3 ms·
You're missing the point that, if the claims were real, 200 KW of the claimed output power of 1 MW cold be used to sustain the reaction, thus removing the input
by lutusp 13y ago
You're missing the point that, if the claims were real, 200 KW of the claimed output power of 1 MW cold be used to sustain the reaction, thus removing the input power requirement. This kind of "fact sheet" can only persuade people who don't understand physics.
- dublinben 13y agoI'm pretty sure this is a scam/hoax. I was just trying to explain how the initial claim itself was at least plausible.
- lutusp 13y ago> I was just trying to explain how the initial claim itself was at least plausible. If the author had wanted to be plausible, he would not have mentioned the required input power. That's a dead giveaway and show-stopper, because anything remotely real would not have that requirement. If the units can deliver five times their input heat energy, then 1/5 of the output energy can be used to sustain the reaction. That's not difficult to grasp.