Lasarus > Laser-ignited fusion is still very much experimental.
I accept that. One of your references explains why.
>>...two approaches to nuclear fusion are possible: the longer time approach or the higher density approach. The former is called Magnetic Confinement Fusion (MCF), and the latter is called Inertial Confinement Fusion (ICF) (see Fig. 2). (In the sun, the confinement energy comes from its own gravity. As for the hydrogen bomb, high density and temperature are created by the energy of previously ignited atomic bomb.)
MCF does not require high density but a longer reaction time : ?~1014 cm-3 and t~1 s each. This approach needs a magnetic field for confinement, which is why it is named MCF.
ICF requires high density but not a long reaction time : n~1026 cm-3 and t~10-12 s. When a high-power laser beam fires on the fuel pellet, the pellet is compressed by the counterreaction of the high-temperature plasma’s expansion. The name “Inertial Confinement” comes from the fact that the expansion needs certain time – i.e. the pellet must be kept inert for a certain period.<<
> I await proof that al Qaeda or Bush has access to it in a practical sense.
Would we find that on a video-tape presented to Al Jazeera?!
> It exists in a few university/national lab facilities and takes a lot of precise equipment.
To me as a layman, lasers are ubiquitous therefore it makes sense that they could be used in a portable, mini-nuke set-up, even a semi-experimental one. The idea does not seem far-fetched.
> The explosion also leaves behind a lot more radioactivity than you credit it for.
Let's consider, hypothetically, that mini-nukes were exploded in the basements of the WTC towers, nearly 100 ft below ground level, with the intention of destroying the bases of the 47, 4 inch thick, steel columns in each building.
A. I would argue that little or no radio-activity would find its way into the atmosphere.
B. Since no independent observers were permitted on site in order to make measurements and the steel debris was removed ASAP, how would we know if residual radio-activity was, in fact, present? I accept there was molten metal in the basements for months afterwards. I am also aware that some tritium was found in the atmosphere near the WTC (and also that some atmospheric radio-activity was apparently found near the Pentagon) but I'm not aware of any radio-activity tests having been done at the WTC site itself.
rense.com
> You WEREN'T going to bring down the WTC towers without telltale radioactivity left behind and spreading out.
Is absence of evidence, evidence of absence?
|
