[itishappy]

I suspect the current record for sustained plasma is owned by fluorescent lighting, so not sure that's a valuable metric.

My comment that it doesn't seem like "serious science" means that I'm going to ignore anything not peer reviewed and I suggest others do the same.

I honestly still wish them the best, they just have a lot of work to convince anyone they're really dealing with anything new or interesting, and I don't think that video production is the path to that.

[devaiops9001]

Sustained plasma fusion, not simply sustained plasma, which is not what we are talking about here, is held by Safire by far.

>> sustained plasma is owned by fluorescent lighting

This is an NPC "I deliberately misunderstand the argument" tier response.

>> I don't think that video production is the path to that.

If you aren't intelligent enough to see in the raw video footage that you are looking at something new and novel, that's not their problem.

That said, their materials have been published and reviewed. You can find them if you look. I'm not here to spoonfeed you.

[lostmsu]

> If you aren't intelligent enough to see in the raw video footage that you are looking at something new and novel, that's not their problem.

What does intelligence have to do with seeing a video? To make an analogy, you think you'd be able to discern Intel Pentium IV from 14900K from a video footage of a working processor that would have its model number scraped out?

Fusion is just going to produce light of a certain spectrum. I don't think your brain is good at spectrometry.

[devaiops9001]

>> What does intelligence have to do with seeing a video?

The raw video footage of the multi-layered plasma fusion reaction in a laboratory conveys meaningful and complete information, directly validating the larger assertions made by the Safire team. The information is right there.

If you are not able to comprehend what is right there on video not just in one place but many videos over several years, and you still want to present non-arguments against it, then you aren't very intelligent. Simple as.

>> you think you'd be able to discern Intel Pentium IV from 14900K from a video footage

The topic is not about CPUs, the topic is about plasma fusion.

>> Fusion is just going to produce light of a certain spectrum.

The fusion in question shows multiple separate plasma layers, this key information is literally shown in the video in question, not mere spectrometry.

You argued against novel scientific information conveyed in raw footage providing proof of the scientific claims made. You don't even know what the video is yet you present a bad argument where you don't even know what it is you are arguing about.

What a fucking waste of time. God damn you are stupid. You should be ashamed for posting such garbage.

edited: clarified video footage

[lostmsu]

> God damn you are stupid.

>> To make an analogy, ...

> The topic is not about CPUs, the topic is about plasma fusion.

I mean if you can't comprehend word "analogy" in a simple sentence, what makes you think you can reason about scientific claims?

[devaiops9001]

The core of the multi-layer self-contained plasma fusion reaction is the size of a baseball, and the overall size is larger than a basketball, which is visible to the naked human eye.

What goes on inside of the Intel CPU you specified is not visible to the naked human eye.

Considering the scales very obviously involved (if you bothered to look), it's harder to come up with a dumber analogy than the one you presented.

[lostmsu]

Nah, the analogy is excellent and you are dumb. In both cases you can't see the important parts: calculations/energy conversion, and in both cases you can see the part that doesn't really tell you anything: CPU lid/the colors of the thing.

Do you realize how many bright gazzy things have visible layers? Hell, even a match flame has visible layers and is also part plasma.