Video Transcript
Oh, the pressure, the starting pressure at which it died up a factor of a thousand. We said, "Oh boy, we're winning. We're going to get there. Where do we need to go? We need to go to a pressure approximately 100 times higher to get to densities of ions high enough to make useful fusions in the middle when they when they coalesce. We were 100 times too low. We were not 10 to the eighth or 10 to the fifth times too low. So all we needed to do we said was put 100 times more current in it. Hot dog. We got that capacitor bank. We can put 100 times more current in it for a short while." So we did. But we've done some electrostatic code calculations to show magnet electrostatic potential lines. And the next one is even more compelling. >> Watch this. >> This shows us where the electrons went. And lo and behold, >> where do they go? >> They went to the corners to the seams where there wasn't any magnetic field. Sure enough, the magnetic fields produced by the coils insulated the surfaces beautifully. That's where we got that factor in the thousand. But as the fields turned around and came out through the corner, they went straight into the walls. And that's a railroad track for the electrons to get lost. And so we put 100 times more current and we gained a factor of two in pressure. We said this is obvious. This is the obvious point that we all missed. It's trivial. Of course, you can't have anything that does that. You have to have a machine that doesn't do that. So we that's what causes to build. No, don't do that one. Build WB6 where we didn't magnetic field. >> Look at this. [clears throat] What does that look like to you? If you don't say simatics, you're wrong. Look at that. That looks like simatics right there. Right. And this is the confinement of the plasma within the boundary. When we say the boundary, we're talking about the walls. Now, the problem here, of course, is you can see that the plasma is arcing directly or shooting out directly towards the corners. In a configuration like this, the plasma is going to hit the corners of your box and it's going to destroy your reactor. So, when you look at the plasma like this, you can realize, oh, what do I have to do to fix this? I have to change the geometry. I have to change the shape. I need to get rid of these corners on the edges here or I need to let the plasma just escape out right there and have it come back and flow back around. Those are my options. But I can't have the plasma basically. I don't want the plasma at the dark spots on this map to ever touch any part of my device because I if it does, it will damage the device, damage the reactor. Boom. There it is. Pretty cool, huh? I thought I mean the amount of stuff this guy comes armed with Dr. Brousard just incredible man just straight up incredible. Uh we're going to skip ahead a little bit here >> and he would like to pursue that program. Next slide. >> Then you talk more about that. >> Oh no. This is Oh yeah. One of the things on the on the outline said I'll tell you all the things we've learned. I won't tell you all the things we've learned. It's too much. It's 11 years. But there's a paper that I submitted and it was probably will be published from the international conference in Spain early in October, International Astronomical Congress, 1500 people, 150 nations. And I published to put this paper into the conference because I wanted to for the first time in 11 years put a summary out in print that says what we did and what we've learned and what it's about. So there is a paper available if anybody wants it that describes it all. It's not a very good physics paper because it doesn't contain all the equations, doesn't contain all the theory and the models, but it talks about it all and it gives a lot of references and I you can probably get that somewhere. I don't know where it's out point is it's out in public for the first time in 11 years. >> Yeah, I guess no. Isn't there one about codes? >> There were Oh, okay. Well, I can't help. Let's see. We have codes. I'll just say we have codes that show power balances in these things. Palo Alto some years ago looked at build a machine like that and put it in a blanket, put it in a container like that. And then Palo Alto some years ago looked at machines that would make utilities feel happy. And we think this is the best one. The DT catalyzed by the helium 3. We call it a cat A. It makes a neutron. You capture it in a blanket to make more steam. It minimizes radiation hazard. It has the advantage that it makes processed steam. This is not PB11 clean. This is DD making things that look like PWR neutrons. But but it makes PWR steam. So you could build a machine like that and put it in a blanket. >> What the hell? Do you just see what he just showed you? He just showed us the precursor to Helium fusion. He said we were thinking about reactors that we could build that would make the utility companies happy. What he means what he says is he's saying that we were thinking of what kind of energy reactor we could build that could be added to the grid that they would be satisfied with. And he said the one that we came up with was helium 3 dutyium helium 3. That's the equations he's showing on the screen right here. Dutyium helium 3 fusion. There it is right there. Capture the neutrons in a boron 10 blanket. Helium 3 only in vacuum system. Minimizes material problems. Avoids enormous materials development time. Minimizes radiation hazards. Wow. Wow. What What kind of world are we living in right now? >> More steam. It minimizes radiation hazard. has the advantage that it makes processed steam. This is not PB11 clean. This is DDD making things that look like PWR neutrons but but it makes PWR steam. So you can build a machine like that and put it in a blanket, put it in a container like that and then take that particular container and put it in the central part of a of a whoops central part of a power plant where you have a number of them lined up in a row. And then that's the reactor building. The rest of this plant is normal plant. steam generators, steam steam turbines and generators and cooling towers. And this is a way you could retrofit existing fossil fuel fired plants. You come in, sit down next door, build a >> This is pretty crazy. He's explaining how you could retrofit our old nuclear power plants right here. This is again 2006. He's like, "Guys, just build a fusion reactor next door, plug it into the steam reactor, and you can still use the steam cycle if you want. And now you can boom, you've now turned your nuclear power plant into a fusion reactor." And now basically the same. It's already attached to the grid. So we don't have to worry about any of that. >> Damn man. >> Reactor building and tie it into the existing steam lines. Don't trouble the guys with the oil tanks. Leave them there. But now you can turn the oil tanks off and run the thing on the steaming that comes from the DD fusion system. And it's no different than a PWR system in the sense of the neutrons it produces. Except when you turn it off, there isn't any radioisotope product to decay and kill you. We did most of our work for the Navy. Oops. What? We did most of our work for the Navy. Um, Sal Pais, are you out there? Uh, you watching, bro? [music] Uh, so wait, this guy did most of his work for the Navy making a fusion reactor and now Sal Pais 10 years later is like, "Hey, I got a fusion reactor. I'm referencing Bousard a bunch in it. >> Okay. What's going on, man? >> Somehow for the Navy to make system power systems like that. In the long run, the Navy's interested in PB11. The Navy wants to convert the whole fleet to electric ships. >> Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. Slow down, slow down, wait. The Navy is interested in PB11 fusion. The Navy wants to convert to all electric ships. What? Sorry. Am I in a different time? Did I change to a different timeline than this guy's in? I I'm in the year 2025 in my timeline. We'll call it AF123 timeline. Is that Is this video from a different timeline where all the ships are fusion electric powered and I just don't know about it? Uh is nobody just talking about this publicly or what? I I'm confused here. >> This is a way to make an electric ship that is nuclear but has no radiation unlike the U the submarines and it's relatively simple engineering. Commercial viability is about 6 to 10 years from the time we prove the first main demo plant and the cost as we estimated today is 150 to 200 million. This was a chart from 1994 and the Navy system. >> Sorry, this is a chart from 1994. This is a chart from n the Navy was interested in proton boron 11 fusion propulsion in 1994 for their submarines and it turned into everything electric 30 years ago honestly the easiest conspiracy to believe in is the secret space program conspiracy because how I mean I don't know how else he said it's only going to take 6 to 10 years after 199 94. So, do I think we had plasma orbs teleporting planes in 2014? Yeah. According to this, if you just believe what they're saying and putting on paper and on Google talks, then yeah. I mean, he just showed it to you. You just you literally looked at it. Look, this is old school paper. This man doesn't even probably know how to use a computer. It's all overhead projectors for this man. There it is right there. Okay, let's keep going. >> Which is of course why we died. >> I mean, but who would want these things? All why would you want fusion anyway? All we're going to do is stop all greenhouse gases, end atmospheric smog, eliminate acid rain, decrease thermal pollution, uh stop nuclear waste forever, by the way, and end water shortages because we can uh use reverse osmosis. We can remove the salt from the ocean and and use it and turn it into drinking water for basically zero with fusion power. [snorts] Who would want all that? Nobody would want any of that stuff. So for no for unrelated reasons, it's just never this has never come out to the public. Unrelated to these global problems that would all solve instantly. Okay. Oh, and here's more things. So he he actually talks about here all the things that we could do to clean up the world with this fusion. You could actually ethanol would potentially replace gasoline. Interesting. Fresh water from the sea. Practical space flight. Global economic stability. I'll let him I'll let him speak. >> Space flight practical. If you had this thing, they're all it brings global economic stability. And that's really the main driver. Cheap clean power makes readily available. Makes fixed energy prices. We don't have the OPEC up and down game. Low value cane in third world countries becomes a high value export product. and all the third world nations can become economically viable provided you set up the business arrangements in the right way so that the people who are building the plants and making the alcohol are forced to pay some portion of the profits back to the third world countries from which they are taking the cane. >> Yeah, Chad, I think I pretty much figured out why he died right after this speech. There it was. That was the moment right there. Shouldn't have said shouldn't I put that slide in your presentation. [laughter] the one that says, "Oh, if we release this, all the developing countries, all the third world holes, their sugar cane becomes worth like a ton, becomes worth like gold all of a sudden because now we're going to all use ethanol because it's going to be way cheaper. So all of their product that currently they export for cheap now becomes like co exporting coffee or whatever becomes a cash cow." Yeah. Yeah. The first world's never going to let that happen, bro. Not in a bajillion ever years. So, I'd have deleted that slide. If I was editing, I'd have been like, "Bro, life expectancy just went down like five years. You could have lived to 98 like all the rest of the Black Project engineers." But nope, you had to go talk about helping out the third world. Now, you got to die at 80 like normal people, like a normie. >> You can make a profitable indust industrialization possible in third world countries because they will have money. And that's the whole name of the game. Destroys the world market for gasoline. eliminates the world cartel and while it >> destroys destroys the market for gasoline and d and ends the world cartel. Yeah, that's what a neutronic fusion will do for us. Chat, do you have to wonder why we don't have it? >> Well, states suffer income losses. What they really what they really need is food. And how do you get food in many of those states? You need water to irrigate to make agriculture. But these plants can make desalination plants so cheap that you can afford to make food. You can make deselination plants that run at 120th of the cost of what the Saudis now pay for desalinated and leasing everybody in the world to build these things. We want to build them. Lease everybody. GEC, UK, Korea, Electbury, lease them all over the world. >> Here's the other problem is it's easy to build and it's modular so it's small. So you can license everybody could have one. You could have one in your house. Again, no bueno. Uh the energy companies no Leico that idea. gonna have to throw you off a building though. [laughter] Like my man, this is where like he starts to go off the rails here. He was doing fine. He was talking to the Google people. Then you had to go start talking about cleaning up the environment and how we basically been destroying the environment for no reason whatsoever. They don't like all that. They don't like that kind of talk. >> Lease them and charge them a royalty fee of 2% of gross. Always working at one end of the machine and build and test the demo plan. We can do that in something like five years. He's like, "And by the way, we only need like $150 million and we can build one of these plants. We can basically do what Helen Fusion, this is literally what Helen Fusion is doing. Helen Fusion is playing this out right now. TAE as well, presumably then this is their next proposal. You guys are going to see this on the news." And again, I only know this because I got a psychic brain download from the Zeta aliens, right? Not because I did hard research. No, no. Hard work doesn't pay off, Chad. Never work hard. Never try at anything. Just wait for the aliens, the brain, psychic download it to your mind. You're going to find out the helium fusion is going to come out and be like, "Our reactor, our thing costs like $200 million to build our next power plant." And it's going to be like literally this exact proposal, right? You're looking at it now. It's going to be a different configuration, but you get the idea. Same idea. He just laid it out for you. You said if we're going to do this commercially, one way to do it is doing helium 3, helium 3 reactor. Okay, now we're going to get to the questions here right off the bat. First question, I think I promised this one already. [applause] By the way, yes, it's a standing applause. Bravo. Just master class, bro. Masterclass presentation. They're unassalable. Got it. Came with the facts. [applause] Came with the fact. >> I'm sorry I took so long. You have a qu. We should have questions and answers if I can give any. >> I guess. Yes. These microructured nanoructured metam materials have negative index fractions of microwave. I wonder if those expand the design options for what we've done in confinement. >> The question is if the metastatic materials which have strange indices of refraction, will that give us any hope in the magnetic confinement business? I don't think so. And the reason has nothing to do with their properties. I think that they're just in another world that we don't we don't interact with. Everything we we are doing is an enormously high magnetic fields and it's an environment that's totally hostile. It's very high energy particles that are in the case of PB11 up to 200 kilovolts and huge surface damage from from impacts. And so I don't see how these solid state machine those solid state devices have any particular role to play in this this machine. They might have some use in external control systems but not in the device itself. >> So really interesting. I mean first of all question gets asked right away. What about negative resisting meta materials? So in 2006 asking that question is wild. That is a wild question for 2006. You asked that in 2020. No problem. Everybody knows about metamaterials and the UFO community and what have you. For him to come out and be like, "Hey, what about negative refractive index metamaterials? Could those be used? I mean, you're talking about using uh electric potential to create a voltage." Well, the problem he says is the answer is also very intelligent. It doesn't matter what your meta material is. We're literally melting It's 300 billion degrees, bro. I don't care what your metam material is. nothing's surviving 300 million degrees. So one avenue is could it be used for a control system or other aspect of the device potentially and I think there probably is room for improvement in terms of what the material is in terms of the superconducting magnets and whatever but the geometry is what's allowing for this null zone or this negative well potential in the middle and that's being formed by the magnetic fields because the magnetic fields don't melt. Boom. There we go. That may be a bad answer, but that's the only one I can know. I know it's called WB7 and WB8 right here. The first year will be two small test machines which are >> somebody asked him like what's the next prototype? Why haven't you built a prototype? Because the last prototype WB6 melted and he says though there it is. Is that the next thing would be build another prototype underneath this grant or whatever it would be and then you're going to build your reactor. This is exactly what helium fusion and TAE are doing. those reactors that TAE and Helium are doing. They're doing this. They're building their prototypes so they can say, "Yes, this works. We can prove this works. Now, buy one of my large, you know, whole power plants that I'll build for you with the mag with a giant reactor and batteries and everything >> called WB7 and 8 that are like WB6, but not because they're not circular coils, which are not optimum. They will be actually coils that follow the polyhedral configuration, but they will be carefully spaced and we expect them to work three to five times better than WB6. One of them will be a truncated cube and one of them will be a truncated dodcahedron. And those are two machines that we will do to do just exactly what you ask. We will do WB6 improved 50 times more so that we can hammer that data down so that the senior review panel will have something to look at. >> Here's the risk. >> Yeah. >> Cube and a docahedron. They're all polyhedral configurations. Doesn't this remind you guys of sacred geometry? When I was watching this, I couldn't stop thinking about the letter to Ashton Forbes and the sacred geometry and the monor structure thing. In fact, I even made a clip of it for you guys. >> Products or application you are now working on is correctly based on superc conductivity. The number of orbs you've been speculating about is correct. The fourth orb decides where the object ends up. The technology is based on structures, simple and beautiful structures that lets us use the unlimited power that is everywhere and step outside what I would like to describe as perceived reality. >> Yeah, we're about to find out that the universe is fake and gay. Holographic principle is going to be the winner. It'll be theirs. And