3 ms·

Your link literally says nothing solid, and the video link is just a scatterplot of pulsating stuff. No offence but what actual scientific justification is ther

Your link literally says nothing solid, and the video link is just a scatterplot of pulsating stuff. No offence but what actual scientific justification is there of this idea? (BTW I'm not qualified to judge, kust feedback. I hope if the idea's solid that you get backing).

pontifier 6y ago
The idea is built on very basic physics. There is nothing super complicated here. It's an inverted cyclotron built in a penning trap. Instead of all ions orbiting a single point, they all pass through that point. The scatterplot is from a penning trap simulator showing the motion of individual particles. What you are seeing is periodic implosions similar to the IEC fusion machines. Instead of compressing a pellet with lasers and getting one pulse, this design gives you many implosions for free once the motion is created. I HOPE it will work, but without ANY experimental data, nobody can say for sure. If it does work the payoff would be huge, and if it doesn't, the cost of trying it is relatively small. It seems like a fantastic bet to me, and that's why I'm trying my best to fund the initial experiment myself. That's the biggest hurdle, and also the most risky. Once that threshold is passed, if it works as intended, I should have no problem getting as much funding as I want while giving up a miniscule amount of equity. At the end of the day, results are all that matter. If it's not solid, then there's no point.
- throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
  I'm in no position to judge this, may I suggest making available your models and simulations to the physics community - perhaps even start with https://physics.stackexchange.com/ https://physics.stackexchange.com/ and see what they say? If they blow holes in it at least you have some feedback from professionals to work with. Good luck!

3 ms·

Your link literally says nothing solid, and the video link is just a scatterplot of pulsating stuff. No offence but what actual scientific justification is ther

by throwaway_pdp09 6y ago

pontifier 6y ago
The idea is built on very basic physics. There is nothing super complicated here. It's an inverted cyclotron built in a penning trap. Instead of all ions orbiting a single point, they all pass through that point. The scatterplot is from a penning trap simulator showing the motion of individual particles. What you are seeing is periodic implosions similar to the IEC fusion machines. Instead of compressing a pellet with lasers and getting one pulse, this design gives you many implosions for free once the motion is created. I HOPE it will work, but without ANY experimental data, nobody can say for sure. If it does work the payoff would be huge, and if it doesn't, the cost of trying it is relatively small. It seems like a fantastic bet to me, and that's why I'm trying my best to fund the initial experiment myself. That's the biggest hurdle, and also the most risky. Once that threshold is passed, if it works as intended, I should have no problem getting as much funding as I want while giving up a miniscule amount of equity. At the end of the day, results are all that matter. If it's not solid, then there's no point.
- throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
  I'm in no position to judge this, may I suggest making available your models and simulations to the physics community - perhaps even start with https://physics.stackexchange.com/ https://physics.stackexchange.com/ and see what they say? If they blow holes in it at least you have some feedback from professionals to work with. Good luck!