One more time, everyone!  The world desperately needs to know that we could have been doing commercial thermonuclear energy for decades already !  I started studying thermonuclear fusion back in the 1960s when I was still in high school.  I have known for much of my life that there are far simpler approaches to thermonuclear fusion than those which the scientific community has traditionally focused on.  Those traditional methods basically compare to jumping straight to jet engine development in pursuit of chemical combustion.  Please understand that we presently have 50,000 cubic miles of heavy water in our oceans, and deuterium is 1/5th of the weight of heavy water.  The energy contained in just one pound of deuterium is equal to the energy contained in 29 billion pounds of coal.  This means that we could potentially replace our entire world's yearly consumption of coal with less than one cubic yard of heavy water.  What this means is that we already have enough thermonuclear fuel right here on our planet to last for trillions of years into the future, and all it takes to separate heavy water from regular water is fractional (multistage) distillation.  What the world desperately needs to know is that all it  really takes to release this enormous supply of energy is charged vacuum core reactor technology .  This (electrostatically) charged vacuum core thermonuclear reactor system would basically rely upon a large solid block of thermonuclear fuels with many  cylindrical holes or channels cut through it, and these cylindrical channels would all contain a vacuum environment.  At the center of each of these cylindrical channels would be a dielectrically insulated hollow metal pipe covered on the outside by many dielectrically insulated hollow metal needles.  These pipes and their needles would be all be positively charged, and the surrounding block of thermonuclear fuel would be negatively charged.  Thermonuclear fuel gases (H, D, T, He3) would be introduced into this thermonuclear reactor core by way of these positively charged pipes and needles, and these gases would become ionized in the process, at which point these thermonuclear fuel ions would accelerate toward the surrounding block of thermonuclear fuels containing various thermonuclear fuel elements (D, T, Li, B, Be, N, etc.) via the vacuum core environment.  The dielectric coating on these pipes and needles is designed to prevent reverse electron leakage from the negatively charged block of fuel to the positively charged pipes and needles.  The resulting thermonuclear reactions would not only generate large quantities of heat, but they would also breed Tritium and He3, as well as neutrons for other breeding purposes.  Believe it or not, commercial thermonuclear fusion is really that simple, but I have never been able to convince anyone of that over the previous decades that we could already have been doing commercial thermonuclear fusion.  How long is it going to take for me to finally convince the world of this vital fact???  I personally stake my entire reputation on this legitimacy of this thermonuclear technology as I have described it.  - Rick Carter

              Please understand, everyone, that I know EXACTLY what I am talking about when I say I know how to do commercial thermonuclear energy, and there is ABSOLUTELY ZERO possibility that I am wrong about this!  Countless so called experts believe that you use up more energy than you gain by using my described method, but please understand that you actually use up almost nothing, because whatever energy does not go into producing a successful thermonuclear reaction has not been lost, since it is still available in the reactor core in the form of heat, to be recycled and used to generate new electrical energy.  This means that you actually use up virtually nothing by trying to initiate a thermonuclear reaction, regardless of how infrequent a successful reaction might be, and you actually don't need many successful reactions to make this process a commercial success, since the energy released from a successful reaction is so enormous.  I stand ready to publicly prove this to the entire world's scientific community at any time and any place !!!  We can have successful commercial thermonuclear energy right now, and we actually could have had it for decades already!  When is everyone going to finally listen to me, before it is too late?  As I said before, I stake my entire reputation on the veracity of what I am saying.

-  Rick Carter

                   Does everyone understand what I am trying to say here???  I continue to get so much insane argument from the scientific community over this, time after time after time after time, over the years!  Please let me try to spell it out to everyone again in 'no uncertain terms'.  Whenever you try to initiate a thermonuclear reaction using an accelerated nuclei, this inertial energy is not, repeat, NOT used up in the process!  The energy from this effort still resides in the reactor core in the form of recoverable and reusable heat.  It is simply a matter of the efficiency of the overall method which you use to recover the heat from the reactor core, which determines how much energy you are ultimately able to recycle.  By the way, back in the 1960s, there was a method of generating electrostatic energy from low grade (waste) heat which was already approximately 70% efficient at the time.  This low pressure condensation generation technology basically emulated the natural processes which generate lightning in thunderclouds, and one reason that it was so efficient is because it basically used no moving parts.  I remember first reading about this technology in Popular Electronics in the later part of the 1960s.  What this basically means is that you can essentially power this thermonuclear system which I am describing by using the low grade waste heat left over from electrical generation, the type waste heat that we normally throw away into the environment using cooling towers.  (You can also use low grade heat from solar energy, too.)  Is that reasonably clear to everyone now?  You DO NOT use up more energy than you generate, even though successful thermonuclear reactions tend to be infrequent, because you do not actually use up any energy at all by trying to initiate a thermonuclear reaction.  That inertial energy continues to reside in the reactor core in the form of recoverable and reusable heat.

- Rick Carter