Re: Better not put this in your HPR!

forward......what better way to take out a specific

I could nuke antz hills.....can you say teeny tiny

be harnessed as a rocket propulsion force instead?

Read "Project Oriobn" by George Dyson (Freeman Dyson's son). The use of high yield, smallsized, "focused" nuclear weapon detonantion as a propulsion method was considered and explored. It is possible that this developement is related/inspired by the work done on Orion. The following link is to the book on Amazon

TRA 08542 L3

MAKE THAT "PROJECT ORION"...I hate these fat fingers I have....

Mark Palmer

by George Dyson (Freeman Dyson's son). The use of

Well, stimulated emission of radiation is easy enough for electrons above the ground state... why not nuclei too?

No. Just ask them.

How does Brian McDermott relate to Buzz McDermott?

Jerry

"The experiment released 60 times as much energy as was put in, and in theory a much greater energy release could be achieved."

Why not use this new thing for a positive, like generating super cheap Electricity? (If I read this right, sounds almost like perpetual motion .)

HDS

Because the energy needed to create the isotopes in the first place, exceeds what comes out? I think the quote above refers only to the final triggering process that releases the stored energy.

Look back at that statement in context. I read that as releasing 60 times the 'triggering' energy, not 60 times the original 'pumped in' energy. If I light a bonfire with a match, the bonfire releases 1000's of times the triggering energy.

Don't forget, folks -- this thing, used as a weapon, is in the same category as depleted uranium. That is, a UN-banned radiological weapon. Oh, well.

As a fuel source it might be cool, but think of the cost! NOT an alternative to hydrazene (-zine, whatever).