org...

www.csmonitor.com...

Here is a site with lots of info and links:
freeenergynews.com...

We really should not be surprised by cold fusion as we had quite specific hints almost half a century ago.

experts.about.com...

www.rexresearch.com...

www.lasarcyk.de...

www.cheniere.org...

Stellar

We do not need any of that as we already have a wide range of technologies that could have accomplished that goal back in 1970.

wide range??? unless you are talking about scalar energy , the claim is untrue...

and some say we already did most of the solar system )

is it that conspiracy nonsense again ???

Do you have any idea of the scale of such projects and how much centralization of power and resources would have to take place before we could attempt to 'confine' the sun's energy?

resources have always been centralized wheter under tsars,kings, socialists,rich bankers,plutocrats etc... centrralization is inevitable... as for confining the sun's energy , all we need is almazoid or bio-metal nano materials, which must have solid state electromagnetism as prerequisite ,

Why do we need a second sun? How much of life on Earth could deal with perpetual sunlight or nights lasting mere hours?

a red dwarf star like jupiter would make ganymede or europa (moons of jupiter )inhabitABLE

We might very well end up with 'global warming' if we added another sun to the mix

nonsense , the energy genrated by jupiter will not be enough to heat the atmosphere of the earth

I would love to see the physics involved in this theory...

clearly , the physics is of space and time , this process will possibly take place in the next 2-3 billion years , with increase iin the energy at jupiter core's and the increased compression of the outer solid metallic hydrogen core , could trigger its creation as a star .. though this is a mathematical model , its nature is disputed

Do you have a problem making your own decisions in life?

definitely a stupid question .... history has proven that authotritian leaderships last far longer than democracies

Technocracy is just fascism ( police state) that employs technology to exploit and control it's citizens

fascism involved rule of leaders , and technocracy most probably will not , it will involve the rule of the singularity....

a chore for those who would rather not think for themselves

better than being self centered parasite like how 'individualistic' humanity is ....

I don't see why democracy must decline into fascism and if anything it's in my opinion because we have so little democracy in our democracies and the powers that be that are always conspiring to take away whatever liberty is achieved.

which proves that democracy cannot survive

"Only a few prefer liberty, the majority seek nothing more than fair masters."
Sallust

what are you quoting , a roman plutocrat and historian , who helped caesar ruin and oppress the poor african tribes , and became governor of africa , a imperialist , woww...
i must say a 'great ' example a great example of freedom and liberty ,

Are you really just one of the sheep who perpetually toys with notion of giving away their liberty

certainly not one of those sheep , who loves frivolous freedoms like the rest or , and certianly one of those(like you) , who quotes a roman plutocrat and historian ,who mass murdered poor tribes ,in the name of freedom and liberty

Fusion technology , ESPECIALLY high spatial energy fusion, is a complete waste of time and general distraction to prevent us

proof ???? ..... please quote a major nuclear scientist in the field of nuclear fusion .....

from exploiting the breakthroughs we have had in the LERN

what breakthroughs???

Originally posted by vK_man
wide range??? unless you are talking about scalar energy , the claim is untrue...

Vacuum energy extraction ( or rather gating) or LERN can give us all the energy we would ever need without messing with planets or radioactive elements. To say nothing of the space we would save by not planting wind turbines like trees...

is it that conspiracy nonsense again ???

What conspiracy nonsense? Some people believe some Earth governments already have outposts on most major planets or at least one of their moons? It would obviously be a conspiracy of sorts but that hardly disqualifies someone holding that opinion!

resources have always been centralized wheter under tsars,kings, socialists,rich bankers,plutocrats etc...

And that was a GOOD thing in your opinion? The bloodshed and resulting violence was all just part of how things must go for civilizations to evolve? Bah...

centrralization is inevitable...

Only if you believe in the reality that a relatively small group of men ( well their mostly human even if you can't tell by their genocidal actions and plans) are attempting , and mostly succeeding, in bending the world to their will. Don't gtell me that centralization is 'inevitable' because it has been brought so often about by instigating wars and suffering around the world... The human being is s tribal entity and when centralization happens it's got little to do with what the common man wants.

as for confining the sun's energy , all we need is almazoid or bio-metal nano materials, which must have solid state electromagnetism as prerequisite ,

As far as i am concerned i am not the only dealing with far fetched notions. What i propose can be proved by good old studying of the historic record and you wont need to go dig for it on obscure Russian websites...

a red dwarf star like jupiter would make ganymede or europa (moons of jupiter )inhabitABLE

And what would it do to the rest of the solar system? We DON'T need more planets as this one can hold as many billions as we would like.

nonsense , the energy genrated by jupiter will not be enough to heat the atmosphere of the earth

I was mostly kidding thought and your probably right in saying that it's effects on the Earths atmosphere will be marginal at best and even if it turned out to affect it we have good means of cooling down the Earth if we so choose.

clearly , the physics is of space and time , this process will possibly take place in the next 2-3 billion years , with increase iin the energy at jupiter core's and the increased compression of the outer solid metallic hydrogen core , could trigger its creation as a star .. thoug this is a mathematical model , its nature is disputed

Well i am one of those that believe , given time, few things are impossible or even very unlikely so given your 2-3 billion year time frame I'm not going to take part in this particular speculative theory.

definitely a stupid question .... history has proven that authotritian leaderships last far longer than democracies

It's a valid question as those who want to give power to others generally do not like wielding it themselves for whatever reasons. Why should the length of the term in office mean anything if the people ruled by such powerful men suffer longer than the normal 4-5 year term in democracies? I like the Italian and European models where , coalition, governments can fall in mere weeks or days if they mess up and word gets out. I do NOT like two party states where one party gets four or five years to run a given country into the ground with voters having little or no recourse short of armed resistance...

fascism involved rule of leaders , and technocracy most probably will not , it will involve the rule of the singularity....

Singularity? The only thing worse than being ruled by men would be being ruled by 'AI's who were after all created by men.

better than being self centered parasite like how 'individualistic' humanity is

Humans are parasites only in terms of how they want to better their living conditions and generally enjoy themselves and if you have a problem with that we are not going to agree on much. If you have a problem with humanity itself i suggest you find a different planet or help solve the problem by ending your, apparent, 'worthless' 'parasitic' existence.

which proves that democracy cannot survive

It proves that democratic forces are up against forces they largely fail to comprehend and while that is the case there can never be true liberty or true democracy. As the world moves closer together it's getting ever more difficult for nations to act in truly independent ways and i foresee a whole lot of bloodshed and destruction ahead before these issues are resolved or made redundant by the massive global destruction resulting from our disagreements with those who would impose a global dictatorship on humanity.

what are you quoting , a roman plutocrat and historian , who helped caesar ruin and oppress the poor african tribes ,

As if that was not the Roman way? You got it backwards as Julius was actually doing much to fight the Roman aristocracy while giving land back to the poor and generally trying to change things for the betterment of most Romans. He aided Sallust in gaining public office and they were allied in their resistance of the Roman aristocracy.

and became governor of africa , a imperialist , woww...
i must say a 'great ' example

a great example of freedom and liberty

As if Athens ( the so called progenitor state for the modern west) did not oppress her neighbours? I am talking about liberty for the citizens of that given 'democracy' and such actions by Julius tells us he had the best in mind for Rome even if he did not always manage action. Murdering Africans by the millions have not apparently affected the American 'democracy' ( at least according to some ) so once again i fail to understand the connection you attempt to draw here. I quoted Sallust for no other reason than the fact that you seem to share his cynical view of man in general.

certainly not one of those sheep , who loves frivolous freedoms like the rest

Rather someone who loves frivolous freedoms than someone who would give them up to be ruled by someone who possible take away ALL freedoms.

or , and certianly one of those(like you) , who quotes a roman plutocrat and historian ,who mass murdered poor tribes ,in the name of freedom and liberty

Murdering Africans, as Sallust seemed to have had done, could not and did not rob Romans of their liberty so there is no connection. You are the one attempting to give away your freedom because you do not understand the basic tenants of liberty and democracy and or refuse to take up the assumed responsibilities

proof ???? ..... please quote a major nuclear scientist in the field of nuclear fusion .....

That is my opinion and considering the vast expenditure of resources with not a single watt generated i am still well within my rights to hold that opinion. We do NOT need more centralized power 'generation'!

what breakt
hroughs???

The one's that shows us that you low energy nuclear reactions are the way forward?

Why do you spend time reading about these fantastical 'stuff' when you could be studying these relatively well known areas?

Stellar

LERN can give us all the energy

what cold fusion ... ??, it is not even credibe in the eyes of major scientists

--
Cold fusion's commercial viability is unknown. The evidence for the excess heat effect is not accepted by a majority of scientists. If it exists, the effect would have to be theoretically understood before it could be scaled up for commercial use. Cells are too small by orders of magnitude to be commercially viable (with typically less than a gram of material).

Researchers have not yet invented methods to prevent cathodes from deteriorating, cracking, and melting during the experiments. Additionally, all cold fusion experiments have produced power in bursts lasting for days or weeks, not for months as would be needed for many commercial applications. Moreover, the aggregate ratio of power output to input for all cold fusion experiments reproduced in peer-reviewed scientific literature has been far too small to suggest any kind of commercial viability
-----
On May 1, the American Physical Society held a session on cold fusion that ran past midnight in which a string of failed experiments were reported. A second session started the next day with other negative reports, and 8 of the 9 leading speakers said that they ruled the Utah claim as dead. Dr. Steven E. Koonin of Caltech called the Utah report a result of "the incompetence and delusion of Pons and Fleischmann". The audience of scientists sat in stunned silence for a moment before bursting into applause. Dr. Douglas R. O. Morrison, a physicist representing CERN, called the entire episode an example of pathological science

And that was a GOOD thing in your opinion? The bloodshed and resulting violence was all just part of how things must go for civilizations to evolve? Bah

the crux is that decentralization cannot survive and centralization is more efficient... it is the blood shed that has led to scientific progress
examples:
1)GPS and remote sensing sats were orginally for military , but now civilian
2) space travel came into being because of development of ICBM's
3)peaceful nuclear reactors are based on the processes of nuclear fission in atom bombs
4) internet was orginally developed by military , now for civilian use
(though internet is disputed and believed to have been created by CERN)

5)supersonic jets were orginally military hardware, though later they led to developent of concorde and tu-144
6)tanks tracks were orginally used for military tanks , but today for snow mobiles

The human being is s tribal entity and when centralization happens it's got little to do with what the common man wants.

many tribal entities were communitarian in nature

Don't gtell me that centralization is 'inevitable' because it has been brought so often about by instigating wars and suffering around the world...

centralization is inevitable(in democracies) as it always prevails either due to external forces(war, invasion ,genocide) or internal forces(dictators , rich bankers , corporates,plutocrats , aristocrats etc...) , this is fundamental crux and factor of vico's theory of nations

What i propose can be proved by good old studying of the historic record

really ????

As far as i am concerned i am not the only dealing with far fetched notions
you wont need to go dig for it on obscure Russian websites...

far fetched ??? we are on the eve of a new technological revolution ... and i haven't dug russian websites , its western websiteds that i dug

Singularity? The only thing worse than being ruled by men would be being ruled by 'AI's who were after all created by men.

really but history proves that creation is more powerful than the human creator , whether in form of spears ,tanks , nukes etc..
advantages of singularities :

Technology reaches towards...

SINGULARITY

Singularity: The rise of super intelligent life, created through the improvement of human tools by the acceleration of technological progress reaching the point of infinity


Technologies Which May Take Us to Singularity:

Computer software endowed with heuristic algorithms
Artificial entities generated by evolution within computer systems
Integration of the human nervous system and computer hardware
Blending of humans and computers with user interfaces
Dynamically organizing computer networks
www.singularity.org...

see singularity can make mankind perfect

Humans are parasites only in terms of how they want to better their living conditions and generally enjoy themselves and if you have a problem with that we are not going to agree on much.

well i was talking more in relation modern sexually hedonistic human..
any ways i will correct it , europeans particularly british are more parasitic than rest ,as proven by their genocidal imperialism and starvation of poorer nations ....

If you have a problem with humanity itself i suggest you find a different planet or help solve the problem by ending your, apparent, 'worthless' 'parasitic' existence

thankfully i am not a parasite like the british bandit humanoid Feces, faeces, or fæces ... anyways the great west is like a parasite standing on the back of third world countries ,
so i advise you to not pass stupid comments like how your british parasitic forefathers ,white south african ,

As the world moves closer together it's getting ever more difficult for nations to act in truly independent ways and i foresee a whole lot of bloodshed and destruction ahead

,if Srila Prabhupad ji is right , it will lead to total destruction of west and its dengenerated culture for it has lost the protection of the almighty and the rise of a new world order based on unification of islam , hindusim , orthodox christianity in a manner similiar to bahai faith (religion) ,

As if that was not the Roman way? You got it backwards as Julius was actually doing much to fight the Roman aristocracy while giving land back to the poor and generally trying to change things for the betterment of most Romans. He aided Sallust in gaining public office and they were allied in their resistance of the Roman aristocracy

as if rome a great example of democracy, it only blurs and contradicts your stand on centralization and decentralization ....

while giving land back to the poor and generally trying to change things for the betterment of most Romans.

i do not care about romans who benefitted from imperialism and whose freedom was based on other's suffering ..

. I quoted Sallust for no other reason than the fact that you seem to share his cynical view of man in general.

my view matches with parasitic roman bandits like sallust ??? what nonsense..

That is my opinion and considering the vast expenditure of resources with not a single watt generated

soviet t-15 tokomak reactor was the first tokomak that generated energy in far more excess of what was needed to power the reactor , thanks to use of superconducting magnets to control the plasma .... and ITER is actually a larger version of T-15 ...though the walls of the reactor could not sustain the high temperatures on a continual basis , but the problem of sustaining high temperatures in t-15 could be solved by primitive level almazoid created by soviet chemical industrial grade diamond making machines or more advanced diamondiod nanorod(+) armour layers (almazoid )From 1996 to 1998 a series of upgrades were made in t-15, in order to conduct research preliminarily for the design work on ITER, which will also use superconducting magnets

-----(:
+note: Aggregated diamond nanorods, or ADNRs, are an allotrope of carbon believed to be the hardest and least compressible known material, as measured by its isothermal bulk modulus; aggregated diamond nanorods have a modulus of 491 gigapascals (GPa), while a conventional diamond has a modulus of 442 GPa. ADNRs are also 0.3% denser than regular diamond. The ADNR material is also harder than type IIa diamond and ultrahard fullerite.

A process to produce the substance was discovered by physicists in Germany, led by Natalia Dubrovinskaia, at the University of Bayreuth in 2005. ADNRs are made by compressing allotropic carbon fullerene molecules (generally 60 carbon atoms per molecule) to a pressure of 20 GPa, while at the same time heating to 2500 Kelvin, using a unique 5000 metric tonne multi anvil press. The resulting substance is a series of interconnected diamond nanorods, with diameters of between 5 and 20 nanometres and lengths of around 1 micrometre each.

A diamond anvil cell, located at the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility at Grenoble, France, was used to measure the compressibility of the material
--------):

on near future of tokomaks(based on soviet t-15 and capble of sustaining higher temperatures):
DEMO (DEMOnstration Power Plant) is a proposed nuclear fusion power plant that is intended to build upon the expected success of the ITER (originally an acronym for International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor) nuclear fusion power plant. Whereas ITER's goal is to produce 500 million watts of fusion power for at least 500 seconds, the goal of DEMO will be to produce at least four times that much fusion power on a continual basis. Moreover, while ITER's goal is to produce 10 times as much power as is required for ignition, DEMO's goal is to produce 25 times as much power. DEMO's 2 gigawatts will be on the scale of a modern electric power plant.

To achieve its goals, DEMO must have linear dimensions about 15% larger than ITER and a plasma density about 30% greater than ITER. As a prototype commercial fusion reactor DEMO could make fusion energy (which does not produce the global warming or pollution of fossil fuel, nor the long-lived radioactive waste of fission energy) available within 20 years. Subsequent commercial fusion reactors could be built for nearly a quarter of the cost of DEMO, if things go according to plan .

While fusion reactors like ITER and DEMO will not produce transuranic wastes, some of the components of the ITER and DEMO reactors will become radioactive due to neutrons impinging upon them. It is hoped that careful material choice will mean that the wastes produced in this way will have much shorter half lives than the waste from fission reactors, with wastes remaining harmful for less than one century. The process of manufacturing tritium currently produces long-lived waste, but both ITER and DEMO, it is hoped, will produce their own tritium, dispensing with the fission reactor currently used for this purpose.

The Tokamak-15 The Tokamak-15 is designed for investigation of plasma thermal insulation and plasma heating. The plasma dimensions are: major diameter - 4.9 m, minor diameter - 1.4 m. The unique feature of this installation is the use of the world largest superconducting niobium-tin toroidal magnet. The superconducting magnet creates a stationary toroidal magnetic field (maximum field on the plasma column axis - 3.6 T) in the volume of about 50 m3. This permits a current up to 1.8 MA to be created in the plasma. The plasma equilibrium in the discharge chamber is obtained by means of poloidal windings controlled by feed-back system. The plasma current duration, with a fully remagnetized phase, is about 15 sec. For the additional plasma heating a gyrotron complex, with total power introduced into the plasma up to 10 MW, and three injectors of neutral hydrogen atoms of total capacity 9 MW are provided. No one world installation now in operation has the possibility of conducting experiments on combined plasma component heating by these methods.
www.kiae.ru...

no tokomak reactor is as advanced as this one , possibly with a exception of EAST in hefei

[edit on 15-3-2007 by vK_man]

Originally posted by Scramjet76
We are all familiar with Nuclear power. Some countries (like Japan) get up to 60% of their power from Nuclear power plants. The upsides we are well aware of.... none of pollution (smog, soot, acid rain, etc) associated with coal and oil. The downsides are the hazardous radioactive waste (which has yet to be solved).

So while we can cut down on greenhouse gas emission through the use of Nuclear (fission), we have to risk the possibility of a meltdown & hazardous wastes.

For years I have heard that eventually Fusion Power will replace the current Fission process and that there will be no more radioactive waste and mankinds problems will be solved forever yada yada...

So where is it? What's taking so long to develop this great power source?

Well I'm sure you are all aware that stars are in fact giant fusion reactors. The reason that it is so difficult to reproduce what stars do is they have an enormous amount of gravity working for them. You see the minimum temp at which a fusion reaction will occur is something like 100 million deg C. That's hot! At these temperatures all gases ionize and become unstable, forming a plasma. In a star, it's own gravity serves to contain the plasma..... but what could they use here on earth?

One possibility is using a magnetic field to contain the plasma. Well actually containment isn't the only problem. Getting the plasma hot enough is also a problem, and so far they haven't achieved any sustaining reactions longer than one second.

Will we see them eventually master the fusion process in our lifetime? What does everyone think?

Getting the plasma hot enough is also a problem, and so far they haven't achieved any sustaining reactions longer than one second.

totally incorrect ...

On May 9, 2006 the Japan Atomic Energy Agency (JAEA) announced that the JT-60 had achieved a 28.6 second plasma duration time beating its own previous record of 16.5 seconds which it set in 2004. The JAEA used new parts in the JT-60, having improved its capability to hold the plasma in its powerful toroidal magnetic field. The main future objective of JT-60 is to realize high-beta steady-state operation in the use of reduced radio-activation ferritic steel in a collision-less regime
en.wikipedia.org...

also , t-15 in kurchatov ,thnaks to use of super conducting magnets has achieved high levels(full or overload) of power for 15 seconds , and at low level(3-5 MW, though it consumes more than it generates at this level or only makes break even plasma ) , for greater than 200 seconds, superconducting magnets are necessary to control the plasma
it was the first reactor to achieve excess fusion energy at full power for 15 secs thanks to the use of superconducting magnets :

The Tokamak-15 is designed for investigation of plasma thermal insulation and plasma heating. The plasma dimensions are: major diameter - 4.9 m, minor diameter - 1.4 m. The unique feature of this installation is the use of the world largest superconducting niobium-tin toroidal magnet. The superconducting magnet creates a stationary toroidal magnetic field (maximum field on the plasma column axis - 3.6 T) in the volume of about 50 m3. This permits a current up to 1.8 MA to be created in the plasma. The plasma equilibrium in the discharge chamber is obtained by means of poloidal windings controlled by feed-back system. The plasma current duration, with a fully remagnetized phase, is about 15 sec. For the additional plasma heating a gyrotron complex, with total power introduced into the plasma up to 10 MW, and three injectors of neutral hydrogen atoms of total capacity 9 MW are provided
www.kiae.ru...

The T-15 is a Russian (previously Soviet) nuclear fusion research reactor, based on the (Russian-invented) tokamak design. It was the first fusion reactor to use superconducting magnets to control the plasma.
en.wikipedia.org...

Tore Supra is a French tokamak that began operating after the discontinuation of TFR (Tokamak of Fontenay-aux-Roses) and of Petula (in Grenoble). Its name comes from the words torus and superconductor, as Tore Supra is the only one of the largest tokamaks to have superconducting toroidal magnets, allowing the creation of a strong permanent toroidal magnetic field.
---
It has a goal of creating long-duration plasma; it now holds the record of the longest plasma duration time for a tokamak (6 minutes 30 seconds and over 1000 MJ of energy injected and extracted in 2003), and it allows to test critical parts of equipment such as plasma facing wall components or superconducting magnets that will be used in its successor, ITER.
en.wikipedia.org...

plasma duration time means breakeven plasma , no excess or deficit

[edit on 16-3-2007 by vK_man]

I used to have great interest in this topic, but I'm sure the theories have changed considerably.

An interesting note that prevents certain technologies from developing: here in the very spot I type this, my town, we had a chance to get a super-collider for the very study of this. The local flavor of people shot it down within days. I, for one, was greatly embarrassed. I also supported the characterization of Hillbilly Hicks that become a favorite joke around here.

That is what stymies a lot of research in this area. People are gun shy, some within reason. The Nuclear Genie wasn't first released as a power source, but rather a weapon to end a World War. But, I feel this fear in irrational in too many, and way to unbounded.


[edit on 3/16/2007 by bothered]

quote:
Getting the plasma hot enough is also a problem, and so far they haven't achieved any sustaining reactions longer than one second.


totally incorrect ...



quote:
On May 9, 2006 the Japan Atomic Energy Agency (JAEA) announced that the JT-60 had achieved a 28.6 second plasma duration time beating its own previous record of 16.5 seconds which it set in 2004. The JAEA used new parts in the JT-60, having improved its capability to hold the plasma in its powerful toroidal magnetic field. The main future objective of JT-60 is to realize high-beta steady-state operation in the use of reduced radio-activation ferritic steel in a collision-less regime
en.wikipedia.org...

vK- thanks for contributing. I can't recall my source for my OP... I should have provided the link on the OP. Perhaps the fraction of a second referred to energy levels at the breakeven point. I think the other records are not necessarily consistently breakeven but just refer to containment time of the plasma at high temp.

Its my understanding that even ITER will not be producing an abundant net power (only heat which will not be used to generate power).

Originally posted by Scramjet76
Its my understanding that even ITER will not be producing an abundant net power (only heat which will not be used to generate power).

true, as iter is a experimentaL reactor

Perhaps the fraction of a second referred to energy levels at the breakeven point.

i do not think you reaD MY LINKS CARFULLY READ THIS PLEASE:

In operation since 1985, it currently holds the record for the highest value of the fusion triple product achieved (). 1.

JT-60 is a typical Tokamak with a D-shaped poloidal cross-section, similar to JET. Experimental results obtained by the reactor will no doubt be of great importance to the ITER experiment.

During Deuterium (D-D fuel) plasma experiments in 1998 plasma conditions were achieved which would, if the D-D fuel were replaced with a 50-50 mix of Deuterium and Tritium (D-T fuel), have exceeded break-even - the point where the power produced by the fusion reactions equals the power supplied to operate the machine. JT-60 does not have the facilities to handle Tritium; currently only the JET tokamak has such facilities. In fusion terminology JT60 achieved conditions which in D-T would have provided Q=1.25 where Q is the ratio of fusion power to input power. A self-sustaining nuclear fusion reaction would need a value of Q that is greater than 1.

On May 9, 2006 the Japan Atomic Energy Agency (JAEA) announced that the JT-60 had achieved a 28.6 second plasma duration time beating its own previous record of 16.5 seconds which it set in 2004. The JAEA used new parts in the JT-60, having improved its capability to hold the plasma in its powerful toroidal magnetic field. The main future objective of JT-60 is to realize high-beta steady-state operation in the use of reduced radio-activation ferritic steel in a collision-less regime
en.wikipedia.org...

SO, IN FUSION TERMINLOGY :
In fusion terminology JT60 achieved conditions which in D-T would have provided Q=1.25 where Q is the ratio of fusion power to input power. A self-sustaining nuclear fusion reaction would need a value of Q that is greater than 1.
------
at with Deuterium-deuterium ,it achieved breakeven point for 5-10 sec , but deuterium-tritium , it could achieve self sustaining power
-----
During Deuterium (D-D fuel) plasma experiments in 1998 plasma conditions were achieved which would, if the D-D fuel were replaced with a 50-50 mix of Deuterium and Tritium (D-T fuel), have exceeded break-even - the point where the power produced by the fusion reactions equals the power supplied to operate the machine.
--

I think the other records are not necessarily consistently breakeven but just refer to containment time of the plasma at high temp

these are aslso very important like that of first super conducting magnets in t-15 that improved efficicieny...

as the record of holding plasma at high tmeperature(though possibly for short interval breakeven and most peeriod energy loss ):

it now holds the record of the longest plasma duration time for a tokamak (6 minutes 30 seconds and over 1000 MJ of energy injected and extracted in 2003), and it allows to test critical parts of equipment such as plasma facing wall components or superconducting magnets that will be used in its successor, ITER.
en.wikipedia.org...

[edit on 23-3-2007 by vK_man]

Mod Edit: Quoting – Please Review This Link.
Mod Edit: New External Source Tags – Please Review This Link.


[edit on 23-3-2007 by The Vagabond]

Originally posted by vK_man
what cold fusion ... ??, it is not even credibe in the eyes of major scientists

'Cold Fusion' have been within the scientific literature since at least 1926 ( F. Paneth and K. Peters ) and then verifiable with the observations of Kervran published in the late 50's. Cold fusion is not 'new' in any sense of the word.

Kervran

www.lasarcyk.de...

experts.about.com...

www.rexresearch.com...

www.cheniere.org...

And then some more main stream discussions that basically tells us that still denying it speaks more to your bias and motives than to reality.

www.wired.com...

www.csmonitor.com...

www.loe.org...

epw.senate.gov...

And then a few hundred more for those who care to check

lenr-canr.org...

Cold fusion's commercial viability is unknown.

And how can it be known when the science establishment ( and their government sponsors) refuse to act on what has been repeatedly observed in more than a thousand experiments?

The evidence for the excess heat effect is not accepted by a majority of scientists.

And when has the majority view EVER turned out to be the right on in scientific terms? Is is not more true to say that whatever the majority believes at any given time about future breakthroughs invalidates the theory?

If it exists, the effect would have to be theoretically understood before it could be scaled up for commercial use. Cells are too small by orders of magnitude to be commercially viable (with typically less than a gram of material).

The effect is theoretically understood ( fusion at low energy happens in plants so god knows if we can't replicate it.... ) and there are no issues of merit that must still be resolved.

Researchers have not yet invented methods to prevent cathodes from deteriorating, cracking, and melting during the experiments.
Additionally, all cold fusion experiments have produced power in bursts lasting for days or weeks, not for months as would be needed for many commercial applications. Moreover, the aggregate ratio of power output to input for all cold fusion experiments reproduced in peer-reviewed scientific literature has been far too small to suggest any kind of commercial viability

Source? What power source has ever been 'viable' at the start before government funds started making it so? Where is the evidence of all these 'shortcomings' in anything but hot fusion mafias journals?

On May 1, the American Physical Society held a session on cold fusion that ran past midnight in which a string of failed experiments were reported. A second session started the next day with other negative reports, and 8 of the 9 leading speakers said that they ruled the Utah claim as dead. Dr. Steven E. Koonin of Caltech called the Utah report a result of "the incompetence and delusion of Pons and Fleischmann". The audience of scientists sat in stunned silence for a moment before bursting into applause. Dr. Douglas R. O. Morrison, a physicist representing CERN, called the entire episode an example of pathological science

The key word is 'ruled' and others that seems quite interesting ' incompetence and delusion' used as if these terms should ever be in scientific circles. Pons and Flesichmann were respected before but suddenly came under viscious attack for daring to talk about what they had again and again validated and laboratory conditions.

lenr-canr.org... is where you can find quite extensive lists of all those hundred of experiments that have verified low energy nuclear reactions.

You should be familiar with this considering you much you seem to know about far more exotic technologies.

the crux is that decentralization cannot survive and centralization is more efficient...

Centralization CAN be more efficient when those managing the system are interested in efficiency and make the right choices. Centralization can be a complete disaster when those in the center work only for themselves and while decentralization has it's flaws it takes natural disasters to result in the starvation we now see in a world with plenty of food for everyone. The reason i can never sanction centralization is because the inherent danger of abuse of power.

it is the blood shed that has led to scientific progress

The type of progress we make in wars are normally based on pre war knowledge that governments failed to act on because it simply did not suit them to have such technologies available to their citizens. War may result in knowledge being implemented but it has very little to do with discovery of such knowledge.

examples:
1)GPS and remote sensing sats were orginally for military , but now civilian
2) space travel came into being because of development of ICBM's
3)peaceful nuclear reactors are based on the processes of nuclear fission in atom bombs
4) internet was orginally developed by military , now for civilian use
(though internet is disputed and believed to have been created by CERN)

Which does not prove that it could not have been employed for civilian use from the start. These technologies were implemented with public funds and they should have been employed for the public benefit from the start. The reason they normally are first used in the military is due to the fact that the military gets heaps of resources to allocate as they please while scientist in the private sector has to beg for funds to attempt proving their theories.

5)supersonic jets were orginally military hardware, though later they led to developent of concorde and tu-144
6)tanks tracks were orginally used for military tanks , but today for snow mobiles

There are not good examples in my opinion but i still think that there is no reason why these things could not first have been developed for the private sector and for profit. I guess one can argue that the military industrial complex is for profit and that is the reason why we get these 'new' technologies from them but i would say that it would be better if the civilian sector could determine what implementations of these technologies they could have most benefited by.

many tribal entities were communitarian in nature

That is the point but you seem to think that 6 billion is as good a 'tribe' as the thirty member tribes of old. The benefit with the tribes of old was that the nominal 'leader' slept three tents to the left of yours and did not have a police force, sniper teams, bunkers or anything like that to protect himself from you when he did not act in your general best interest. There were abuse but what we see today never was possible back then. Centralization does nothing but remove the criminals from the proximity of their victims while supplying the criminals with ample means of protection against retribution.

centralization is inevitable(in democracies) as it always prevails either due to external forces(war, invasion ,genocide)

It is most certainly not the result of any democratic type system as people do not like war and do not start or join in them without serious propaganda and general brainwashing. The resources that is required for these things does not result from democratic forces...

or internal forces (dictators , rich bankers , corporates,plutocrats , aristocrats etc...) , this is fundamental crux and factor of vico's theory of nations

Rich bankers make their power felt on the global scale so it's not a question of internal democratic dynamics. Aristocrats are too a large extent connected by blood and once again that creates the framework for cooperation or fighting that does not result from democratic forces. Dictators suppress their own people and they are neither elected or kept in power by their own people too any large extent. There are few dictatorships that can function or has function without massive external aid and or massive volumes of violence and terror.

really ????

It surely depends on what parts of history you choose to read or avoid but i think what i have said is borne out in the historic record if one does the investigations on your own time and do not use standard text books...

far fetched ??? we are on the eve of a new technological revolution ... and i haven't dug russian websites , its western websiteds that i dug

I regret saying what i did as i found the sources you have supplied ( after my response) to be quite interesting. That being said the technologies i am considering is MUCH older and have been far more extensively studied and documented by many more people and institutions. I was just trying to get the message across that your solutions to the energy problems are far more exotic than mine and might require still great deals of research while vacuum energy extraction and the like have been done for a hundred years.

really but history proves that creation is more powerful than the human creator , whether in form of spears ,tanks , nukes etc..
advantages of singularities :

In my opinion history proves that those who wield the weapons are as, or more, important to the proper employment of if as any inherent quality or power the designers or engineers could bestow on it.

I think it's well summed up by that training officer in Starship troopers who pins the recruits hand to wall , with a knife, asking him how he will fire the weapon.

SINGULARITY
Singularity: The rise of super intelligent life, created through the improvement of human tools by the acceleration of technological progress reaching the point of infinity
Technologies Which May Take Us to Singularity:
ee singularity can make mankind perfect

A central organization unit/plan/program is in my opinion the worse possible idea for human liberty and i will do my best to keep telling people why it's a horrible idea that will lead to global dictatorship without freedoms for anyone.

well i was talking more in relation modern sexually hedonistic human..

Well i think you are wrong and do not seem to value either the freedom or the inherent responsibilities that people should accept as price for their liberty. You are certainly not alone in wanting others to make important choices for you ( centuries of propaganda, murder, lies and subversion of the truth will do that) but i can but point out what history tells us happens to such people and such societies. There is no such thing as benign unchallenged rule.

I think the myth of virginal 'cave women' and medieval chastity should be confined to some kind of grave considering the amount of truth involved. A few centuries of European church indoctrination can apparently change history...

any ways i will correct it , europeans particularly british are more parasitic than rest ,as proven by their genocidal imperialism and starvation of poorer nations ....

Their RULERS are and considering the means they had they could drag their people into aiding them in these crimes. I simply do not think that the violent historic record proves as much about human nature as some would have you believe. Unless those history writers are willing to tell us how unwilling the vast majority are/were they have their own agenda's and should be exposed.

thankfully i am not a parasite like the british bandit humanoid Feces, faeces, or fæces ...

Their no worse than the rest of us even if their kings and queens certainly deserve that and worse...

anyways the great west is like a parasite standing on the back of third world countries ,

Once again that is not in doubt but i would argue as to what this means. Do you think most in the west understand this and if so why does our governments spend such vast amount of energy on lying to their citizens and rewriting the text books? Why do the advertising industry have to constantly bombard us with their propaganda if we were so easily fooled? I in fact have quite a high opinion of humanity and i believe that given a fair chance to run our world we would do far better than we currently are.

so i advise you to not pass stupid comments like how your british parasitic forefathers ,white south african ,

They were not really parasitic as these groups in many instances simpled attempted to exterminate whoever happened to be there before them. The original Dutch interacted in a quite civilized manner ( certainly so for the times ) with the locals and it took some time for their corporate heads to lose control of the situation. Considering the types that normally 'joined' the fleets and exploration missions it's not surprising to see the results given a understanding of the motives of those who sent them.

,if Srila Prabhupad ji is right , it will lead to total destruction of west and its dengenerated culture

Who is he and what insight does he offer into the reasons for the downfall of the west? What is so degenerate about the human aspiration for freedom from tyranny and is the actions of those who seek to destroy such freedoms , or at least warp the expression of it by employing the full range of their powers, not the real force behind that observed 'degenerate' behaviour?

for it has lost the protection of the almighty and the rise of a new world order based on unification of islam , hindusim , orthodox christianity in a manner similiar to bahai faith (religion) ,

Which Almighty's protection did they lose as i know they are kind of divided on that issue?

as if rome a great example of democracy, it only blurs and contradicts your stand on centralization and decentralization ....

I am saying that the middle to late republic had plenty of 'democracy' considering the devils of the time and that the democratic forces within the Roman society had little if any relevance on how they treated non Romans. The US is after all a democracy and while it's actions have led to the deaths of several ( if not tens) millions around the world Americans retained much of their democratic forms if not all the 'results'. I think the historic record speaks volumes as to how much democracy can be attained in internal politics without effectively changing foreign policy which in so many instances have been hijacked by other forces.

i do not care about romans who benefitted from imperialism and whose freedom was based on other's suffering ..

Romans benefited no more from imperialism than does Americans today and i can assure you that imperialism is not meant to benefit the people of any particular country. If it does happen it's largely accidental or coincidental and certainly not the primary aim.

my view matches with parasitic roman bandits like sallust ??? what nonsense..

I will have you know he reformed later in life.

What you are proposing under this 'singularity' rule will probably lead to far worse than the Romans could dream up at the time.

soviet t-15 tokomak reactor was the first tokomak that generated energy in far more excess of what was needed to power the reactor , thanks to use of superconducting magnets to control the plasma .... and ITER is actually a larger version of T-15 ...though the walls of the reactor could not sustain the high temperatures on a continual basis , but the problem of sustaining high temperatures in t-15 could be solved by primitive level almazoid created by soviet chemical industrial grade diamond making machines or more advanced diamondiod nanorod(+) armour layers (almazoid )From 1996 to 1998 a series of upgrades were made in t-15, in order to conduct research preliminarily for the design work on ITER, which will also use superconducting magnets
no tokomak reactor is as advanced as this one , possibly with a exception of EAST in hefei

While the sources are good i did state that they have not contributed a single watt for public consumption. As far as i can tell my earlier claim stands and while i am sure these technologies could lead to drastic and massive energy 'creation' ( yes, yes i know ) i know of better and more efficient methods that have been in use for a century or more.

I should not have questioned the validity of your claims in the regard and for that i apologise. Having said that we have large lists of patents proving that we do not need fusion of any type to create a paradise planet with energy in any in almost any amount for everyone.

Stellar

published in the late 50's. Cold fusion is not 'new' in any sense of the word.

so has fisson and hot fusion...

Cold fusion is not 'new' in any sense of the word.

cold fusion was verified first in 1989 ,thogh believed to be discovered long before, though other cold fuision experiments have not been able to do what was claimed to be done done in `1989 .....
and Corentin Louis Kervran was more related to biological transmutation and not a specialist on fusion sciences or baryogenesis like sakharov ,

And then some more main stream discussions that basically tells us that still denying it speaks more to your bias and motives than to reality

my bias ???? rahter your rhetoric and bias against centralizred power gen..
some o your

And then a few hundred more for those who care to check

and those did not generate any excess...
rather one of your own sources , seems to be showing a differnet story
read:

Unlike some previous claims of room-temperature fusion, this one makes intuitive sense: its just another way to get atoms close enough together for the strong force to take over and do the rest. Once the reaction got going, the scientists observed not only the production of helium nuclei, but other tell-tale signs of fusion such as free neutrons and high energy radiation.

This experiment has been repeated successfully and other scientists have reviewed the results: it looks like the real thing this time.

For the time being, don't expect fusion to become a readily available energy option. The current cold fusion apparatus still takes much more energy to start up than you get back out, and it may never end up breaking even. In the mean time, the crystal-fusion device might be used as a compact source of neutrons and X-rays, something that could turn out to be useful making small scanning machines. But it really may not be long until we have the first nuclear fusion-powered devices in common use.

So cold fusion is back, perhaps to stay. After many fits and starts, its finally time for everyday fusion to come in out of the cold.
www.csmonitor.com...

so much for the your idea that cold fusion is easily viable...

The effect is theoretically understood ( fusion at low energy happens in plants so god knows if we can't replicate it.... ) and there are no issues of merit that must still be resolved.

very funny , go ask the scientists themselves ,
and one of reasons IS weight to power efficency ratrio (HOT FUISON IS PREFERRED FOR THIS)... SCIENTISTS WILL CONSTRUCT 150 TON TOKOMAK COMMERICAIL REACTOR OF 200 MW POWER IN FUTURE(DEMO)
----
he goal of DEMO will be to produce at least four times that much fusion power on a continual basis. Moreover, while ITER's goal is to produce 10 times as much power as is required for ignition, DEMO's goal is to produce 25 times as much power. DEMO's 2 gigawatts will be on the scale of a modern electric power plant.

To achieve its goals, DEMO must have linear dimensions about 15% larger than ITER and a plasma density about 30% greater than ITER. As a prototype commercial fusion reactor DEMO could make fusion energy (which does not produce the global warming or pollution of fossil fuel, nor the long-lived radioactive waste of fission energy) available within 20 years. Subsequent commercial fusion reactors could be built for nearly a quarter of the cost of DEMO, if things go according to plan .
----

And how can it be known when the science establishment ( and their government sponsors) refuse to act on what has been repeatedly observed in more than a thousand experiments?

what you refer to is low energy reACTION (and those were not denied ) but the cold fuison was denied and the name has gained noteriety in scientific circles after the 1989 experiment (full of controversy) ,

is where you can find quite extensive lists of all those hundred of experiments that have verified low energy nuclear reactions.

and most of all , results have not breakeven with as exception of gas loading method(conducted by mitsubhishi in japan) , where excess heat
was generated for some hours and the rods have
ave tendency to breAK, as stated before
---
Researchers have not yet invented methods to prevent cathodes from deteriorating, cracking, and melting during the experiments.
----

You should be familiar with this considering you much you seem to know about far more exotic technologies.

i am , but looking at the number of controversies and failed experiemts or successful experiments , i avoid it ...

The reason i can never sanction centralization is because the inherent danger of abuse of power.

and this is why i believe AI is the best solution or a global social welfare govt is better ....

Centralization CAN be more efficient when those managing the system are interested in efficiency and make the right choices. Centralization can be a complete disaster when those in the center work only for themselves

true...

while decentralization has it's flaws it takes natural disasters to result in the starvation we now see in a world with plenty of food for everyone

incorrect
india is decentraliazted , and yet 1.7 MILLION CHILDREN DIE OF STARVATION AND DISEASE HERE EVERY YEAR.... AND THIS BECOMES FROM THE WHO ORGANZTION
HEALTHCARE ... ZERO
WELFARE...ZERO

The type of progress we make in wars are normally based on pre war knowledge that governments failed to act on because it simply did not suit them to have such technologies available to their citizens. War may result in knowledge being implemented but it has very little to do with discovery of such knowledge.

waRS have a lot to with invention or refinement of discoveries ....
radiolocation was refined in ww2 ....
fission was discvered in lab in 1938 and
was refined quickly into atom bomb in 1945....

War may result in knowledge being implemented but it has very little to do with discovery of such knowledge.

war leads to heavy refinement and several inventions on basis of the discovery , example : fission was dscovered in 1938 , but atom bomb invented 1945

Which does not prove that it could not have been employed for civilian use from the start. These technologies were implemented with public funds and they should have been employed for the public benefit from the start.

the problem with private sector is that its not willing to toy with extreme risk many a times...

There are not good examples in my opinion but i still think that there is no reason why these things could not first have been developed for the private sector and for pr

the reason is as stated above

It is most certainly not the result of any democratic type system as people do not like war and do not start or join in them without serious propaganda and general brainwashing. The resources that is required for these things does not result from democratic forces

the result is from the desire for power and corruption resulting in ultimate centraliztion:

Human societies pass through successive stages of birth, growth, development, decay and death. First there is the purely bestial condition, from which emerges what Vico called, "the age of the gods." Here the basic social unit is the patriarchal family. In the age of the gods, man's brutal or bestial instincts are curbed by their fear of supernatural powers. This, of course, signifies a mythopoeic world view -- myth-making -- as well as the beginning of religion.

The next stage is marked by the "age of heroes." This stage appears as a consequence of alliances formed between the fathers of families to meet the challenges from both within and outside the family. Oligarchies are established through these alliances and society is divided between patrician rulers and plebeian slaves. Laws are necessarily cruel and unjust and the poetry of the age is marked by ferocious and predatory ideals of behavior. This stage is followed by the "age of men," which is engendered not by reverence for human reason and natural law but by class conflict. The plebeians demand and gradually achieve equal rights and a legal system that respects its interests. However, the weakness of traditional ties and the questioning of accepted customs and values that result from the establishment of free democratic republics leads inevitably to corruption and dissolution. The end of the cycle comes either through conquest from without or through inner disintegration or both. This is followed by a reversion to barbarism and the cycle is then repeated.
www.historyguide.org...

and after reversion to barbarism , centraliztion , again happens , if you are careful , you will realise that illuminati is plannig to do in this stage(collapse of democracies).. particularly in europe and USA
www.16108.com...
don't take the predictions into consideration ,take tthe historical analysis into consideration of the source above ...

It surely depends on what parts of history you choose to read or avoid but i think what i have said is borne out in the historic record if one does the investigations on your own time and do not use standard text books...

so you were ignorant about vico's theiory

I was just trying to get the message across that your solutions to the energy problems are far more exotic than mine and might require still great deals of research while vacuum energy extraction and the like have been done for a hundred years.

vacuum energy , i do not deny ... as there are many such inventions been documented in reputed newspapers , and most mainstream scientists remain mum as they cannot disprove it , though many a time such devices were destroyed by goons or not given patents...
------
also some russian scientists believe that tokomak 's development has been subverted and believe , it could have easily been created in 80's as USSR had excellent industrial diamond creation tech....

A central organization unit/plan/program is in my opinion the worse possible idea for human liberty and i will do my best to keep telling people why it's a horrible idea that will lead to global dictatorship without freedoms for anyone

go tell the world , but time never stops , centraliztion is inevitable..
'

I think the myth of virginal 'cave women' and medieval chastity should be confined to some kind of grave considering the amount of truth involved. A few centuries of European church indoctrination can apparently change history

and some years of influence of forces like illuminati and mainstream newspaper nonsense can ruin everything , looking at evidence or truth , seems as methods to destroy the foundations of society and this was goal of forces like illuminati.. ,
it is the influence of conditoning that influences us ... for this please to refer to pavlov's theory of classicial conditioning ..
siome examples of dispute of bio sciences on sexuakl behavour

Men are by nature polygamous, women monogamous. Men want a harem, women a husband. Men are by nature protective of their exclusive sexual possession of women, or of the reputation that establishes them in the eyes of other men as formidable protectors of their women-folk, in other words of their honor; women, by contrast, are protective of the attributes, including the reputation for fidelity, that make them desirable mothers of children
www.city-journal.org...

is also found in both monogamous and ... There is, however, evidence that human nature tends towards monogamy, although
edoras.duhs.duke.edu...

a lot of dispute over evolution and monogamy is there in biological sciences...






[edit on 16-5-2007 by vK_man]

[edit on 16-5-2007 by vK_man]

We will not get anywhere, so long as we continue to use the Tocamak design and principles..

Others have sucessfully created minifusion reactors using other principles and designs and reached far greater success, but not got any attention from the mainstream science community..

Oh geez, i wonder why...could it possibly be due to the fact that the mainstream science establishment doesn't have the public interest/betterment of humanity as its primary goal?

Text

Once again that is not in doubt but i would argue as to what this means. Do you think most in the west understand this and if so why does our governments spend such vast amount of energy on lying to their citizens and rewriting the text books? Why do the advertising industry have to constantly bombard us with their propaganda if we were so easily fooled? I in fact have quite a high opinion of humanity and i believe that given a fair chance to run our world we would do far better than we currently are.

so you refuse to acknowledge how IMF and the west use the loan system to loot and ruin third world countries and then trhis leads to starvation and civil war in those nations .... and WTO uses the economic levers to RUIN THE POOR OF OTHER NATIONS , OR SHOULD I SAY ECONOMIC IMPERIALISM....

How does the WTO get away with this? It claims to be a "democratic" organisation, where all the 146 nations have one vote. In theory, the poor countries could outvote the rich on the floor of the WTO. (This is quite unlike the other economic bodies, the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, where nations are perceived as shareholders – so imperialist countries can always win, since they can afford more shares).

So to get round that they don’t have votes! The right wing economist Bergston explains, the WTO "does not work by voting. It works by consensus arrangement which, to tell the truth, is managed by four - the Quads. The US, Japan, the European Union and Canada. Those countries have to agree if any major steps are going to be made, that is true. But no votes."
www.marxist.com...

Whereas farmers in less developed countries are, if not in a majority, still a sizeable minority of the population, in the West they are statistically insignificant. Workers in British agriculture make up 1 per cent of the population. While "third world" farmers are super-exploited, those in advanced capitalist countries are cosseted.
For instance, the USA pays out $4 billion in subsidies to 25,000 cotton farmers. Work it out for yourself. We are not talking about sharecroppers in dungarees and straw hats wielding hoes. These people are getting $160,000 a head from the American government. $4 billion is actually more than the entire crop is worth! As a result – because nobody actually wants to buy this cotton – it is sold at a loss ("dumped") on the world market. Peasants in countries such as Mali are literally driven to starvation by US cotton displacing what ought to be their export crop

But let’s go back to Europe. The European Union subsidises sugar beet producers to the tune of £1 billion. "Our boys" manage to produce the goods at £430 per tonne, while cane sugar can be bought in the underdeveloped countries for £175. Nothing for it but to slap a tariff of 140 % on imported sugar to enable the likes of the beet barons in East Anglia to survive. This is a crop that would not be cultivated in Britain if there were a genuine free world market! Again the surplus is dumped on the world market, impoverishing the poor farmers of the underdeveloped countries.The European Union negotiates as a bloc. But don’t you feel insulted when negotiator Pascal Lamy assures you he is putting forward "our" interests in keeping "third world" farm products out of Europe? "We" have never been asked, and the Common Agricultural Policy is costing us plenty. In reality the EU trade mission has been captured by the interests of a handful of well-to-do farmers from France and Ireland.
Overall the USA and the EU featherbed rich farmers at home with $400 billion per annum. Most of this money destroys the livelihoods of the wretched of the earth. This costs us eight times as much as the AID(financial) we fund them with.
www.marxist.com...

west plays a game ruins third countires and then comes to fund them in the name of 'AID' in the form of loans , with interest

---
An . Pascal Lamy, negotiator for the European Union, pressed for concessions on the free movement of capital – even though the EU has failed to deliver on its promises to withdraw subsidies to European farmers
www.marxist.com...

Half the world’s people live on $2 a day or less. By coincidence, $2 is the amount in subsidy each cow in the EU gets in subsidy from the Common Agricultural Policy. European cows probably regard themselves as hard done by compared with their Japanese cousins. Japanese cattle are subsidised by $7 each and can expect regular rations of beer (and I did not make that last bit up).
www.marxist.com...

you say that west values humanity .... this must be biggest joke i ever read , because , west values its cows more 2$ a day for european cow and beer and 7$ for japanese cow ....
read more:
---
This is an old story. In a recent book, Behind the scenes at the WTO, sources who prefer to remain anonymous point the finger, "There were some nasty personal attacks and outrageous threats made to countries in Doha." And, "It was also made emphatically clear that any US support in other areas of mutual interest will be subject to our support in Geneva."
Though small countries may feel themselves bound by WTO decisions, America is not. A member of the Clinton administration declared, "We do not believe anything the WTO says or does can force the US to change its laws."
---

Who is he and what insight does he offer into the reasons for the downfall of the west?

the imperialism -economic,social,cultural etc.... and sexual hedonism
and selfish lives of westerners and primarily divination ....

I should not have questioned the validity of your claims in the regard and for that i apologise. Having said that we have large lists of patents proving that we do not need fusion of any type to create a paradise planet with energy in any in almost any amount for everyone

i agree with free vacuum energy devices , the planet could have been much better


[edit on 16-5-2007 by vK_man]

reply to post by Scramjet76


The current set of fusion reactors (JET, etc..) have only achieved a Q value (ratio of input power to output) of ~ 0.7, which is where ITER comes into play. The larger cavity volume and other improvements should increase the Q to near ~1.

That's great and everything, but it apparently is only designed to maintain this state for ~400 seconds. Considering the time to build this experimental fusion plant, and then the demonstration plant after that (assuming all goes well), it will probably take another 50-70 years before you see anything.

The problem is material degradation, they just don't have the right materials for this type of reactor and until they get that right the fusion plant will always look better on paper.

also, as the poster above mentioned, the tokamak concept is flawed... funding should go into better designs such as a spherical fusion reactor or this guy:

'Should Google go Nuclear?', it's a long video, but the speaker has the real deal in terms of fusion and he discusses the flaws of the tokamak design...

Should Google go Nuclear?



[edit on 103131p://535317 by porky1981]

reply to post by porky1981

'Should Google go Nuclear?', it's a long video, but the speaker has the real deal in terms of fusion and he discusses the flaws of the tokamak design...

A very good video thanks for posting porky. I thought I'd add a few notes I took..


Current Fusion Approaches Are:
- Highly Radioactive
- Very Expensive; $B vs. $M
- No End In Sight
- Giant Machines
- No Predictability (All Empirical)

Billions Of Fusion Reactors Exist In Nature- The Stars And The Sun
Only One Other Force Is Known Like Gravity:
This Is The Electric Field Force, Or Coulomb Force, Between Electrically-Charged Particles. Fusion Fuel Plasmas Could Be Held Together Efficiently By Electric Forces And Electric Fields. This Is Called "Electric Fusion."

Should know whether our current approach is feasible by 2030. That's what scientists are saying, and they've been more than consistent since the 70's that it would be viable by 2035. The last reactor which got about a second of sustained fusion did far better than it was expected to do. It's coming along, and scientists are confident to a fair degree that it will work from what I gather.