Subject: Re: Text of New CETI Brochure
From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk)
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 09:00:20 GMT
In article <56lhmr$fos_001@ip205.sky.net>, Bob Sullivan wrote :
[snip]
>
> From The Mini-Journal of Irreproducible Results, Issue No.1
>
> Louis Kervran of France, ardent admirer of alchemy, for his
> conclusion that the calcium in chickens' eggshells is
> created by a process of cold fusion. [For an English
> language version of Kervran's research see the book
> "Biological Transmutations, and their applications in
> chemistry, physics, biology, ecology, medicine, nutrition,
> agriculture, geology," by Louis Kervran, Swan House
> Publishing Co., 1972.]
>
> http://www.het.brown.edu/news/air/9311.html
[snip]
Careful Bob, I believe that in posting this reference you may have
actually contributed something of use for once!
Regards,
Robin van Spaandonk
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
Check out: http://netspace.net.au/~rvanspaa for how CF depends on
temperature.
"....,then he should stop, and he will catch up..."
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
Subject: Re: Failing to see how hot fusion is expensive
From: singtech@teleport.com (Charles Cagle)
Date: Sat, 16 Nov 1996 23:26:49 -0800
In article <56dok3$1t0@lex.zippo.com>, dietz@interaccess.com (Paul F.
Dietz) wrote:
>Jeramie.Hicks@mail.utexas.edu (Jeramie Hicks) wrote:
>
>>Pardon my ignorance, but could somebody explain how hot fusion will
>>never be a cost effective competitor for today's conventional fuels?
>>I'm aware that the reactors are expensive to build, but once a design
>>is frozen for a commercial reactor they should be more "shake-n-bake"
>>construction.
>
>Since when does freezing the design on something make it inexpensive?
>Perhaps *less* expensive, but even ignoring development costs the
>fusion reactor studies have not been able to come up with a
>tokamak-based reactor design burning DT that is more than marginally
>competitive.
Whoa, Dietz, I don't mean to be disrespective here but your statement
could be taken to imply that there *is* a tokamak-based reactor design
that is marginally competitive. This borders on dishonesty if you were
making even a hint of an implication in that direction, because the fact
of the matter is there has never been true 'ignition' and it looks like
using the hot fusion approach there never will be.
--
C. Cagle
SingTech
