Nuclear Fusion

href="file:///C:%5CUsers%5CSTUDEN%7E1.TRA%5CAppData%5CLocal%5CTemp%5Cmsohtml1%5C04%5Cclip_filelist.xml">

by JonThm9@aol.com

Is all through nature, but there is so much to learn. Oxford are talking about firing a high powered laser through an H plasma.

This will give a lot of research years, but it will not give the world nuclear fusion – which is what they got the £1 billion to give the world.

You are far better off with an H plasma tube: This is like a fluorescent, but filled with H gas, rather than Na vapour. I think we can top up with water, to generate steam which will do molecular nuclear fusion: But what do I know.

Certainly the H plasma will give us nuclear fusion with a small driving current. We are talking about 2 amps generating 100 MWatts!

The exact driving current will vary with pressure. We may even get to the pressure where we require no driving current, so once started the H plasma tube drives itself.

Certainly we will get as tube which liberates power, by turning H gas into He! OK, we put in power to start the tube, then we add more H gas, and get pure power out.

No CO2, and none of the toxic death of present nuclear power. I thought of this idea at Sheffield University, so they are going to get me working on the tube ASAP.

No. Nuclear Power has control of all universities through the funding agencies, so academia would prefer YOUTUBE did not tell anybody how to do nuclear fusion for free!

None of the plant CERN or Oxford University wants. You could build a fusion plant in your garage this week end.

And save life. And fix the climate. All with no academic input. Becau7se not even Sheffield has dared to comment. This is a shame, as my old PhD supervisor, Prof Zimmerman, is a very smart guy, whose input would have been worth having. His comments to me about nuclear fusion and turbulence is where the idea of steam plasma came from.

H plasma came up, and do more nuclear fusion, but steam plasma are easier to work with, and easier to top up.