Crossfire Fusor

Point out news stories, on the net or in mainstream media, related to polywell fusion.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

KitemanSA
Posts: 6179
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Post by KitemanSA »

MSimon wrote:No worries mate. You can't reach the speed of light if you have any rest mass. I suggest starting with a kilo or two. That should be enough to prevent the problem from arising.
Not to stir up TOO much trouble, but if you are in the rocket going to AlphaCent, doesn't it FEEL like you are going faster than light? I mean, you get 4.3ish light years in fewer than 4.3 of your years. That is going faster than light, scr@% the rest of the universe for being out of whack! :wink: :o :wink:

hanelyp
Posts: 2261
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 8:50 pm

Post by hanelyp »

Yes, the time passage as measured on the ship can be shorter than the time it takes light to cover the distance as measured by an observer at rest at either end. A trip of many light years might have a shorter ship time if you assume a miracle propulsion system.

Time dilation does some strange things.

bcglorf
Posts: 436
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 2:58 pm

:)

Post by bcglorf »

MSimon wrote:
cosmos wrote:You are right.
E/m=66.03921e12 J/Kg
v=SQRT(2E/m) = 11.49254e6 m/s
v=SQRT(c^2-[c^3/({E/m}+c^2)]^2) = 11.48622e6 m/s

I am not an expert in Relativity.
I rely on acceleration (g-force) for generating a gravitational effect in the spacecraft.
When the matter is acceleration, the Relativity sounds very strange for me.
At speed of light, will the g-force disappear?
No worries mate. You can't reach the speed of light if you have any rest mass. I suggest starting with a kilo or two. That should be enough to prevent the problem from arising.
Your gonna get me fired for laughing out loud at work with posts like this. I think that is absolutely the most perfect and complete answer possible. :)

cosmos
Posts: 17
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2009 6:54 pm
Contact:

Post by cosmos »

Relativism sounds like a belief.
A century and billions spent.
Is there an irrefutable proof for "time dilation", "curved spacetime" and "nothing can travel faster than light"?
Or, are these only dogmas that do not allow contestation?

Art Carlson
Posts: 794
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 7:56 am
Location: Munich, Germany

Post by Art Carlson »

cosmos wrote:Is there an irrefutable proof for "time dilation", "curved spacetime" and "nothing can travel faster than light"?
Yes. Or let's call it "experimental confirmation of the highest quality". Do some reading.

cosmos
Posts: 17
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2009 6:54 pm
Contact:

Post by cosmos »

I had done some reading, and I found a lot of contestations like that "Mercury's orbit explained without relativity":
http://www.science-frontiers.com/sf031/sf031p02.htm

Art Carlson
Posts: 794
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 7:56 am
Location: Munich, Germany

Post by Art Carlson »

cosmos wrote:I had done some reading, and I found a lot of contestations like that "Mercury's orbit explained without relativity":
http://www.science-frontiers.com/sf031/sf031p02.htm
A 25 year old article in Nature? Now that's cutting edge!

I remember hearing a talk by Dicke around that time about how he measured the non-sphericity of the sun and used it as evidence against GR and in favor of his own theory of gravitation. Must be the same story. I didn't follow it too closely after that, but it seemed to fade away, I think because the effects reported were and remained too close to the error bars of the measurement.

JohnP
Posts: 296
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 3:29 am
Location: Chicago

Post by JohnP »

Relativism sounds like a belief.
A century and billions spent.
Is there an irrefutable proof for "time dilation", "curved spacetime" and "nothing can travel faster than light"?
Or, are these only dogmas that do not allow contestation?
Actually, other earlier models were the dogma. Relativity took a long time to be tested/validated before it was accepted.

SR and GR have withstood a century's worth of investigation. If you can propose verifiable tests that would invalidate them, go for it.

For details, a Physics III class at a decent school would be helpful.

alexjrgreen
Posts: 815
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2008 4:03 pm
Location: UK

Post by alexjrgreen »

JohnP wrote:SR and GR have withstood a century's worth of investigation. If you can propose verifiable tests that would invalidate them, go for it.
Newton's theory lasted longer. Aristotle's much longer.

Every theory in science is potentially about to be falsified. No comfort, no certainty, no problem - just science.
Ars artis est celare artem.

IntLibber
Posts: 747
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 3:28 pm

Re: The Crazy

Post by IntLibber »

cosmos wrote:Hello guys, I am the Crazy that you are talking about.
Here is one of my gems:
How fusion reactions take place?
The CrossFire Fusor does not need a nebulous physics concept with a lot of enchantments to work. It's really pretty simple.
It simply relies on collisions of ions needing kinetic energy and confinement.
For that, it is much more focused on an embodiment to achieve a tridimensional injection and confinement.
I am against personal attacks.
Feel free for critiques concerning my approaches.
Ok no attacks.

However, apparently you have't read that relativity has been well proven several different ways. Theres a few tweaks here and there, but really, things like time dilation and other effects near light speed are really not debatable. Time dilation has been proven, as have the other effects.

You may make it to Alpha Centauri in 3.2 years SHIP TIME, but to the objective observer, its going to take a bit longer.

"transdimensional injection" is at this point in time science fiction. Wormhole travel is not transdimensional injection, but even wormhole travel requires exotic matter to keep both ends open, and we have yet to even observe exotic matter, so it might as well be science fiction for the forseeable future.

Better to stick to fusion.

IntLibber
Posts: 747
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 3:28 pm

Post by IntLibber »

cosmos wrote:I had done some reading, and I found a lot of contestations like that "Mercury's orbit explained without relativity":
http://www.science-frontiers.com/sf031/sf031p02.htm
dude, Science Frontiers is a quack zine that does stories on aliens, psychic powers, structures on mars, ancient astronauts. Not scientifically credible.

alexjrgreen
Posts: 815
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2008 4:03 pm
Location: UK

Re: The Crazy

Post by alexjrgreen »

IntLibber wrote:"transdimensional injection" is at this point in time science fiction.
I think the word was "tridimensional"...
Ars artis est celare artem.

cosmos
Posts: 17
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2009 6:54 pm
Contact:

Post by cosmos »

tridimensional injection
After some geometric simulations, a preliminary conclusion is:
In a bi-dimensional injection, the electrostatic repulsion diverges the ion paths from the central point.
In a three-dimensional injection, the electrostatic repulsion converges the ion paths to the central point.
In the three-dimensional injection, the ion kinetic energy will exchange to potential energy
as they approach to the central point, then the kinetic energy must be higher than 123KeV, about 600KeV.
The three-dimensional injection increases the probability of fusion reactions at the beginning.
The three-dimensional confinement will do the remaining fusion reactions after that.

Alchemist
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 2:38 pm

Post by Alchemist »

Might want to do some reading on Heim Theory. It's about the best shot we've got of any FTL in the foreseeable future.

imaginatium
Posts: 55
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2009 10:46 pm

Post by imaginatium »

scareduck wrote:This site is getting overrun with cranks.
Personal attacks are not helpful, if you want to debate the science, then do so.

Post Reply