Coherent Nuclear Fusion - The Path to Infinite and Safe Energy
----------------------------------------------
The Energy Book is available for download here----------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------
I wrote short blog about Coherent Nuclear Fusion sometime ago. As anything, one only pays attention to form (properly marketted ideas) as oppose to ideas simply told straight-up.
I had my equation for epsilon0, mu0 and G and any other derived cosmological constant since the beginning of times in my papers...:) I believe that only when I was able to create a picture of that equation in the forefront of my blog (right in front of your face) that that salient point was noticed.
It took time to realize that people are impervious to anything that doesn't hit them in the face..>:)
I decided to refresh another salient point or conclusion derived from my theory. I proposed the means to create an infinite source of energy in another of my postings: Coherent Nuclear Fusion.
Up to now, people have been colliding particles and trying to understanding what happens from those collisions.
That is a good start...:)
The problem with that is that this has been done in the dark and that should not be the case after I wrote my theory.
I proposed the experiment for the Large Hadron Collider: Collide particles which are traveling in the same direction, using a focusing magnetic lens... :)
This is a tremendous change in paradigm since a collider normally uses head-on collisions to maximize the collision energy...:)
This paradigm finesses the procedures used to create knowledge and nuclear fusion..>:)
The dilator paradigm and the Hypergeometrical Standard Model creates the ideological (theoretical) basis for this new kind of experimentation.
Having a focused beam of Deuterium and polarizing magnetic lensing should lead to coherent nuclear fusion processes with extremely high yield and achieved at much lower collision energy.
Needless to say, this should open a window into a new future, distant from the one we are rushing into now. Currently we are just going to extract all underground carbon and burn it...:) Any carbon taken from the ground makes Earth warmer and life worse.
Most likely I should make a picture of a beam and a two set of magnetic lenses: one to focus the beam and create fusion and another to redirect the beam back into the accelerator path.
Coming in a separable angle would be the products of the nuclear fusion. Of course, the same process could be used for coherent nuclear fission...:)
There are other sources of energy that I can envision and many unimaginable innovations (gravitational shielding, direct manipulation of the Fabric of Space, superluminal traveling, the ability to create non-interacting matter, etc)...
It will take time for me to explain everything since I can't find a single human that shows a basic understanding of this theory..>:) Maybe only the Aliens from Area 51 or those crafty scientists from Livermore..>:)
My goal is always To Serve Humans >:)
Cheers,
MP
1 comment:
From an early post: "...but I will be glad to see anything relevant on my mailbox."
Here goes 'anything'
A well-known (and sadly deceased) scientist once said "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." I have taken the time to read your foundation papers and to skim your blog from the bottom up, getting only to the aptly-named August 14th, 2006 entry. I then followed your suggestion to examine the yahoo group of the same name. One word from that group’s page jumped right out at me and confirmed my growing opinion of what I was reading: “Metaphysics”. Since metaphysics is defined as a philosophical discipline, it is uninhibited by science’s burden of the requirement of verifiable, reproducible proof. Freed from that burden, anyone can create a theory of the universe that sounds reasonable and good – the penultimate requirement of metaphysics – and from there extrapolate a universe-view where all problems are solved, all questions are answered and – satisfying the ultimate requirement of metaphysics – can’t be proven by any scientific means.
At this point, I wonder if you’re still reading. Hopefully you are. It would be easy to dismiss my writings as the rant of another dogmatic scientific disbeliever stuck in his cave as it were. While easy and convenient, it would also evade the real-world issue of why so few people are paying attention to your work. Earlier I made what may have seemed like a sarcastic reference to your August 14th 2006 entry “Field of Dreams.” Einstein had a dream too. But what set him on the path from philosopher/metaphysicist to become a true theoretician is that he created (or discovered if you’d rather) the mathematical equations to explain his universe-view. These equations made predictions that were put to the test and verified empirically and validated mathematically. This is indeed how “Science is done.” You present some interesting ideas that would turn the world science on its ear – just like Einstein did – if, and only if, your core assumptions are true. If you can prove this, you’ll be remembered for all time in the same breath as Aristotle, Newton, Einstein, Heisenberg and others. If not, your ideas carry no more weight than the (flat) Earth resting on the back of a gigantic turtle, which also sounded reasonable and good to a rather large group of people. Without any cynicism or contempt and with the best will in the world, I wish you good luck. And I’ll keep an eye out for your name in the science headlines just in case!
Post a Comment