There's Something Strange and Radioactive Inside Neptune !!

List members , every once in a while , we come across information that could deal a SUCKER PUNCH , no less , to the prevailing science paradigms .

This video contains EXPLOSIVE new insights about Neptune , that blow every tenet of mainstream planetary science out of the water :))

It would not be an exaggeration to state , that the HEAT ANOMALY of Neptune defies ALL that is part of the establishment's view of Astrophysics ! For the first time , they are being forced to admit to the existence of a SUSTAINABLE source of energy at a planetary core .

Please watch this video again and again to imbibe the significance of these disclosures about Neptune .

**One last point - our Hollow Planet theory about the Inner Sun , at the core of Hollow Planets , is 100% validated by these latest findings about Neptune .



When I get home ‘lol catch it.


Enviado do Yahoo Mail para iPhone

Sure @deandddd , insane heat in the upper atmosphere , diamonds raining down (yes !) and winds howling at twice the speed of sound are part of weird Neptune's bizarre environment .


“I”ll” catch it.

Enviado do Yahoo Mail para iPhone

It would be a good idea to see about getting Jan Lamprecht to share - at least privately - his outer planet research that he has collected before to compose the second book, that he probably will not be able to write due to the insanity of S. Africa.

IDEA: perhaps we can set up a donation fund of some sort that would facilitate his being able to feel as though he has a reason to share his previous research?

Yes @Soretna , Neptune is a "wild planet" , that upends all the textbooks on planetary science . This "ice giant" has quite a personality !

Even though Neptune is such an extreme planet in every way imaginable , we should remember that it is STILL bound by the same laws of nature that apply to Earth and ALL other planets in the Universe .

Mother nature has NO double standards , only humans do :))

**The point is , the same phenomena are occuring here on Earth too , for example , just that they are manifesting in a very mild manner - the "anomalous" Polar observations being just one example . So , all this while , our scientists have just been conveniently ignoring such "deviations" from their cherished theories :))


Folks , the reference to "Something Radioactive inside Neptune" , is truly the clinching evidence , we have long sought for our Hollow Planet theory .

**Even manmade Nuclear Fission or Fusion reactors are ALWAYS hollow (never solid) by design and the same applies to planets , moons and stars .

Only a Nuclear reaction (fission or fusion) , can be a self-sustaining energy source and therefore , a solid or molten ball or iron as a planetary core , is simply NOT viable , neither for Earth , nor for ANY other planet in our Solar System , or even beyond .

Nuclear core theory of Earth deserves study

Diane Clay

Buried 4,000 miles beneath our feet is a churning, burning nuclear reactor shifting continents, bubbling molten rock and providing a magnetic field that protects the human race from extinction.

This new theory by geophysicist Marvin Herndon boldly contradicts the standard view of Earth's core as a solid sphere that has tugged at iron and nickel for 4.5 billion years as it cooled from creation.

The currently accepted theory has the relatively small ball of partially crystallized iron or nickel-iron metal surrounded by a thick fluid core made of iron, nickel and one or more light elements such as sulfur, oxygen or silicon. The theory has been the pervasive belief since the 1940s.

Herndon contends the theory does not explain the amount of heat escaping from the Earth or the helium found in lava flows. And it doesn't explain how the magnetic field has slowed, reversed and even stopped at times.

"From the very beginning of the thought about this, every piece has fallen into place. It's so natural," Herndon said.

"There was never any need to manufacture special circumstances. It fit."

Herndon's theory received little attention among scientists or the public until this fall, when a lengthy article about his inner-Earth idea graced the cover of Discover magazine.

The mainstream exposure forced fellow geophysicists to at least respond to Herndon's work, even if they stopped short of endorsing it.

Many, however, said the new idea deserves at least a crack at recognition and a chance to be disproved.

So far, most of the cry for study has come from scientists in other fields such as an environmental scientist, who thought the idea of a nuclear reactor could explain the ice age, global warming and El Nino.

Those scientists don't claim to know about the geology of the planet's molten center but said Herndon's theory "fit" with what they know from their disciplines.

"It's ordinary people who are bringing this up," Herndon said.

"A construction worker was watching a volcano flow with his wife, thinking how can this be happening on an Earth that's cooling. He said it didn't make sense."

Such lava flows on the ocean floor produced the next link in the San Diego scientist's 30-year adventure to prove his theory.

Included in the flows are helium 3 and helium 4, a phenomenon yet to be explained. Scientists found the very light element in oceanic lava in the late 1960s.

The helium cannot come from the air and must be produced deep within Earth.

Herndon theorizes the helium, a product of nuclear fission, is produced thousands of miles below the surface before making its way through the mantle and riding to the ocean floor on lava flows.

He continues to test Earth's helium production.

The latest additions to Herndon's mounting pile of evidence were included in a paper published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. More papers are on the way, as are three movies about Earth's core, which Herndon said will pique interest among the masses.

Even though Herndon's controversial theory has been published in respected journals, including the Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, his work is seldom cited by other geophysicists.

The issue isn't as much refuted as ignored.

"Not only was it selectively ignored, when it should have been debated, I found all of my grants and proposals were not funded," Herndon said.

"They pretend it doesn't exist."

Ibrahim Cemen, a structural geology and tectonics professor at Oklahoma State University, said he doesn't believe a nuclear reaction is under way at Earth's core, despite "some unconvincing evidence" that traces of radioactive potassium may exist.

"There is probably some radioactive elements in the inner core, but not much," Cemen said.

He said the magnetic field is not produced by energy from natural fission but by turbulent convection currents in the outer core that act like copper wire with the iron to keep the magnetism going.

Despite the skepticism, Cemen said Herndon's ideas should be studied, as should any scientific theory with some merit.

As happened with the theory on tectonic plates in 1912, it was 50 years before the idea of moving continents was accepted, then proved.

"That's part of progress in science. We have to test new ideas," Cemen said.

"If there is a way to test those ideas, I will be open and listen. If it shows uranium and plutonium are there, then definitely."

Herndon, 58, began churning new core models in the 1970s as a graduate student. But it wasn't until 1990, when he was told about the discovery that Jupiter radiates about twice as much energy into space as it receives from the sun, that he molded his clues into the nuclear reactor theory.

The energy, and Jupiter's perfect ingredients for a nuclear reactor, sparked the realization. If it was happening on Jupiter, then it probably existed on other planets, possibly moons and definitely on Earth.

"It clearly seems to me to be a plausible," said David Deming, a geophysicist at the University of Oklahoma.

Deming met with Herndon in Norman this summer.

Until people can truly journey to the center of the Earth as Jules Verne did in his 1864 adventure novel, or at least collect a drilled sample, the planet's core will remain a mystery.

"No one can go down there and see what's really there," Deming said.

"That's what's fascinating about this stuff."


Hi @Echo_on , I am quite keen to know your thoughts on this Nuclear Core theory for the Inner Sun of Hollow Planets .

I tend to think , the Tokamak Fusion reactor is analogous to the way Hollow Planets function , but of course , nature achieves this a LOT more smoothly/harmoniously and without the "radioactive side effects" of manmade nuclear fission or fusion reactors out there :))


1 Like


"The tokamak "

Inside a tokamak , the energy produced through the fusion of atoms is absorbed as heat in the walls of the vessel. Just like a conventional power plant , a fusion power plant will use this heat to produce steam and then electricity by way of turbines and generators.

The tokamak cannot solve the fusion problem. The fusion of atoms does cause energy but the core principles are not correct to create the way our planets create energy.

I am firmly in view that earth's core is the dielectric potential of earth's mass caused by its spin/ dynamo effect. 3 times energy is produced by one earth rotation. In so keeping itself sustained. One feeds the other. All planets with spin create core energy.

The northern lights are an example of energy exerted from our earth. It is not the solar wind that creates them but the fusion of hydrogen within the he earth's core. Science does not want us to know that all planets create their own energy.

So for me the core is either plasma or an inner sun so to speak. Going sci-fi it could also be some sort of inner generator created by aliens who knows.

I will also guess the earth's dynamo is reacting to the 2d fabric of aether (spacetime) but that is another story.


@Echo_on , you are spot on that plasma fusion is the likely SUSTAINABLE energy source (the INNER SUN or Smoky God) powering each and every planet - couldn't agree more :-

"I am firmly in view that earth's core is the dielectric potential of earth's mass caused by its spin/ dynamo effect. 3 times energy is produced by one earth rotation. In so keeping itself sustained. One feeds the other. All planets with spin create core energy.

The northern lights are an example of energy exerted from our earth. It is not the solar wind that creates them but the fusion of hydrogen within the he earth's core. Science does not want us to know that all planets create their own energy.

So for me the core is either plasma or an inner sun so to speak."

***It is high time , that the BULLSHIT theory of a molten iron core for planets be scrapped and thrown into the DUSTBIN of history , where it deserves to be . I'm sorry for the strong language , but I believe this UNTRUTH being taught in schools and colleges to generation after generation of kids is UNFAIR and a huge IMPEDIMENT to progress in the fundamental sciences . This topic goes to the very ROOT CAUSE of all that has gone WRONG with mainstream sciences in the last 150 years .

This is the reason why we are still stuck here on planetoid Earth , marvelling at UFOs built by others and haven't yet fulfilled our own destiny of becoming an inter-planetary species travelling to the stars...!


There could be molton iron around the core but it needs plasma to create it and so is probably a by product (capacitor) not a cause that helps earth stable it's energy. Tectonic plates and the oceans may create a resistance too.


Yes @Echo_on , I agree - electrical plasma is a necessary ingredient for the controlled nuclear fusion reaction (probably cold fusion , NOT thermonuclear fusion that could rip the planet apart) powering the Inner Sun (that's made of plasma) , or the "Smoky God" of Hollow Planets .

**Cold fusion (or nuclear fusion controlled by nature) is the engine of our Universe that powers all stars , planets and moons . Runaway Thermonuclear fusion chain reaction is the exception in nature , NOT the rule . When stars go thermonuclear , they self-destruct and Supernovae are the result .

So , Einstein's gravity centric view that stars are "continuously exploding Hydrogen bombs" is naive . Nature doesn't function so destructively . This view is also corroborated by the Electric Universe Theory.

**Here is an interesting article on different techniques for nuclear fusion . One thing common to all these methods is a Hollow Chamber of some sort , that is protected by an outer shell - analogous to Hollow planets . It is simply unviable to trigger controlled nuclear fusion enclosed inside a solid space . Maybe uncontrolled thermonuclear fusion could occur inside a solid space (as in a Hydrogen bomb), but probably not controlled fusion or cold fusion .

I suspect Hollow Planets somehow generate controlled nuclear fusion (NOT thermonuclear fusion) at their cores , by one of these processes , or some combination of them - it would be highly fascinating to research how exactly controlled nuclear fusion occurs at the Plasma core of Hollow Planets...!

***From what I know , Jan Lamprecht is currently engaged in research on the above topic .

Mainstream science only sees stars as "Energy Generators" , they've missed the point that planets and moons too are Energy Generators . The difference is just in scale because as we know - Mother Nature does NOT apply double standards , only humans do :))

I think the defining characteristic that distinguishes stars from planets is some "critical energy threshold" . Above that threshold , stars come into being and below that threshold , planets come into being . The visible difference of course being that the Dyson sphere of a Hollow Planet coalesces into a SOLID outer shell structure encasing the smaller Inner Sun . In the case of the stars , the higher energy equilibrium means the Dyson sphere outer shell continues to remain in a plasma the boundary between these 2 states are the "brown dwarves" or the "failed Suns" , that we see as gas giant planets like Jupiter or Saturn...!

Nuclear Fusion Power Without Regular Tokamaks Or Stellarators

February 12, 2020

When it comes to nuclear fusion, the most well-known reactor type today is no doubt the tokamak, due to its relatively straight-forward concept of plasma containment. That’s not to say that there aren’t other ways to accomplish nuclear fusion in a way that could conceivably be used in a commercial power plant in the near future.

As we covered previously, another fairly well-known type of fusion reactor is the stellarator, which much like the tokamak, has been around since the 1950s. There are other reactor types from that era, like the Z-pinch, but they seem to have all fallen into obscurity. That is not to say that research on Z-pinch reactors has ceased, or that other reactor concepts — some involving massive lasers — haven’t been investigated or even built since then.

In this article we’ll take a look at a range of nuclear fusion reactor types that definitely deserve a bit more time in the limelight.

Inertial Confinement Fusion

Target assembly at the NIF in 2010, with the target pellet mounted in the cryogenic positioning device.

Inertial Confinement Fusion (ICF) relies on the rapid transfer of energy into a fuel target — usually a fuel pellet. This causes the outer layer of the pellet to rapidly expand, causing a shock wave to travel inwards, into the target. If done properly, this causes compression of the fuel (usually deuterium and tritium) at sufficient levels to start a fusion reaction that travels outwards from the center.

The use of ICF ranges from fusion weapons research to generating electricity. France’s Laser Mégajoule (LMJ) is an example of the former, whereas the US’s National Ignition Facility (NIF) is the world’s most prominent example of the latter, though it has also been used for materials science and weapons research.

Both LMJ and NIF use lasers to transfer energy to the fuel pellets, which in the case of NIF involves 192 main laser amplifier beamlines that amplify the initial low-power (1 billionth of a joule) laser pulse to the target of about 4 million joules, with each beam traveling 1.5 km before hitting the target.

At this point in time, there are a number of ICF facilities operating around the world, though some newer ones like the EU’s HiPER ICF project never got off the ground. Interest in ICF seems to be waning on account of its economic viability as an energy source remaining questionable. This is mostly due to the cost of the fuel pellets and surrounding infrastructure. Unless ways can be found to sharply reduce these costs, it seems unlikely that ICF reactors will be used for anything other than materials science and weapons research.

Magnetic Confinement Fusion

Although tokamaks and stellarators are also Magnetic Confinement Fusion (MCF) reactor designs, they are not the only type of MCF reactor. The Z-pinch reactor design is another type of MCF reactor, using the Lorentz forces through the plasma instead of surrounding the plasma with (super-conducting) magnets. The main advantage of the latter approach is that it allows for continuous operation, something which is a fairly unique property in fusion reactor designs, which most commonly use a pulse-based design.

Whereas ITER is considered to be a bog-standard tokamak design, along with China’s HL-2M and upcoming CFETR tokamaks, more exotic configurations are also being worked on. One of the most prominent being the ARC design. The acronym stands for ‘Affordable, robust, compact’, one can tell where its focus lies. While ITER and CFETR are massive tokamaks with a large internal volume, ARC aims to use ReBCO — rare-earth barium copper oxide — high-temperature superconducting magnets.

The inside of the National Spherical Torus Experiment’s vacuum chamber.

Theoretically, this should allow ARC to generate a stronger magnetic field than current tokamaks, doubling the magnetic force on the plasma, while allowing it to be much more compact and sheeting the requirement the same level of cryogenics as low-temperature superconducting magnets. It is also suggested that the use of ReBCO would allow for enough flexibility to allow the tokamak to be ‘folded open’ when not in use, to allow for easy maintenance. At this point, however, ARC is a purely theoretical design by MIT and PSFC. It’s possible that a demonstration reactor (SPARC) could be constructed in the future.

Spherical tokamaks (STs) are another interesting topic of current research. The principle here is simple: instead of forcing the plasma into a tokamak’s typical toroidal (‘doughnut’) shape, it is allowed to take on a spherical shape as much as possible, with only a minimal ‘hole’ in the center for the central magnets. This should make a reactor less expensive and easier to manage. A currently active ST is the National Spherical Torus Experiment, (NSTX) constructed by Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory along with Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Columbia University and University of Washington.

After an upgrade between 2012 and 2015, NSTX was renamed to ‘NSTX-U’, for ‘Upgrade’. This version was stopped in 2016 due to issues with its poloidal coils, which required dismantling of a significant part of the reactor to diagnose and fix the issue. Reactivation of NSTX-U is not planned until the end of 2020. With some luck we’ll be seeing more of this reactor soon.

An interesting proposition by some scientists involved in STs is to replace the central magnet column with a design inspired by the Z-pinch reactor, using Lorentz forces to provide the magnetic field in the center instead of a physical column. This would allow for an ST to form a virtually perfect sphere of plasma.

One of the two yin-yang mirrors arrives at LLNL.

Finally, Lockheed Martin’s Compact Fusion Reactor (CFR) has received a lot of attention since they announced it in 2014, conveniently omitting that a lot of work was still left to be done on the design. This MCF design is interesting because it appears to revive the concept of a magnetic mirror, a fusion design that many had thought to have been left behind in history after the Mirror Fusion Test Facility was shut down in the 1980s. Time will tell whether the demise of magnetic mirror reactors was truly exaggerated.

Worthy of mention is the Field-Reversed Configuration (FRC). Although not as prominently present in power generation research, FRC has the interesting property that by trapping plasma on closed magnetic field lines, it can manipulate this plasma to be accelerated in one direction, which would make it useful for spacecraft propulsion. It’s one of various possible new propulsion designs under consideration.

Here’s to All the Other Designs

Implosion of a fusion microcapsule on the NOVA laser system.

Although the goal of this article wasn’t to provide an exhaustive list of current fusion power reactors, it should at least give a solid overview of the big players on the field at this point in time. There are countless smaller players out there as well, often start-ups testing out a new idea or concept using some funding money. Some of those designs may prove to work well as a neutron source, while an occasional concept may make it past the prototyping stage and show enough promise to be considered for something more.

The most exciting thing about nuclear fusion research is perhaps that nothing is set in stone. Much like the plasma inside a tokamak, it constantly changes shape and direction. Once it was thought that the stabilized Z-pinch reactor design was going to work, only for that to fall apart. Then there are the magnetic mirror, stellarator, tokamak (spherical or toroidal), and ICF configurations. Nobody can tell which of these approaches will turn out to be the golden ticket towards the one design that will end up getting commercialized.

This knowledge, along with the promise of the immense pay-off if one cracks this one, has led to a modern day gold rush. Who will figure out the first commercial scale fusion power reactor? The first compact and cheap fusion reactor? The first fusion battery that will run a smartphone for a decade? The first fusion powered spaceship?

With the tokamak design seemingly reaching its zenith with ITER and CFETR, we might end up with another ZETA moment in another decade or two with plasma physics throwing an unexpected spanner in the wheels, or we will have 2 GW commercial fusion reactors churning out cheap, clean power by the 2030s. Nobody knows for sure. That’s both exciting and terrifying, which is exactly the kind of situation that draws in those who are in for a bit of adventure.

Here’s to keeping that bright star of fusion research burning .

[Featured image: The preamplifiers of the National Ignition Facility in 2012. (CC-BY 3.0, Damien Jemison/LLNL)]

120 thoughts on “Nuclear Fusion Power Without Regular Tokamaks Or Stellarators”


Folks , it just got even weirder on Neptune !!


List members , such a peculiar reversal of the massive storm on Neptune provides a clear evidence for the existence of the "Coriolis Effect" , which occurs on all planets , but with varying intensity .


Folks , strong X-Ray emissions from Uranus , Radioactivity from Neptune , net positive energy emission from all gas giant planets , insanely strong magnetic fields of Jupiter/Saturn...what does all of this point to ???? The core of planets has to be nuclear - NOT a stupid ball of iron :))


1 Like

Very interesting. I like the idea and of raining diamonds.

1 Like

Thanks @Madmonk , I too like the raining diamonds of Neptune :))



A spinning solenoid creates a magnetic canopy, and hollow planets absorb particles from The Sun.

Cater stipulates that the electron particles that become caught up within the hollow cavity experience repulsion from the gravity-inducing radiations that are emitted from the inner surface, and that this repulsion - experienced in an equidistant way from all sides around - causes them to congregate and jumble together at the center of the cavity.

He continues (paraphrasing mine) to explain that the friction thus caused unleashes higher frequency particles held with the particles that congregate at the center, and that this is how the inner sun, the source of heat and energy, forms. It is a plasma sun.

The David LaPoint video takes it from there, so to speak, and delineates the electromagnetic structure of the planet.

This idea of a particle containing another particle, of differing frequency, within it; is simply nature's way. Biologists are well aware that cells can contain other cells, and biologists call the carier cells just that; carrier cells. It is a biological term. As an example, infected cells can enter into carrier cells, and thus the infected cells escape detection by a body's immune system. In this form, the carrier cell can hide infected cells for a while and then, when the carrier cell dies, the infected cell pops out.

So please don't doubt that the particles that congregate at the center of the inner cavity can carry more active and hotter particles within them, and that they can fragment due to friction from Jumbling, and release the warmer particles.


1 Like


You have made a nice comment that the northern lights are not created from the solar winds but rather, from "energy exerted from our Earth".

Observation proves this, too:

Page 106 of Farthest North

1 Like

Yes @deandddd , the wandering & starless "rogue planets" , that sport spectacular Auroras , have nailed the blatant lies about solar winds as the root cause of planetary Auroras !