For years I have resisted the idea that the sun is powered by a nuclear type of energy. Basically it made no sense according to my understanding of the bible. Everything about the creation of the universe spoken of in the bible indicated that it is built to last forever. If the idea that is current is true that the stars are nothing but nuclear bombs is true then the bible is wrong.
However since all we have from nuclear physics is from scientists, I reserve the right to re-examine the findings of idiots. And the right to change my mind in the light of understanding that there are big financial concerns subverting to general understanding of the way the world works.
Most people are familiar with the way that the destruction of the Space Shuttles was handled. That the committees responsible for the investigations into the number of disasters that occurred with them were corrupted by government concerns.
If you are not familiar with the goings on in the US government over the several crises involved back then there are plenty of commentaries on the subject. Just look into the aspects of the Challenger controversy the Richard Feynman was involved in:
More broadly, the report also determined the contributing causes of the accident. Most salient was the failure of both NASA and its contractor, Morton Thiokol, to respond adequately to the design flaw. The Commission found that as early as 1977, NASA managers had not only known about the flawed O-ring, but that it had the potential for catastrophe. This led the Rogers Commission to conclude that the Challenger disaster was “an accident rooted in history.
It’s odd that the team that went into the investigation also had Chuck Yeager at the controls. He had an history of not sparing culprits and of running against compound deceit. Yet the scientists involved in the scandal chose to speak quietly to Feynnman. (Scientists have an history of never speaking out. They are by nature the worms in the shit of history and there is as good example of typical scientists’ arse covering as any I have ever heard about.)
Richard Feynman, who had won the Nobel Prize for his breakthroughs in quantum physics, was an independent investigator who applied his scientific knowledge to investigate the disaster. His work helped to make the US space programme safer.
There again of course they did check their sources and investigate backgrounds to find someone who wasn’t likely to be bound by arsecoveration. Full marks there. (Good job Feynman was dying though.)
But to get on with the story. I am not in awe of military types and especially not in awe of scientists who are bound to the military. It is a top heavy constriction that hampers break-throughs for all the wrong reasons. That is probably why Tokamak research has got nowhere. Nobody wants to speak out about things in the vicarious fusion research fields, evidently.
When I first presented myself for the abuse metered out to free thinkers in sci.geo.earthquakes and sci.geology I was unaware of the state of play in the field of fusion research so like the fool I was I asked questions. I mean: I asked foolish questions. They made sense to me:
I was going to post some of the stuff that went on decades ago in sci.geology and sci.physics but they are more or less as defunct groups now as sci.earthquakes is. Apparently Google isn’t keeping old stuff from them any more. I couldn’t find me on there. I was using another name back then though. Michael McNeil. Ever heard of him?
Google hasn’t. Not that I want them to.
All water under the bridge from biscuits taken no doubt. I was reading stuff about thorium reactors recently and it occurred to me that the reason that fusion research is in the doldrums is that they are looking for results from low pressure reactors.
A tokamak works by shoving small particles of atoms at vast units of acceleration, hoping that putting a sudden stop to things will tell them something. So far it hasn’t. Coupled with that is the fact that so far all fusion produced on Earth has been of a frequency unseen in stars. And of course costs more to produce than it should.
They say that they are looking for a sustained reaction that will put an end to the cost of nuclear fuel. But if that was true then they would have produced thorium reactors by now.
Nuclear fusion, if it can be produced by humans will have to take place under conditions that mirror those of the deep earth where nuclear fission materials are produced. And the chances of producing good cheap fusion in sustained environments without also producing harmful and long lasting nuclear pollution materials are very slim.
Uranium and radium are mass produced by-products of the fusion that takes place in the earth. But the way they are produced and the superabundance of solvents (safe solvents) for these by-products, ensures that what little radiation they produce naturally is not harmful to us nor to the environment.
Deep in the earth physical chemistry takes place that is difficult for most people to imagine. Can you imagine a state of being for simple everyday things like water, salt and rock, where they can exist as both liquids, solids and gases at the same time?
Can you imagine how water can dissolve glass and be at the same time, unable to suspend common salt?
Those are the conditions required to obtain fusion. And just how much research do you imagine is being done on that?