A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Astronomy Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Suppresed Technology: Fusion Reactor



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old May 1st 04, 04:07 AM
ren
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default That's Old New, Fool.

Fussion and fission reactions are unstable for producing fuel.

It's all about high electrical voltage and magnatized plate cells now days.

The technology produces an ionic wave which creates lift and propulsion.





  #22  
Old May 1st 04, 04:52 PM
Alexander Whiteside
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default That's Old New, Fool.

What in God's name does "unstable for producing fuel" mean? Doesn't he meant
"unsuitable for producing energy"?

And who would propel a vehicle with a nuclear reactor anyway? What is this,
Thunderbirds?


  #23  
Old May 2nd 04, 12:54 AM
Ugly Bob
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Suppresed Technology: Fusion Reactor


"Laura" wrote in message
...

"House Widdershins" wrote in message
...
X-No Archive:Yes On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 09:32:19 +0200, "Laura"
wrote:


Nowhere on those websites does it say that it's existing and applicable
technology. In fact, one of them clearly states "being developed" about

some
of the most crucial elements needed to make it work - most notably the
fusion itself! The rest deals with theory, which is perfectly sound.
The fact remains that, so far, the only practical fusion device

possible
is
the thermonuclear bomb.

By the way, why does all of this matter to you, anyway?
I thought you said that you, along with a select few others, will be

whisked
away by aliens, and the rest of us are going to die horribly when we're
clobbered by an asteroid in 2012. If that's true, what difference does

it
make what we use as an energy source for the next 8 years?

Laura, Laura, Laura. It has probably come to your notice that
Alexa isn't quite playing with a full deck. IOW she's a sandwich
shy of a picnic, a few bricks shy of a load, not the brightest bulb
in the GE lineup, not the sharpest knife in the drawer. To wit:
She's a loony!


Oh hush! You're spoiling it! :-)


Now ask her about her "alien" friends ;-)


  #24  
Old May 2nd 04, 01:04 AM
Ugly Bob
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default That's Old New, Fool.


"ren" wrote in message
trafeed.com...
Fussion and fission reactions are unstable for producing fuel.

It's all about high electrical voltage and magnatized plate cells now

days.

The technology produces an ionic wave


Does it leave your house clean and fresh smelling?

http://www.tvproductsguide.com/product-141.html

which creates lift and propulsion.


Ah, but does it separate?


  #25  
Old May 3rd 04, 07:05 AM
*
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Suppresed Technology: Fusion Reactor

On Sat, 1 May 2004 16:54:57 -0700, "Ugly Bob"
wrote:


"Laura" wrote in message
...

"House Widdershins" wrote in message
...
X-No Archive:Yes On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 09:32:19 +0200, "Laura"
wrote:


Nowhere on those websites does it say that it's existing and applicable
technology. In fact, one of them clearly states "being developed" about

some
of the most crucial elements needed to make it work - most notably the
fusion itself! The rest deals with theory, which is perfectly sound.
The fact remains that, so far, the only practical fusion device

possible
is
the thermonuclear bomb.

By the way, why does all of this matter to you, anyway?
I thought you said that you, along with a select few others, will be

whisked
away by aliens, and the rest of us are going to die horribly when we're
clobbered by an asteroid in 2012. If that's true, what difference does

it
make what we use as an energy source for the next 8 years?

Laura, Laura, Laura. It has probably come to your notice that
Alexa isn't quite playing with a full deck. IOW she's a sandwich
shy of a picnic, a few bricks shy of a load, not the brightest bulb
in the GE lineup, not the sharpest knife in the drawer. To wit:
She's a loony!


Oh hush! You're spoiling it! :-)


Now ask her about her "alien" friends ;-)


You mean the ones who are pals with the US government.


  #26  
Old May 3rd 04, 07:06 AM
*
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Suppresed Technology: Fusion Reactor

On Sat, 1 May 2004 16:54:57 -0700, "Ugly Bob"
wrote:

[...]

Now ask her about her "alien" friends ;-)


You put the wrong word in parenthesis.

Seems the aliens don't like you in space, Herr. Bob.

  #27  
Old May 3rd 04, 07:06 AM
*
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Suppresed Technology: Fusion Reactor

On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 09:35:34 +0200, "Laura" wrote:


"*" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 00:09:20 -0500, Lars Eighner wrote:

Then it isn't sustainable.


Yes it is.


No, he's right. It isn't.


So how much does Bechtel pay you to post to Usenet?






  #28  
Old May 3rd 04, 07:12 AM
*
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Suppresed Technology: Fusion Reactor

On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 22:13:29 +0100, "Alexander Whiteside"
wrote:

[...]

Why would they do such a thing?


Money -- the economy of the world would collapse. The economy is based on
drugs, arms, oil and the banking system which is laundering money. The
entire federal reserve is based on this.

It would be a nightmarish collapse of the world economy.

But it will collapse anyway with repercussions of extinction (which are
exponential ).


  #29  
Old May 3rd 04, 09:01 AM
Laura
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Suppresed Technology: Fusion Reactor


"*" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 09:35:34 +0200, "Laura" wrote:


"*" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 00:09:20 -0500, Lars Eighner

wrote:

Then it isn't sustainable.

Yes it is.


No, he's right. It isn't.


So how much does Bechtel pay you to post to Usenet?


Ah, again this strange spiel about people being paid to post to usenet. Why
would anyone ever bother to throw money away like that? It would have no
effect.
Nobody is paying me to do this, just as nobody is paying you. You're on some
sort of a doomsday mission, apparently, enjoying your role as one of the
chosen ones who get to preach to the rest of us about the error of our ways,
whereas I am merely trying to discuss it with you in a reasonable manner.

Anyway, no. I am actually against nuclear (fission) power, since it is
unsafe.
When they manage to get fusion power working, I will be in favor of it.


  #30  
Old May 3rd 04, 09:02 AM
Laura
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Suppresed Technology: Fusion Reactor


"*" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 22:13:29 +0100, "Alexander Whiteside"
wrote:

[...]

Why would they do such a thing?


Money -- the economy of the world would collapse. The economy is based on
drugs, arms, oil and the banking system which is laundering money. The
entire federal reserve is based on this.

It would be a nightmarish collapse of the world economy.

But it will collapse anyway with repercussions of extinction (which are
exponential ).


Before or after the asteroid in 2012?


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Our future as a species - Fermi Paradox revisted - Where they all are william mook Policy 157 November 19th 03 01:19 AM
N by M Body Fusion Charles Cagle Astronomy Misc 0 August 31st 03 11:30 PM
New UK technology will make the first global X-ray map of the Moon(Forwarded) Andrew Yee Astronomy Misc 0 August 22nd 03 02:09 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:05 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.