The Sun and the solar system

So, are you going to apologise for this?

Since you know I was not connecting neutrinos and neutron stars?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

NO.. re-read your own words...

do you take them back now.?

do so, and i will appologise.

-MT

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

YOU REPLYED TO my conversation about nuetron stars with your words about stars and nuetrinos...

it doesnt fit does it?

you said it... and you have stood by it... why?

-MT

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I replied to your words about fusion. I even stated "main sequence stars" in my post. Apologize.

 

hey MT, heres an idea

why dont you give US some links supporting your point of view?

(I know, he'll probably just type in all caps about neutron stars for some reason...)

 

NO, he'll accuse you of being NARROW MINDED and having NO IDEAS OF YOUR OWN, fool.

 

Do U think I give a Damn, I have nothing to loose.

 

you fell right into that one didn't you.

 

what evidence are you contesting mosheh?

 

Does MT know and understand ( and agree with ) the theoretical limitation on the yield of a purely fission explosive device?

I'm not going to bother with looking it up but remember it as being about 50 kilotons ( the Hiroshima device was 10 to 20 KT, depending on which estimate you happen to read ).

Russia detonated the first thermonuclear device in about 1948, a "layer cake". The maximum yield of a layer cake is about 80 KT, I think. It was not what is considered a true full fledged thermonuclear device, but was a "boosted yield". A true thermonuclear device is not really limited in yield size: one can be designed with any large yield a military is bloodthirsty enough to desire.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

I have read different accounts of the largest device actually tested, from 60 megatons to 200 megatons. The first U.S.thermonuclear device tested was 20 megatons. One megaton is 1,000 ( one thousand ) kilotons.

Does MT know why the maximum yield of a pure fission device is not a whole lot more than the Hiroshima device?

Does MT know why the maximum yield of a layer cake is about 80 KT?

Does MT know why a true thermonuclear device has no theoretical limit to its yield?

Does MT know why the whopper explosions, as photographed, of the tested devices could not possibly have been pure fission or boosted yield devices?

 

NO... but i could look it all up in half an hour... but what would be the point of that.

i am not TESLA.. i do not remember everything.... i do not have special powers.

and superluminal.. if you want an apology.. you have it.. i apologise...

there is no point to the discussion any further.

i have lost, and i bow out.. but as i go i just have to remind you of one thing...

its been along time... 50 years of fusion research...
and its always just beyond our reach... just 10 more years they say every 10 years.

tokomaks.. z pinchs... and countless others... pushing pushing...

but still.... it never works.

fusion does happen... and it can be used... gentlemen. and ladies.

fusion of helium and lithium at 2 million ev yields 17 million ev of energy...

transmutation... of specifc elements and isoptopes into unstable configurations.. will be... will... will... be the savior of fusion technology...

but we have to turn our research that way... and until we do.. ..well.

it doesnt work... how much evidense do you guys actually need?
you have 50 years of it... but they dont tell you that... that make their living in the fusion field... and the schools preach it like gospel...

So why not right?

i say it because its a proven waste of time... other methods can work better.
that is also in evidense.

-MT

 

And now I have draged U with me into the darkness.

 

It's about time!!

With a few rare exceptions, I don't think I've seen anyone continue to repeatedly drag out an issue based on his sheer ignorance. It's quite rewarding to finally see this idiot admit he was wrong. (The only thing missing is that he failed to admit he was wrong about everything!)

 

i dont think i am wrong... im just tired of discussing it with closeminded people.
and i have said enough to complete my arguements.. assuming this is a debate.

in which case.. it is the casual observer who ARE the judges in the matter...
and they are always silent... sadly.

-MT

 

All I can tell you at this point is when you finally do figure out that you're wrong (badly!), you will at last be on the way to making some real progress.

And has it occured to you that the silent, casual observers you mentioned probably didn't even find what you said the least bit interesting? Garbage seldom is.

 

Exactly, these morons missed the starting point of scientific progress, first U have to propose a theory and then move ahead on its research.

Light, ...99 and Superlublium, Q, these people are not research minded they are just mugger, ie. they mug up things blindly and think they are smart, but all they are nothing but Recorders, they use theirs minds to record things thats all.


Not for U CANGAS.

 

Yep, just like your "hero" - dumb enough to fall for any kind of nonsense. No matter what you think, ignorance of facts does not hold back progress.

See if you can show me some examples of where ignorance produced something - I dare you.

 

Thats exactly what I meant.

 

why are you dragging me into this?
i just asked mosheh what evidence he was contesting.

 

I believe in transmutation..... and which fusion and or.. obsorbtion of masses together can and does happen.... but only processes that lead and cause the break down of masses into smaller ones.. yields energy... wothwhile energy, anway.

-MT