Cuicui wrote: Your assertion is not proof. It simply expresses your belief. To get an idea, shouldn't we start by analyzing the article?
And what does the article say?
sen-no-sen wrote:Ok you will tell us.
According to the short summary published on their site, they seem to allude to the curious confidentiality of the project and its possible developments (military / civilian).
I did not know this magazine, and although it is an alternative, the subjects covered are very interesting.
obi76 wrote:The Nexus is far from being a scientific benchmark
+1bernardd wrote:Again, do not confuse media and source. If the media only propagated what is scientifically proven, there would be neither sport nor politics and we would be quieter :-)obi76 wrote:The Nexus is far from being a scientific benchmark
Nexus has made it its mission to address subjects that are ignored or censored elsewhere. It is up to the reader to form his opinion. If we only talk about known subjects, how can we learn about unknown subjects? Unless you think you know everything
gegyx wrote:The 10-page article is collated by ... a passionate about unconventional scientific approaches.
gegyx wrote:The 10-page article is collated by Jérôme Dangmann, professor of physical sciences, passionate about unconventional scientific approaches.
It is a clarified and historical approach to the Z machine.
It is now the solution for a clean merger.
Go back to "Fossil energies: oil, gas, coal and nuclear electricity (fission and fusion)"
Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 305 guests