3 ms·

Sure, but looking at the patent itself, it seems true that it "explains nothing about the proposed fields and ion motion." https://patents.google.com/patent/US

Sure, but looking at the patent itself, it seems true that it "explains nothing about the proposed fields and ion motion." https://patents.google.com/patent/US20190295733A1/en?inventor=Salvatore+Pais&oq=inventor:(Salvatore+Pais) https://patents.google.com/patent/US20190295733A1/en?invento...

colechristensen 7y ago
Well the patent office didn't see that to be a problem, and I'm no fusion expert so I can't say that that is a valid criticism. My point being that I haven't seen any criticism that seems credible or any at all outside people treating fusion like it's fairy technology or armchair physicists. The same could be said about praise, to be fair.
- DennisP 7y ago
  The patent office has approved all sorts of weird patents including some that violate known physics, and some of those by this same author. I agree it'd be nice to see commentary from a non-anonymous fusion researcher. But it's possible to be skeptical of vague claims from people who've "invented" both working fusion and inertia manipulation, without thinking fusion is fairy technology. There are lots of fusion projects with real experiments and clear publicly-known details on their physical principles. Here are some: ITER (the big dog, a giant tokamak) Wendelstein 7-X (stellerator) Tokamak Energy (high field tokamak) Commonwealth (same, from MIT) First Light Fusion (inertial confinement with fast projectile) HB11 Energy (petawatt picosecond laser for boron fusion) TAE (formerly Tri Alpha, boron fusion with magnetic confinement) Helion (deuterium/he3 fusion, with funding from YCombinator) General Fusion (compression by acoustic shockwave from steam-driven pistons) LPP's focus fusion (uses a plasma configuration that collapses itself into high compression) Sandia's Z-pinch ZAP Energy (a private z-pinch effort)

3 ms·

Sure, but looking at the patent itself, it seems true that it "explains nothing about the proposed fields and ion motion." https://patents.google.com/patent/US

by DennisP 7y ago

colechristensen 7y ago
Well the patent office didn't see that to be a problem, and I'm no fusion expert so I can't say that that is a valid criticism. My point being that I haven't seen any criticism that seems credible or any at all outside people treating fusion like it's fairy technology or armchair physicists. The same could be said about praise, to be fair.
- DennisP 7y ago
  The patent office has approved all sorts of weird patents including some that violate known physics, and some of those by this same author. I agree it'd be nice to see commentary from a non-anonymous fusion researcher. But it's possible to be skeptical of vague claims from people who've "invented" both working fusion and inertia manipulation, without thinking fusion is fairy technology. There are lots of fusion projects with real experiments and clear publicly-known details on their physical principles. Here are some: ITER (the big dog, a giant tokamak) Wendelstein 7-X (stellerator) Tokamak Energy (high field tokamak) Commonwealth (same, from MIT) First Light Fusion (inertial confinement with fast projectile) HB11 Energy (petawatt picosecond laser for boron fusion) TAE (formerly Tri Alpha, boron fusion with magnetic confinement) Helion (deuterium/he3 fusion, with funding from YCombinator) General Fusion (compression by acoustic shockwave from steam-driven pistons) LPP's focus fusion (uses a plasma configuration that collapses itself into high compression) Sandia's Z-pinch ZAP Energy (a private z-pinch effort)