Bryan Derksen <bryan.derksen@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in news:mHOVj.133010$rd2.20079
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> nuny@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>> Considering the waste heat issues in the "real-world" embodiments of
>> so-called Cold Fusion, it better be Frozen Solid Fusion.
>
> Maybe one could mumble something about pycnonuclear reactions?
> Pycnonuclear reactions happen easily, AFAIK, but require a combination
> of extreme pressure and extreme low temperature - a combination that's
> pretty hard to get considering things heat up when you compress them.
>
There are, as I recall, variations on Bussard's vacuum tube fusion that do
not produce excess heat or radioactivity as byproducts. But I also seem to
recall his smallest viable size was on the order of 10 meters in diameter.
(Though that would fit with the larger arc reactor in the movie, and the
"not as smart as Stark" scientist insisting it would be impossible to make
it smaller.)
Tommie Kratman will reply to this, because that's why my ***** does.
--
Terry Austin
"Dude, we're all your *****, but only Ken's wearing the juice."
- tussock
"Just throw a rock, and what screams will probably be a moron."
- Elvis (no, not that Elvis)
|
