reply to post by TeslaandLyne
See right there is incorrect.
The decay is random and most likely dependent on bombardment by high speed
particles.
Spontaneous means at least two things in the way it was used, there. First - it means without a known trigger mechanism. Second, it means in an
unpredictable manner. The first definition, in many ways, foreshadows the second - since an event without a known cause is impossible to predict.
As for bombardment of high speed particles - this also doesn't make much sense. There are radioactive isotopes of almost every element - with some
elements being radioactive by definition. Further, there are multiple types of radioactivity that are classified according to their emission source
(neutron emission defines gamma radiation, as x-ray radiation is tied to electron activity and can occupy the same frequencies of gamma radiation).
Bombardment of high speed particles does not even begin to account for this type of behavior, as the simple addition/subtraction of a few neutrons
from a nucleus will radically change the decay rates and forms. This would seem to suggest that most of the factors involved in radioactivity are
intrinsic to the atom as opposed to extrinsic.
I don't know what else to call Relativists science funded by the rich as you might
try reading up on the subject with authors like William Lyne.
Once again - modern nuclear physics brought us nuclear fission power plants, fission/fusion weapons, atomic clocks, and a host of lesser-known (but
certainly more important in terms of verification of the model) experiments and discoveries.
If you want to propose an entirely different model to compete with the standard model, you can't simply rely on the anti-conformist mantra to carry
your argument.
From what I can find Tesla was all about high voltage and frequencies that became
a one way circuit he demonstrated in 1891 as an Ampere's Law with part of the
circuit in the air. Totally astounded Tesla as he writes in 1891 and we should suspect
he did this and more even before that date of international lectures.
This sounds like what he would be describing is electrostatic potential being built up between the air and ground. Since ionized air tends to rise
and disperse, one could imagine a 'layer' of ionized air above non-ionized air laying close to the ground (a sort of insulator). Any path to ground
would then 'tap' the ionized blanket for power.
This, however, would only work in an enclosed space, and would likely not work so well in the open environment.
Or he is describing something completely different, yet never reproduced by high-voltage enthusiasts (who almost all replicate a number of Tesla's
discoveries and experiments).
Compared to coal the radioactive pile provides instant thermal energy and
the radioactivity will not go away thus providing thermal energy for a long time.
Radioactivity does 'go away.' Generally, though, as a power source, it is very weak - unless you are talking about a material that can be warm/hot
while emitting/absorbing neutrons. Systems like that are used in a number of deep-space probes that cannot rely upon photovoltaic cells. They
aren't powered by nuclear reactors - just nuclear decay.
Even then - the warmth will eventually die out. It, in no way, violates current entropic laws/understandings. It would be fair to state that nuclear
fission is not fully exploited, as most nuclear waste from commercial reactors is still useable in a number of different nuclear power systems.
