What does /sci/ think of this? Some guy posted it on /pol/ saying

File: 2.jpg (670KB, 1920x606px) Image search: [Google]

670KB, 1920x606px

>>8348455

File: 3.jpg (1MB, 2560x1920px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2560x1920px

>>8348460

File: 4.jpg (1MB, 2560x1920px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2560x1920px

>>8348466

File: 5.jpg (1MB, 2560x1920px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2560x1920px

>>8348473
He's also said stuff like

>Lasers and Electrostatics get them to play together nicely. Not as complicated as people think

>Schematics aRd not important, vacuum pump, timed electrostatic plates, and laser.

>H1 pumped in, laser gets the charged H1 in state accelerated by the electostatic plates, plates are timed. All there.

I think it's another attempt at cold fusion, tbqh

Bump from interest.

I don't think there's enough legible writing to really test the schematic.

File: 1473978409651.png (51KB, 963x740px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 963x740px

Bump out of dumb dumb curiosity

Here's the link
boards.4chan.org/pol/thread/89019860

>>8348455
Even /pol/ sciencefags could smell the bullshit, its fucking nothing.

>>8348455
>Some guy posted it on /pol/
Why do /pol/ brainlets keep on invading this board?

>>8348538
They look up to you /sci/ like a big brother that isn't retarded.

>>8348455
Someone make it and find out.

Totally works. Just use the motor to power the pump which will power the tube and that powers the motor. Infinite energy

>>8348550
lel.

/pol/ is like the Mokuba to Seto

>>8348557
this

>>8348455
Its a device that creates protons, using only a water pump, electrostatic plates, a laser, and a proton.

>>8348537
someone mad that they can't afford a proper lazer?

Building it as we speak, shit is looking promising.

>>8348567
live stream the results

>>8348567
I have all the lazers

File: 2.39.50.png (36KB, 141x142px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 141x142px

>>8348567
Anyone who spells laser with a 'z' must not be fucking around

>>8348567
>2016
>still believing in lasers
Particles can't occupy the same space you fucking retard.

>>8348574
>lazaer

dumbass

>>8348573
Chinese sell deuterium?

>>8348583
find it on tor I bet its on there, you can buy almost anything off a dark market

>>8348583
Dude just buy a couple hydrogen atoms and send them through a particle accelerator made out of a toilet and make deuterium.

Just use a fail-safe switch so you can deactivate the atoms.

>>8348455

>Hempstead, New York

What the fuck. I live there. What a funny coincidence.

>>8348583
>Chinese sell deuterium
/sci/ "intellectuals" can't even distill their own heavy water reserves and run electrolysis it

>>8348538

To trigger the easily b8'd like you.

Thanks for the (you) btw

>>8348587
I had a contact in Russia, but with some new Putin legislation that shit is no more...

Now I know how adolf felt, Norway really shouldn't hold a grudge, this shit is grueling!

>>8348594
Hey man I'm an ENTP Engineer, I need other people to do shit for me K?

File: hello i am pol.png (129KB, 314x278px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 314x278px

>>8348559
>/pol/ is like the Mokuba to Seto

>>8348598
>ENTP
ENTJ born fuhrer here, you work for the Alphas like me Delta

File: SouseisekiConfused.png (196KB, 432x480px) Image search: [Google]

196KB, 432x480px

>>8348615
you don't even know your basic bitch anime references and you presume to enter discussions about fusion reactions?

>>8348618
This
You should leave >>8348615 never post here again

File: hot or cold.jpg (39KB, 374x347px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 374x347px

>>8348618
>fusion reactions

>>8348592
You live at ground zero

>>8348632
>18000 volt current
Top kek

When hydrogen protons held in a state by lasers and smashed together, there is a probability that the wave function will appear inside the coulomb barrier.

This produces deuterium and a stray positron.

File: 1472591662105.png (11KB, 1016x547px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 1016x547px

>>8348657

>the wave function will appear

File: 1441032679013.jpg (40KB, 389x501px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 389x501px

>>8348626
>there is only one type of fusion reaction
You're illiterate about science AND esoteric animeism, why are you even here?

>sent the pics to an engineer friend
He called me back right away asking where the fuck I found these, said it looked like some kind of rail gun...maybe. He's gonna check it out a little longer and then get back with me. If the thread isn't dead by then, I'll update. If died, update to /pol/.

>>8348566
I think this guy is right, a radioactive material is emitting particles through a small hole.

What is the motor for?

>>8348550
little do they know this place is just as retarded

>>8348775
Having browsed both extensively I'd say sci is much worse. Mostly high school students. /g/ is by far the most superior board. /pol/ is filled with all kinds of people. /sci/ seems filled with high school students and freshmen who are at a math class or two higher than their peers. Big whoop

>>8348794
Yeah this it what I've found as well. The arrogance of this board is expected but still astounding. It's mostly a circle jerk.

>>8348801
aww, poow baby, which popsci misconception did you get yelled at for?

>>8348805
This is a prime example of what I'm talking about.

>>8348807
Get rekt faggot. Plenty of advanced undergrads post here, you're just salty because someone BTFO you

>>8348807
>you're arrogant
>my proof is that you won't accept my claim that you're arrogant at face value
>abloobloo
That's how it is. If you think that's too much then you've clearly never seen someone getting ripped a new asshole in a conference because there was a mistake in their abstract.

>>8348808
>>8348809
See, you're so far up your ass you've literally made up a scenario to put me in a box because it might hurt your precious ego.

>>8348815
The only people getting BTFO here are popsci brainlets or conspiracy schizos. You're either one of them.

>>8348809
>look at me I attend pretentious conferences where me and my nerd friends all speak to each other condescendingly in an attempt to establish our intellectual dominance

Lol. You're a literal nobody, just shut up

>>8348808
>strawmanning this hard

>>8348823
The arrogance doesn't refer to being BTFO. It's the manner in which you guys share information. It's not about the pursuit of knowledge for most on /sci/. It's about your ego.

File: hillary-rodham-clinton-983ef53096a65c47.jpg (536KB, 2048x1365px) Image search: [Google]

536KB, 2048x1365px

>>8348808
>advanced undergrads

Surely a point of authority and knowledge

>>8348835
>You're not nice enough so let me draw conclusions on what motivates you based on that
Don't be so thin skinned. Every spewed bullshit deserves a wake up call.

>>8348857
I would agree, but that's not what I'm addressing. I'm addressing sharing of information not making counter arguments in favor of truth.

Individuals here are more prone to mock a lack of understanding than try to understand it and correct it. Look at this thread for example, hardly any real information was asserted, huh? For a board specializing in science and math you think someone could have figured this out for people who wanted to learn or know more. Instead it was ignored or ridiculed. I've seen this happen time and time again and not with "home work" threads, but serious inquiry and questioning.

>>8348876
>Individuals here are more prone to mock a lack of understanding than try to understand it and correct it.
When it's easily accessible knowledge, it means that the person spewing shit didn't do their basic research before talking. And THIS is the issue, not the fact they are wrong about the particular thing. Spoonfeeding them an answer isn't gonna help.

>hardly any real information was asserted, huh?
There is no intellectual obligation to try and decode every crackpot diagrams and try to understand what he means, especially when the answer ends up invariably being "it's all wrong". Professors receive shit like this all the time. Anybody can draw a complicated diagram, it's not science.

>>8348883
What do you define as easily accessible knowledge? How do you know they haven't looked it up?

Again it's an arrogance to assume that the individual who doesn't know isn't trying or can't know. The example that comes to mind is when a thread opens up on a topic and someone asks for a quick run down of the ideas. Often times /sci/ will discuss advanced topics that while not difficult to understand in layman terms, are technically complex. The response one often sees to a request like this is regularly negative, something along the lines of what you wrote.

Spoon feeding isn't needed; it can be done through discussion. Not to mention that teaching is a very useful tool. Afterall teaching is one of the best tools for learning/studying a topic.

And no there isn't an obligation to do as such, but there wasn't a post that gave an sounded as though it gave an honest try and reported that it's nonsense with a solid argument. Most of the responses were non answers.

>>8348916
>What do you define as easily accessible knowledge?
Something that you can get through google without an academic access.
>How do you know they haven't looked it up?
Because if they did look it up they wouldn't say the opposite of what is correct.
>but there wasn't a post that gave an sounded as though it gave an honest try
An honest try at what? It's just a fucking obscure diagram, it can mean anything.

>>8348927
Again you're missing the point.

I'm describing scenario like the following:
>Ignoramus: Hey what does x mean?

Versus what you're imagining :
>Ignoramus: X means this.

See the difference?

And the way you answered does help. The lack of a true discussion or argument in this thread was disappointing.

Frankly I'm no scientist, I'm a math guy. I was intrigued in the post and couldn't understand it. I was hoping someone could give a thorough analysis of it with some credentials (even if it was just "hey electrical engineer here, seems like nonsense"). What happened was attacks on the source and dismissal of the post without explanation which is something very unscientific.

>>8348937
>I was intrigued in the post and couldn't understand it.
But that's the point. Crackpots always have a bunch of stuff that nobody can understand, even people who are experts in the domain, because it doesn't make any bloody sense.
This talk has plenty of examples of that:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXSgp755DSA

>>8348768
Im watching and waiting.

>>8348583
It's like $15 bucks a bottle. This isn't hard.
https://www.unitednuclear.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=135

File: 111.jpg (80KB, 600x900px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 600x900px

>>8348794
As someone who goes on /g/ quite a bit, it has a few decent posters, but the majority is just gaymen, bait threads, speccy, desktop, etc. Actual discussion does go on in things like /dpt/ but that's also filled with memes and shitposting. Not complaining, I like some memes, but it's hardly high brow