Antimatter catalysed fusion using neptunium 237

[chew_on_this]

/*ad hominem deleted*/

 

[mlorrey]

With all due respect, all it proves is that he's taken the requisite courses to learn how to be a scientist. There are a lot of such people with such training, who are not scientists and/or cannot act as scientists because they refuse to approach ideas with a scientific mindset. <br /><br />Steve, as an example, is very dogmatic and wedded to knowledge that "everybody knows", which is an extremely UN-scientific attitude to take. Steve is the epitome of the saying, "It ain't so much that people are ignorant, it's that they know so much that just ain't so."

 

[drwayne]

Guys, there is far too much discussion of people going on in this thread. Cool it down, and keep things in the realm of ideas. If you disagree with an idea, state so clearly, without addition ornamentation and attacks.<br /><br />Wayne <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>"1) Give no quarter; 2) Take no prisoners; 3) Sink everything."  Admiral Jackie Fisher</p> </div>

 

[mlorrey]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>It's true I have an aversion to nuclear explosions due to radiation hazards & fallout effect, even in space, and on that basis I'm not too keen about Orion.<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />This is a prime example of dogmatic ignorance. Can steve demonstrate ANY scientific evidence that nuclear ash (NOT fallout, since with greater than escape velocity exhaust speeds, it will never fall to earth unless you point it there) from any form of nuclear rocket is any measurable hazard to people on earth? No, he can't. Can steve demonstrate that the radiation from nuclear exhaust ashes are in any way a significant fraction of the ambient radiation levels of space? No, he can't. Yet he sticks to his unsupportable and unscientific opinion and demands everybody else be as credentialed as he in order to refute his opinion. <br /><br />If steve were aware of the accepted logical fallacies, he'd know that claims about credentials are a logical fallacy known as "appeal to authority". Nor is pointing out that one's opponent is engaging in a logical fallacy any sort of ad hominem, as 'ad hominem' is also a logical fallacy, and using one logical fallacy to defend against another is false logic. Once again, Steve is wrong.<br /><br />As for Neptunium 237 catalyzed fusion, there is a good, refereed paper out there by some cold fusion researchers doing isotopic analysis of anodes before and after being used in fusion experiments, and the signs of various isotopes, starting with N237, among others, being present after experiments has led the researchers to conclude that 'cold fusion' is actually a form of 'fission/fusion'.