Liaring fusion energy pork barrel// LLNL director Dr. Kim Budil and Energy secretary Jennifer Granholm// their budget must be up and so they liar about progress.

Science is made a 1,000 times tougher to educate people on the truth, once they have been brainwashed and memorized the brainwash over a lifetime. In that sense, I have one of the most difficult assignments in my life of getting physicists and the physics community onto the truth of fusion. I did write a book based on conversation with Rick Spielman, a physicist in 1997.

my 17th published book
Fusion Barrier Principle // Energy series, book 1
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)

Preface: I discovered the Fusion Barrier Principle in August of 1997 while discussing fusion in sci.physics. It is a principle of huge importance for it simply means there will never exist a Fusion Power Station, never, in the entire universe, for it costs more energy input than it ever gives in output.
That is the meaning of FBP. It is very easy to prove, in that the forces of Electromagnetism, the Ampere law that controls electricity is a cylinder and the Faraday law that produces electricity is a sphere. And in math it is easy to prove that the sphere nested inside a cylinder is only 2/3 the volume of the cylinder. That it takes 1/3 more energy to control fusion and thus we lose 1/3 energy just to extract 2/3 energy. By the time I wrote this principle, the world had already proven the 2/3 energy barrier in experiments with the tokamak JET, and with the Nagamine cold fusion experiments. And since the 1997 discovery of FBP, not a single experiment has exceeded 2/3 breakeven. So what I request of the world science community is stop funding Fusion Research and put that moneys into making Geothermal Power Stations, such as what Iceland is now doing of volcano electricity geothermal. Stop wasting time and money on welfare science troughs that fusion research has become. Spend those billions of dollars in building Geothermal Electric Power Stations.
Length: 293 pages

Product details
File Size: 1382 KB
Print Length: 293 pages
Publication Date: March 15, 2019
Sold by: Amazon.com Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07PNW3T9Q
Text-to-Speech: Enabled 
X-Ray: 
Not Enabled 
Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled 
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #131,968 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#20 in Electricity Principles
#13 in Physics of Energy
#11 in Electromagnetism (Kindle Store)



My task of reteaching people is made that 1,000 times more difficult because many people are paid hefty salaries for keeping the fake science of fusion going.

Many people in science and physics have few logical marbles to warrant them in physics. Since 1950, the call and clamor was to harness fusion in a machine to make electricity. Here it is almost 75 years later and almost no progress at all. And this report as of December 2022 is not a report of progress but a plea to spend and throw away billions of more dollars, when what that money should go for is Geothermal Energy. There is no mystery in geothermal, just a lack of building the power plants.

Miles O'brien on PBS Newshour covered this latest report tonight 13Dec2022 by saying-- " We need 10 of these implosions per second, not 1 per second, to achieve engineering success"

In other words, like Rick Spielman back in 1997, saying Laser fusion achieved 1,000th of 1 percent fusion breakeven.

By 1997, the world's best fusion machine was not a Tokamak but Nagamine's cold fusion which was 66.66% breakeven. Then second best was JET with 64% breakeven. Laser fusion had not even surpassed 1% breakeven. And this report of December 2022, is more of propaganda, switching to the concept of "Ignition" and veering away from the concept of breakeven. If Budil and Granholm had been required to report only on the concept of "Breakeven" and not even mention "ignition" then we would see this report as Nagamine cold fusion 66.66% breakeven, JET as 64% breakeven and LLNL of 2022 as less than 1% breakeven.

The 1% breakeven is what Miles O'brien was saying when he said 10 times a second of those pellets to achieve engineering breakeven.

So, well, if we ask Budil and Granholm why physicists cannot set off tiny fusion bombs inside a machine to make electricity, they probably do not know the answer-- the tinest bomb destroys the machine. So it is impossible. But now, ask Budil and Granholm whether the O'brien 10 times a second, is that not just the very same ***impossibility*** why we can never have electricity from fusion??? Is not that fusion bombs destroy the machine while 10 times per second the Laser machine cannot exist. You see fusion bomb explosions is the flip side of 10 laser implosions per second.

But try teaching that to a physics community that was brainwashed for 75 years and now receive fat salary paychecks to keep on wasting time and money.

In my book I argue that CONTROLLING FUSION requires the Ampere law as a machine and it is a cylinder in geometry. While making fusion requires the Coulomb law-- not that nuclei fuse, no, but that the proton toruses of two hydrogen atoms join together to make a helium larger proton torus. The 840 windings of one proton with 840 windings of another proton form a torus of 1680 windings with 2 muons inside. And so fusion requires the energy of a cylinder to control yet the Coulomb force output is geometrically a sphere. We know from math, pure math that the sphere inside a cylinder is 2/3 the volume of the cylinder. The Ampere law needs 1/3 more energy than does the total content of the Coulomb law. This is why Nagamine reaches 2/3 breakeven and JET almost reaches 2/3 breakeven, because to control Fusion is Ampere law which needs 1/3 more in energy than what the Coulomb law can deliver.

What LLNL of Budil and Granholm should have reported today is that we have proof that Laser fusion will never deliver energineering breakeven simply from the fact that 10 of those pellets per second have to be ignited.
And that is simply impossible, and the flip side, the smallest fusion bombs destroy whatever container is built to hold the bombs and siphon off electricity. And I bet if anyone is crazy enough to try a fusion bomb machine, the first bomb, no matter how small will destroy the machine, just as Laser fusion will not destroy the container the pellet is in, but impossible to put 10 pellets per second in the container.

Miles O'Brien also reported that the LLNL experiment used 192 lasers. I am thinking there is liaring on the part of LLNL here also, for I find it hard to believe 2 megajoules is all the input energy in this experiment. Are they only counting the energy of a light beam, and not the massive amount of energy required to make 192 laser beams. So it looks to me this report is massive subterfuge.

Liaring fusion energy pork barrel// LLNL director Dr. Kim Budil and Energy secretary Jennifer Granholm// their budget must be up and so they liar about progress.

Liaring fusion energy pork barrel// LLNL director Dr. Kim Budil // their budget must be up and so they liar about progress.

What is different this time??? You have to read 4 pages of junk on BBC -- of stuff you already know, to find a one sentence that is different this time.

A tiny capsule shows signs of fusion, yet the amount of energy spent in the machine for the lasers is 10^40 more energy than the pitiful 10^1 energy created.

These scientists of fusion have no problem in liaring about progress, but a huge problem of showing that it is impossible to scale the lasers up from a tiny capsule to something actually engineered for practical use.

They liared on fusion breakeven. It is not breakeven if the machines involved spent 10^40 energy to create 10 in energy.

These fusion bureacrats keep liaring about what it means to be "breakeven" but they are good at keep the pork money troughs open.

AP, Sun and stars shine not from fusion but from Faraday law. See any of my Teaching True Physics books
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Dec 13, 2022, 6:38:36 PM (6 hours ago)



to
Sorry, the King of Science needs to provide more leadership here. The USA and NATO nations need to spend their energy money on Geothermal electricity, all of the money and zero money for these con artist fusion energy directed by deluded fools of physic.

Fusion Energy has not achieved any milestones since Rick Spielman posted in sci.physics of 1997. The only thing different is that these dishonest scientists keep changing the definition of "fusion breakeven". As Rick said in 1997, Laser fusion will not exceed 4% breakeven, yet this modern day con-artist physicists try to make believe they achieved 100% breakeven.

quoting from my 17th published science book ---
Fusion Barrier Principle // Energy series, book 1
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)

Rick Spielman (rbsp...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
> The most optimist number for NIF would be 4% of breakeven.

(6) costs: 1.2 billion US$
(7) Comments: these machines are more military and defense related.
We must look towards ITER to prove that the Barrier Law is true.
And if the Barrier Law is true and correct, perhaps NIF may be able
to give strong indications of the verity of a Barrier Law. Perhaps
NIF can prove the truth of the Barrier Law even though it only
promises 4% breakeven. This is a good question for Dr. Spielman.
Perhaps NIF can be designed to look for a Fusion Barrier Law and
that would save the world a 10 billion plus expense on ITER and
ten years wasted.

Decades ago in sci.physics I had a conversation with Rick Spielman who really knows about
laser fusion, not these above quacks who invent new terms-- "energy absorbed by the fuel"
in order to get a spotlight on TV. If it is inventing new terms so as to make believe there is progress when in fact all you are doing is deceiving the general public, much like the Higgs boson deception, then you go ahead and invent deceptions of terms and make TV news.

In the 1990s, the best that a laser fusion had achieved was 0.15% not even 1%, where more than 99% of fusion breakeven was absent.

In the above deception report what was the true real advance? Was it 0.16% and that we still are missing more than 99%.

When sci.physics has reverberating sounding-boards of science, then they blindside most readers as well as the BBC blindsiding TV viewers.

I am not opposed to projects being funded, what I am opposed is when they deceptively lie about any advance.

=== below was posted to sci.physics in the 1990s ===
(1) Laser Confinement Fusion 
(2) 0.15% not even 1% 
(3) 1986 
(4) NOVA 
(5) expectations: By 2003 NIF, NOVA's successor NIF is expected to be 
completed and have its first burn-run. 
 See the NIF website: http://xfiles.llnl.gov/x-division/nif.html 
 http://lasers.llnl.gov/lasers/nif.html
In article (6bjgs6$...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>

Rick Spielman (rbsp...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
> Yes, in NIFs CD-1 and CD-2 document with the DOE the mission objectives
> are stated in great detail. NIFs key deliverable is "ignition". Of course
> one man's ignition is anothers failure. LLNL states that they will
> achieve more fusion energy released than "that energy deposited in the
> capsule ablator" (about 200 kJ). Technically, ignition is the attainment
> of a propagating burn in the capsule fuel. Breakeven, in the most
> demanding sense, is the achievement of more fusion energy than energy in
> the device required to produce the fusion event. This is impossible on
> NIF. Let me restate this, it is impossible on NIF. NIF must store about
> 0.5-1 GJ of electrical energy in order to generate 2 MJ of laser light.
> This is typical glass laser efficiency. A huge success for NIF would be
> to generate ~ 20 MJ of fusion yield. Most scientists feel that this level
> of yield is unlikely in the near future, difficult but not impossible.

AP