Science a GoGo's Home Page Forums General Discussion General Science Discussion Forum Safe Energy Forever, or...

...how to save the world, and advance civilization at the same time.
What a wonderful idea...to make this come true all our world needs
is an unlimited supply of clean, pollution free (non radioactive) energy.

Aha....I hear you say. Yes I can hear you thinking ........
Wind Power?, Hydrogen Power?, Wave power?,Solar Furnace?, Solar Voltaic? Chemical Energy?, Fusion? etc. etc........no matter what type of energy you are thinking of, none of the above are able to produce energy in quantities dense enough to enable everyone on our Earth to progress forwards onwards and upwards.
A progressive civilization requires a large constant energy source that can heat and lightup every city, dwelling, and factory of mankind on Earth, even if the worlds population was likely to double over the next hundred years.

I am thinking of an unlimited non polluting energy source that is so far untapped right here on Earth. A mineral that is actually lying around here on Earth.!
An abundant mineral thats just waiting to be mined to produce Energy for mankind.

A mineral that is dozens of times more abundant within the earth, than Uranium, (Uranium is actually becoming more scarce).
Plus Uranium is only found in limited quantitys in 4 or 5 places of the world. It will run out within 50 years at the rate the world intends to build Nuclear Power Stations.
Nuclear Power Waste needs to be buried in metal or concrete tubes, placed deep within the Earth in stable water free zones for thousands of years, until its residual radio-activity has decayed.
So lets forget about Uranium.

So what am I thinking about? I'm thinking about the abundant mineral Thorium
Well yes Thorium is very slightly radioactive, but just one hundred years ago,every one
read by the light of a 'Tilley Lamp', its gas mantle was soaked in a cesium and thorium mixture,
it gave off a brilliant white light when heated by a gas jet.

Now if what I am reading is correct...it seems that if you bombard Thorium with Protons,
that are produced from a minature CERN (just a few feet in diameter) You get 250 more times
power from the Thorium, than its equivalent amount of Uranium weight for weight.
Plus the molten Lead metal, or Silver metal, that the Thorium heats up to produce this power,
is only produced while the Thorium is being bombarded with Neutrons. So its a fail safe
situation. There is no radioactivity or heating produced if the mini-cern Neutron producer stops.
And any Radioactivity that is produced only has a half life of a hundred years or so.
Sounds amazing dos'nt it?

Over the past year, Professor Egil Lillestol of the Institute of Physics and Technology at the University of Bergen, has been attempting to convince the world that nuclear reactors fuelled by Thorium could be the answer to the world's energy problems.
As Lillestol points out, Thorium is "three times more abundant than uranium in the earth's crust, and produces 250 times more energy per unit of weight than uranium in the present reactors". Unlike a uranium reactor, a thorium power station would produce no plutonium. Consequently, the waste produced from burning thorium in a reactor would not be such a security risk if it fell into the wrong hands, and the spent fuel rods are dramatically less radioactive than conventional nuclear waste. Dr Paul Norman of the University of Birmingham's Physics department talks in terms of "hundreds of years of radioactivity as opposed to thousands".
I hear that the Chinese are actually working on a Thorium Power Station.
Should anyone find or read anything about this...Please post it under here.
In my book Thorium is the sensible way forward into the future.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/jul/13/manchester-report-nuclear

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/is-thorium-the-answer-to-our-energy-crisis-428279.html

For more information check out the article on WikiPedia.
Thorium fuel cycle.

Bill Gill

if thorium is more abundant does that mean that if
a meltdown somehow occured the earth might become its fuel?



would naturally occurring protons bombard a area where thorium is being stored?

did ancient aliens build the ancient cities found all over the world that date back to over 12,000 yrs BC?

has the world been destroyed by smart people in the past?

how many times has the world been destroyed by smart people in the past?

what is a smart person?

or would we feel better if we blame it on the aliens?

every year we humans travel around our sun something like
578,053,048.26 miles

thats 65987.79 miles per hour -- were moving really fast when were not moving.

1099 miles every minute!

18.32 miles every second.

but thats pigheaded thinking ... we dont even know how fast
our solar system is moving around our galaxy.

not to mention how fast our galaxy is moving away from the center of our universe.

or how fast our universe is moving away from the other billions of universes.

we could easily be moving millions of miles per second
we just need to apply thought.

a small cern like accelerator would need to move the particle around in a circle that is thousands of times smaller than the cern 17 mile circle.

--------------------------------------------
if the particle time travels as it is traveling around in such a small circle then it would obviously appear somewhere outside the confinement of the small cern type circle .

but because it is the particle that time travels and not the small cern then the particle could appear inside a mountain or inside a storage area where thorium is being stored.

it wouldnt pass through objects while it is transported
it would just appear there because that is where it would be if it would not have time traveled.

but once it appears it would have an enormous amount of velocity.

is that dangerous?
its called a collider so I assume that the particles
have mass.

heres some pictures of the full sized cern
the full sized cern lhc

Cripes, that thing is enormous! If it ever goes Kaflooey it will take out half of Geneva.

There's no meaning to our speed through space. So the particle and its accelerator can't have any knowledge of how fast we're going relative to the sun or galaxy or whatever. Time travelling or not, it still can't be affected by the speed of another galaxy. That would be paradoxical because if it chose to compare itself to a different galaxy it would end up with a different speed and a different, observable outcome.

no meaning ! tell that one to nasa.

this means that nasa no longer needs to calculate where a planet will be in 10-20 years when they want to send a probe out to it.

they can simply point the craft directly at the planet
as it leaves the earth and never worry that it wont reach the planet.

because there is no meaning to our speed in space.
so any of our probes speeds would also have no meaning.

am I following this correctly?

and would you mind explaining how a particle and its accelerator could choose?

could have knowledge?

isnt is suppose to be knowledgeable people that design the accelerator to choose or to have the knowledge of making a choice and not the particle or the accelerator.

the fact that we cannot feel the speeds at which we are moving through the universe does not cancel out that speed.

and that speed has plenty of meaning when dealing with time travel.

it would be really stupid to think that a particle that has a velocity would disappear and reappear in the exact same spot after it has time traveled.

of course it would also be really stupid to build such a massive accelerator and expect particles to time travel yet not have a clue of where the particle will appear at.

just suppose you were to start time traveling as you are driving down the highway.

you time travel for 10 minutes into the future.
but the cars that were beside you on the highway are still
at the same location when your car stops time traveling.

your car travels at the same speed and direction as it was traveling at when it began time traveling for 10 minutes.

then your car reappears inside a building or inside a mountain or in outer space.

but you would be ok with that because our speed has no meaning.

Have you been reading Lynne McTaggart's "The Field". She does her best to put that sort of thing on a "scientific" footing.

[Quote=Mike Kremer]

No sorry Bill S.
I have nmever read anything about Lynne McTaggart, I have just put her name and "Field" into Google and it came up
with a Magazine she publishes with her husband called .....'Conatus'?
Anyway she writes about semi-scientific subjects that might get the 'layman' interested?
Items like..
Humans are really connected together on a subatomic scale,
....alien crop circles, ...plant leaves try to let you know when they suffer audio or mechanical stress,...
quantum medicine and homeopathy, ....UFO's are all over the universe, ....spiritulism, ....ancient artifacts left inside the Giza pyramid ..etc...etc.
So no Bill S. I have taken a cursory interest in what she might believe in, since you have given me her name, other than that, I have no interest in her magazine or writings.
I do generally try to write, or comment upon scientific science subjects.
Would she have any real knowledge that Thorium and Protons could be used to power our World..?
Other than it would make nice headlines in her money making magazine.

http://www.coasttocoastam.com/guest/mctaggart-lynne/5920

Mike, my post was a not-very-serious response to your quoted comment, rather than to the serious content of your post.

I am not familiar with McTaggart's magazine, but I am currently reading her book, "The Field". There are 2 reasons for this:

1. Some time ago I read an account of the abysmal failure of the US remote viewing experiments, and I thought it might be interesting to get a different take on it.

2. I enjoy looking at non-mainstream thought. It might even be possible to find some ideas that could liven up to quieter periods on a forum such as this.

Would I be right in thinking that your line of reasoning here is that if we add up all the possible directions and speeds in which we could be moving through space, assuming enough of the additions are positive, we could be travelling faster than light, and would therefore be time travelling?