FUSIONSCIENCE • TECHNOLOGY • ECONOMICS • POLITICS
July-August 1984
$2.50/?^™

.

The world will have widespreadfusion power by the year 2000.
The only question is whether it will bedelivered by an ICBM or a tokamak.
It's up to you!
With your help, the Fusion
Energy Foundation can• put Fusion magazine into thehands of 200,000 progrowth
Americans• educate America on thebenefits—economic, military,and scientific—of developing
directed energy beamtechnologies• send speakers nationwide to
debate nuclear freeze advocateson campuses and at community meetings• promote science andtechnology—specifically thedevelopment of nuclear fusionand fission and space exploration—as the most important
tools for continuing humanprogress.
Join the Fusion Energy
Foundation and give gift
subscriptions to Fusion magazine.
Yes, I want to support the Fusion
Energy Foundation.
Enclosed is:• Sustaining membership $250
• Individual membership $75• Corporate membership $1,000(AH memberships include 10 issues of
Fusion)• 1-year subscription to Fusion $20(6 issues)• 2-year subscription to Fusion $38(12 issues)
Make checks payable to Fusion Energy
Foundation, Box 1438, Radio City
Station, New York, N.Y. 10101

FUSIONSCIENCE • T E C H N O L O G Y

Vol 6, No. 2•

ECONOMICS•POLITICS

July-August 1984

The Kra Canal: Gateway to Asia's Development
Uwe Parpart Henke
Under discussion for some 200 years, the Kra Canal project is now underactive consideration.

Dr. Steven Bardwell and Charles B. Stevens
Partial use of nuclear explosives for excavation w o u l d cut both theconstruction time and the cost of the Kra Canal by 40 percent.

28 France Takes the Nuclear Lead
Laurent Rosenfeld
W h i l e the U.S. nuclear program is shrinking away, nuclear power has
produced more than one-half of France's electricity since July 1983.

35 Thermonuclear Laser Fusion in the Soviet Union
Dr. Nikolai G. Basov"There is no d o u b t as to achieving breakeven in thermonuclear
reactions using the laser approach,'' says Academician Basov.

41 W h y I Must Attack Albert Einstein
Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.
H o w does one determine valid scientific conceptions? The m e t h o dpresented here, the hypothesis of the higher hypothesis, is based o nrestoring the fundamental principles of continental science.

News

14
16
17
19
50
51
54
59

SPECIAL REPORT
Made in Moscow? The Legislation Against U.S. Beam Defense
The Pritikin Fraud: Promoting the Cult of Protein Deprivation
FUSION REPORTJET Begins Phase 2 of Operation
Sandia Achieves Breakthrough in Particle Beam Focusing
Livermore Study Shows Fusion W i l l Be Cheapest Energy Source
BEAM DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY
Lasers Can Propagate Through the Atmosphere
WASHINGTON
Congress Slashes the Fusion Budget
The U.S. Needs a Manned Space Station!
THE YOUNG SCIENTIST
H o w Plants G r o w in the 'Golden M e a n ' Ratio
Professor Von Puzzle: Brother Bonacci's Rabbits

Departments
EDITORIAL
NEWS BRIEFS

Carol WhiteManaging Editor
Marjorie Mazel Hecht
Fusion Technology Editor
Charles B. Stevens
Washington Editor
Marsha Freeman

Books Editor
David Cherry

26 Using Nuclear Explosives for Construction

9
11

Editor-in-Chief

Energy Editor
William Engdahl

Features
22

EDITORIAL STAFF

761

VIEWPOINTBOOKSArt Director
Alan Yue
Photo Editor
Carlos de Hoyos
Advertising Manager
Joseph Cohen
Circulation and Subscription Manager
Denise Ham(212)247-8820

FUSION (ISSN 0148-0537) is published 4 times
a year by the Fusion Energy Foundation, 304 West58th Street, Fifth Floor, New York, N.Y. 10019. Tel.
(212) 247-8439. Dedicated to providing accurate
and comprehensive information on advanced energy technologies and policies, FUSION is committed to restoring American scientific and technological leadership. FUSION coverage of thefrontiers of science focuses on the self-developing
qualities of the physical universe in such areas asplasma physics—the basis for fusion power—aswell as biology and microphysics, and includes
ground-breaking studies of the historical development ot science and technology.
The views of the FEF are stated in the editorials.
Opinions expressed in articles are not necessarily
those of the FEF directors or advisory board.
Subscriptions by mail are $20 for 6 issues or$38 for 12 issues in the US A; $25 for 6 issues in
Canada. Airmail subscriptions to other countries
are $40 for 6 issues.
Address all correspondence to FUSION, Fusion
Energy Foundation, P.O. Box 1438, Radio City
Station, New York, N.Y. 10101.
Second class postage paid at New York, N.Y.
Postmaster: Send address changes to FUSION,
P.O. Box 1438. Radio City Station. New York, N.Y.
10101.
Note to Libraries and Subscribers
We apologize for irregularity in our printing
schedule, but we assure readers that the only pronuclear science magazine in the country intends tocontinue publishing! Because of financial difficulties, the FEF published only 4 issues of FUSION
in 1983. The FEF will now regularly publish 6 issues
a year, but only 4 issues in 1984, beginning with
Vol. 6. No. 1, May-June 1984.
Subscribers who purchased a 10-issue subscription and those who purchased a 6-issue subscription will receive the number of issues they paidfor.
Contributions to the FEF are welcome (and tax
deductible).
Copyright B 1984
Fusion Energy Foundation
Printed in the USA
All Rights Reserved
ISSN 0148-0537

USPS 437-370

On the cover: Christopher Sloan's illustration of the Kra Canal, depicting
the the canal entrance at the port ofSongkhla. A nuclear power plant is in
the left foreground, the port is at right,
and the industrial zone is in the background. Cover design is by Virginia
Baier.

Editorial

Strategic Defense Initiative on the
If the Democratic Party machine around Charles Manatt
and Averell Harriman along w i t h the so-called conservatives around the Heritage Foundation and Lt. General Danny Graham have their way, w e will be left w i t h the choiceof submitting to Soviet nuclear blackmail or fighting a war
we cannot w i n .
O n the one side, the Graham c r o w d in High Frontier istrying to turn the President's beam weapon defense program into a Rube Goldberg makeshift, p u t t i n g into o r b i t
shrapnel-filled spacecraft that are both ineffective and indefensible. O n the other side, various liberal congressmen
have submitted legislation to Congress attacking the U.S.
beam defense system—legislation that has the stamp of
approval f r o m the Soviet Embassy in Washington, D.C. (asthe Special Report documents, p. 9). As a result, the Strategic Defense Initiative c o u l d have as much as $400 million
cut from its f u n d i n g .
2

FUSION

July-August 1984

The W h i t e House request of $1.78 billion for the Strategic
Defense Initiative was already a compromise, a reelectionyear concession to the Danny Graham lobby and the Soviet
agents of influence in Congress and the Senate. This isabout one-tenth the amount needed for the crash effort
that we have proposed to develop a layered beam defense
system.
At stake here is nothing less than the fate of the Western
Alliance, and w i t h it civilization as w e k n o w it. There is n olonger any d o u b t that the strategic advantage now lies indevelopment of defensive rather than offensive weapons;
defensive beam weapons are here to stay. That the Soviets
have a crash program to develop beam weapons is welld o c u m e n t e d , going back to the 1960s. The question is: H o w
far advanced are they? Are w e about to have another Sputnik surprise this year or next?
Under the p r o d d i n g of Senators Pressler and Tsongas,
Editorialfectiveness is that the Soviets could rebuild their entire
missile force so that the boost phase of a missile w o u l d becomplete before the missile leaves the atmosphere—but
this rebuilding w o u l d take 20 years. Thus Soviet missiles
will remain vulnerable to U.S. X-ray laser defense for quitea w h i l e , giving us time to come up w i t h new defenses.
Who Is the Soviet Lobby?
O n e of the most startling aspects of the fight for beam
defense is to see how successful the Soviets have been in
influencing both ends of the U.S. political spectrum to promote Soviet policy. The crowd around Richard Garwin andKosta Tsipis, for example, openly travels on the left (soopenly, in fact, that former Washington governor Dixy Lee
Ray called Garwin a "traitor" at an international meeting o n
beam defense a year ago). Their line of attack against beam
weapons, however, dovetails with that of the so-called rightw i n g crowd around General Graham. The Graham groupclaims to support the development of A B M systems and theconcept of mutually assured survival. Yet, by opposing thedevelopment of directed energy beam weapons—beam
defense based on new physical principles—at this time they
are w o r k i n g to undermine the only effective system for alayered beam defense.
The line of the so-called right w i n g is that laser and associated defensive weapons are diverting funds f r o m less sophisticated kill systems—and besides, they say, beam
weapons may not w o r k . Of course, Graham et al. fail toadmit that their program is a guaranteed 50 percent failure,according to SDI manager Lt. General Abrahamson, eventhough it involves a proven technology.
&S?tO

f

Line
key liberal spokesmen in the drive to sabotage this country's beam weapon effort, the Congressional Office ofTechnology Assessment has issued a dishonest, but much
publicized report attempting to refute the w o r k of beam
defense authorities such as Maxwell Hunter of Lockheed,
Dr. Edward Teller, Lyndon LaRouche, and the FEF. A u thored by Ashton B. Carter of the Massachusetts Instituteof Technology, the report parallels the arguments of leading Soviet scientist E.P. Velikhov against the feasibility of abeam weapon defense. Yet, to give the appearance of objectivity, Carter is forced t o admit that it w o u l d take only
160 orbiting chemical lasers to provide w o r l d w i d e defense
against ballistic missile attack. He also admits that the X-ray
laser need not be based in space but could be p o p p e d up
from submarines and could accelerate quickly enough todestroy the current Soviet arsenal.
Carter's principal argument against the X-ray laser's ef-

Editorial

N o w a nasty coalition of these traitors has been f o r m e d :the National Campaign to Save the A B M treaty. In addition
to former President Jimmy Carter and dean of the Democratic Party Averell Harriman, its leading spokesmen include former military advisor Richard Garwin, former national security advisor McGeorge Bundy, former secretaryof state Cyrus Vance, and General Maxwell Taylor. These
are the same men w h o 20 years ago were k n o w n as the"butchers of Vietnam." They created that bloody war as ano-win situation whose only purpose was to target as large
a population as possible for destruction. By this " b o d y
c o u n t " policy these butchers meant to leave a w h o l e generation of American youth w i t h the knowledge that they
had been betrayed, to create a climate of cynicism anddespair in the West—the counterculture.
If these opponents of President Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative w i n , w e may well be catapulted into the war
they claim to want to avoid by the very weakness that theirpolicies guarantee.
The London Times reported June 13 that 86 percent of
the U.S. population support the beam defense program,and 73 percent support it w i t h o u t regard to cost. We andthose o f y o u w h o have organized w i t h us can take justifiablecredit for this, but now is not the time for a pat on the back.
This c r o w d of traitors must be prevented from destroying
civilization. W e may not have too much time left.
July-August 1984

FUSION

3

News Briefs
JAPANESE TRANSLATION OF FEF BEAM BOOK SPARKS DEBATE
Beam Defense: An Alternative to Nuclear Destruction was published in Japanese by Jiji Press in early June. FEF research director Uwe Parpart Henke was inJapan to announce the release of the FEF b o o k and to hold seminars w i t h thecountry's t o p political, military, and industrial leaders o n the technical feasibility
and strategic necessity of beam weapon systems. Sixty-five parliamentariansf r o m the Liberal Democratic Party heard Henke give a report on beam weapons
at the party's headquarters June 5. The next day, Henke addressed 200 leadersof Japan's major industrial firms at a seminar sponsored by theKeidanren industrial association.
The Jiji Press edition is b o u n d w i t h a red sash that calls for making beam
weapons and the doctrine of Mutually Assured Survival the basis for revivingtalks between the United States and the Soviet U n i o n .

The FEF's Beam Defense book, publishedin Tokyo by jiji Press.

Stuart K. Lewis

Abrahamson: SDI is aimed at 95 or 99
percent
effectiveness.

4

FUSIONLEADING SOVIET SCIENTIST SAYS U.S. BEAM DEFENSE IS IMPOSSIBLE
E.P. Velikhov, vice president of the Soviet Academy of Sciences, used thepages of the Washington Post June 24 to summarize his activities in the UnitedStates against the beam defense program: "A group of Soviet scientists w i t h
w h i c h I am associated, the Union of Concerned Scientists of the United States,
and the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment were a m o n g thosestudying the issue, and all of them came to the same c o n c l u s i o n : The Star Wars
project is a dream that cannot come true. We all had o p p o r t u n i t y to discuss our
findings at a recent meeting held outside Washington, where w e discoveredthat our scientific conclusions were practically identical."In contrast to Velikhov's assessment, the U.S. Congress June 12 received a 3hour classified briefing on the status of Soviet crash programs for the development of both antisatellite weapons and strategic antimissile defenses, as well ason the degree of advancement of the U.S. Strategic Defense Initiative program.
ABRAHAMSON SAYS SDI SYSTEM AIMS AT EFFECTIVENESS OF 95 OR 99%
Lt. G e n . James Abrahamson, manager of the Strategic Defense I nitiative at thePentagon, said that the projects the SDI is w o r k i n g o n are aimed at 95 or 99
percent effectiveness against nuclear missiles, not the 50 percent effectivenessof the " H i g h Frontier" proposal of General Danny Graham. Speaking at a meeting of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics in New York June
19, Abrahamson outlined a defensive system that has a certainty of "70 percent
in the boost phase, 70 percent in the post-boost bus phase," w i t h the remaining
missiles destroyed by midcourse and point defense.
The June test of the H o m i n g Overlay Experiment (HOE), Abrahamson said,demonstrated "that some of this technology is here today and c o u l d be deployed
under the A B M treaty." He described the w o r k being done on ground-basedlasers, the demonstration of segemented laser mirrors, and the particle beamprogram at Los Alamos National Laboratory. Arms control hasn't w o r k e d in many
areas," Abrahamson said, and w h e n w e sign a treaty, "the piece of paper onlymeans something in this c o u n t r y . "ADMINISTRATION TAKES A PROGROWTH STANCE O N POPULATION
The White House has reversed the Carter administration policy o n population
control w i t h a progrowth policy statement to be presented at the United Nations
w o r l d population conference in Mexico City in August, laying o u t the advantages and necessity of population g r o w t h . The draft statement notes: " A m o n g
the less developed nations . . . population increase was . . . directly related tothe humanitarian efforts of the United States and other Western countries. A
tremendous expansion of health services saved millions of lives every year.
Emergency relief helped millions t o survive f l o o d , famine, and d r o u g h t . The
sharing of technology, the teaching of agriculture and engineering, the spreadof Western ideals and the treatment of w o m e n and children, all helped to
drastically reduce the mortality rates. . . .
July-August 1984

N e w s Briefs

"The second factor that turned the population boom into a crisis," the statement says, "was confined to the Western world. It was the outbreak of antiintellectualism, which attacked science, technology, and the very concept ofmaterial progress. . . .
"In responding to certain members of Congress concerning the previous
admininstration's Global2000 report," the statement continues, this administration in 1981 repudiated its call for more governmental supervision and control. . . . This administration places a priority upon technological advance andeconomic expansion, which hold out the hope of prosperity and stability in a
rapidly changing world."
SPACE SCIENTIST KRAFFT A. EHRICKE RECEIVES GODDARD AWARD
At its annual meeting in Washington, D.C., May 3, the American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics conferred the prestigious Goddard Astronautics
Award on Krafft A. Ehricke for his "more than 40 years of practical and visionary
contributions to astronautics." Ehricke has been a pioneer in rocket propulsion,
including work on the V-2 rocket, the Atlas missile, and the liquid hydrogen
Centaur. In accepting the award for her father, who was ill, Krista Ehricke Deer
said that her father's work proves that "there are no limits to growth." If myfather's engineering designs were implemented, she said, "there would be
increased agriculture, increased industry, increased natural resources and quality of life, and increased human creativity. If his ideas were turned into hardware,
the world would be a better place."
Ehricke's Centaur was the first liquid hydrogen rocket, a precursor of theSaturn V rockets that launched the Apollo missions to the Moon. Today it isbeing modified for use with the Space Shuttle to launch deep-space planetary
missions and future manned space missions. Ehricke, president of the Space
Global Company, has published more than 10 books and 50 papers and articles,
and in 1982 he completed a 10-year study on the industrial development andsettlement of the Moon, which he describes as "man's extraterrestrial imperative." He is a member of the editorial advisory board of Fusion.

Stuart K. Lewis

Ehricke:" Morethan40yearsof practicaland visionary contributions to astronautics. "FUTURISTS LAUNCH DRIVE FOR WAR, TERRORISM, LIMITS TO GROWTH"We'll have to have a real fright, perhaps even a short atomic war, before wehave a central world government." This was the advice presented to the World
Futures Society conference in Washington, D.C., June 12 by J. F. Leddy, chairman of the Amsterdam-based World Association of World Federalists. Asked to
expound on this, Leddy declared: "We have had no real movement toward
world federalism, so we need a real fright, maybe a near-miss in nuclear war
caused by some kind of accident, or perhaps we have to have Colonel Muammar
Qaddafi of Libya getting loose with nuclear terrorism. Maybe we'll need someterrorist to hold New York City ransom. With that kind of scenario, we mightfind ourselves stumbling into a short atomic war. It will take something likethese elements to get people in a state willing to give the United Nations worldfederalist powers."
The five-day World Futures Conference included presentations from such
antiscience figures as Dr. Alexander King, cofounder and president of the Clubof Rome, and Gary Imhoff, executive director of the Washington-based groupcalled Carrying Capacity. "Limiting population is not enough," said Imhoff.
"Population contraction is required for a decent world. Birth reduction is animperative."
LOUSEWORT LAURELS TO U.S. AMBASSADOR TO INDIA
This issue's Lousewort Laurel's award goes to Harry Barnes, U.S. ambassador
to India, for his encouragement of a project sponsored by the Sulabh Instituteof Applied Research to generate electricity from biogas produced by humanexcreta. In a country that has just announced plans to build four large nuplexes
to provide large-scale electric power (see Fusion May-june 1984, p. 9), such
enthusiasm by the American ambassador is misplaced. The Sulabh project is not
only inefficient and smelly, but costly. To pay for 3 km of street lights, the project
had to double the charge on its 46-seat public latrine.
News Briefs

July-August 1984

FUSIONNEW FDA REGULATIONS COULD OPEN UP
COMMERCIALIZATION OF FOOD IRRADIATION
Pending changes in the U.S. Food and Drug Administration regulations will
open up the commercialization of f o o d irradiation in the United States—after
40 years of rigorous testing for safety and wholesomeness have proved thetechnology to be safe and beneficial. The long-awaited changes will permit 100
kilorads of irradiation to process f o o d . This l o w dose level is sufficient t o kill any
kind of insect in any physiological stage. A primary use w i l l be disinfesting citrus
and tropical fruits and disinfesting grain in storage. In a d d i t i o n , potatoes, o n ions, and garlic can be irradiated to inhibit sprouting (6 to 15 kilorads), strawberries and blueberries can be treated to inhibit mold and p r o l o n g shelf life,
other fruits such as bananas could have their ripening process delayed (25 to 35
kilorads). Congress killed the emerging technology in 1958 w h e n it classified
f o o d irradiation as a " f o o d additive," requiring extensive testing product byproduct to get clearance from the FDA. The proposed 100 kilorad limit is t o o low
to enable the United States to derive the full benefits from the technology. Theinternationally accepted standard is 1,000 kilorads, ten times the limit the FDA is
now considering.

After 15 days of refrigeration,
berries treated with gamma(top) are as good as new.

the strawirradiation

LIVERMORE'S NOVA LASER TEST FIRES 8 OF 10 BEAMS
Fusion scientists at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory successfully
test fired 8 of the 10 beams of the $176 million Nova laser facility in early July,delivering a total light pulse of 57 trillion watts in a billionth of a second. W e h n
Nova becomes fully operational at the end of 1984, it w i l l succeed the JapaneseG e k k o X I I laser at Osaka University as the world's most powerful laser.
Nova is designed to demonstrate breakeven, generating far more fusion energy than the laser energy required to compress the fuel pellet. Livermore
scientists plan to test polarized fusion fuel with Nova, and they are now carryingout a brute-force program to develop techniques for polarizing fuel in the tiny
spherical fuel pellets. Lining up the atomic spins—polarization—of fusion fuelcan greatly improve the efficiency of inertial confinement fusion and thereby
reduce even further the production costs of fusion energy. Nova will carry o u tlaser fusion experiments at three different wavelengths: infrared (1.05 micrometers), visible green (0.53 micrometers), and ultraviolet (0.35 micrometers). The
shorter wavelength ultraviolet is expected to achieve the most efficient implosions and soft X-ray generation.
Although laser fusion is the primary objective of Nova, the very first Nova
experiments will be directed toward demonstrating a laboratory scale X-ray
laser. Incoherent X-rays generated by the Nova laser light, w h e n it is directed
onto metal foils, will provide the appropriate p u m p energy. The p u m p soft Xrays excite coherent X-ray pulses f r o m a gas f l o w i n g between the p u m p metal
foils. Plans are also in the w o r k s , once the laboratory X-ray laser is demonstrated,
to use it for making three-dimensional, subatomic-scale pictures of living cells
and other materials. These laser-generated pictures are called holograms, andbecause X-rays have such short wavelengths and therefore such fine resolution,these holograms are called microholograms.

Christine Moon, 1910-1984: A
geous fighter for life.
6

coura-FUSION

MRS. CHRISTINE M O O N DIES IN CHICAGO, MAY 16
The Fusion Energy Foundation was saddened to learn of the death May 16 ofChristine M o o n , w i f e of Dr. Robert M o o n , professor emeritus at Chicago University. Mrs. M o o n , an accomplished poet and artist, is survived by her husband,
four children, and twelve grandchildren. Dr. M o o n , a nuclear physicist andveteran of the Manhattan Project, is a f o u n d i n g member of the Fusion Energy
Foundation and a member of Fusion's scientific advisory board.
Afflicted w i t h Parkinson's disease since 1959, Mrs. M o o n until her very lastdays participated fully in activities to further science and culture and to uplift
the spirit and material well-being of m a n k i n d . She, along w i t h her husband,traveled to Rome to be a f o u n d i n g member of the Club of Life in October 1982,
and she accompanied Dr. M o o n to FEF seminars and conferences. " W e are
h o n o r e d to have had the company of such a courageous fighter for l i f e , " said
Fusion managing editor Marjorie Mazel Hecht.
July-August 1984

News Briefs

Viewpoint
lames E. Oberg is a
professional
space engineer in Houston,working
on the Space Shuttle project. Generally considered one of the West's leading experts on the Soviet space program, he has published 200 articles on
space topics (including feature articles
on space militarizationin the April issues ofScience Digest and OmnU andsix books (including
the widely respected Red Star in Orbit).
Fusion asked Oberg to comment on
recent anti-ASAT
legislation
introduced into Congress that claims that
the Soviets have only a"primitive"
ASAT and that their ASATs are launched
on "unique" rockets that could be detected upon launch.

*

*

*

O n e aspect of the disarmament debate has been heating up lately, because of a combination of recent
weapons tests, diplomatic efforts, andWhite House reports. It deals w i t h theissue of antisatellite weapons, ASATs.
O n Jan. 21,1984, the U.S. Air Forcetested its air-launched ASAT missiles,w i t h o u t the actual warhead. The Soviets have had an operational ASAT satellite for years, but last August—in whatturned o u t to be his last public appearance ever—Soviet Premier A n d r o p o v
declared a "unilateral moratorium" andurged visiting American senators toblock the American w e a p o n .
Then, in early A p r i l , the Reagan
administration released a special report on the prospects for a negotiated
U.S.-Soviet ban on such weapons. The
report was required by Congress. In it,
Reagan's experts concluded that theprospects for substantive negotiations
and a verifiable treaty were next tozero.
This conclusion did not sit well withmany vocal opponents of the Air
Force's air-launched ASAT missile.
Congressmen, lobbyists, commentators, and academics have been strenuously promoting the idea of a "freeze"
on further space weapons tests. The
W h i t e House report published April 2
is in direct o p p o s i t i o n to such advocacies.
W h i l e the debate rages, confusion
over the facts of the issue has reached
Copyright B 1984 James E. Oberg

Viewpoint

The Truth About
The Soviet
ASAT Programby James E. Obergnear-cosmic proportions. The technology itself can be obscure, and Soviet statements have been notable for
their lack of candor.
Many of the proponents of an equivalent American "freeze" on ASAT testing, as a prelude to negotiations to ban
such weapons entirely, have been victims of gross misperceptions and errors of fact. Before a serious public debate can develop to affect administration policy, it must be f o u n d e d on reality, and it must abandon a number offallacies.
Fallacy # 7 : The Soviet ASAT is "primitive, cumbersome,
inept,"or anynumber of pejorative terms.
This is false. Claims that the Soviet
system works only half the time arebased on juggled statistics that c o m bine flight results from tests of the operational radar-guided system w i t htests of a newer infrared guidance system. The newer system has not perf o r m e d w e l l , but the operational syst e m has scored successfully in six o u tof the last seven shots, over the past
decade. Since U.S. satellites, potential
targets for the Soviet ASAT, do not carry countermeasures to the old system,
the new Soviet ASAT is still unnecessary for ensuring a very high "kill probability" for any single shot.
Fallacy #2: The Soviet system, whichuses a 150-foot booster rocket, is easily
observed by American spy satellites andany negotiated ban could be easily verified.
This is false. The Soviet ASAT uses abooster called the SL-11 (or the " F " class, based on the SS-9 ICBM), w h i c hJuly-August 1984is also used by a number of other military space programs. In 1982-1983
there were 20 launchings of this booster (including several after Andropov's
self-proclaimed moratorium), but only
one carried an ASAT. So the presenceof such a booster on a launch pad (there
are several pads in Central Asia andalso north of Moscow) is not an indication of violation of a hypothetical
ASAT ban. The Soviet orbital weapon
is launched under an aerodynamic
protective shroud indistinguishable
f r o m that used by the other programs,so the ASAT warhead w o u l d have to be
spotted out in the o p e n , d u r i n g transport. It is even shorter than the American ASAT missile, and is consequently
far more difficult to spot.
Fallacy #3: The U.S. system is "farmore sophisticated"
and thus offers a
provocation
to the Soviets to build amatching system.
This is false. W h i l e the guidance of
the U.S. ASAT missile is indeed more
precise than that of the Soviet ASAT
satellite (since it uses direct impact
rather than a blunderbuss shrapnel
charge as kill mechanism), the weapons can be fairly compared only interms of actual capability. In this regard, there is little difference in altitude range, reaction time, reload capability, or detectability. The majordifference is that the Soviet system isoperational now (and has been for a
decade), w h i l e t h e U.S. system will not
be operational until 1987-88 at the earliest.
Fallacy # 4 : The Soviets have promisedto stop testing their own ASAT satellite, and to dismantle their system aspart of a negotiateddisarmament.
This is false. What A n d r o p o v reallypromised last August was that "the Soviet Union w o u l d never be the first to
put any kind of antisatellite weapons
into space." This solemn vow was sadly invalidated by the Soviet's preexisting history of exactly such acts: putting
antisatellite weapons into space. Soviet officials have steadfastly denied
they have such a w e a p o n , and consequently they are supposed to havenothing that needs to be dismantled.
Strictly speaking, the Air Force test
last January did not violate the morat o r i u m since no warhead was installed

FUSION7

(only the ASAT rocket booster was
launched, an operation the Soviets
themselves have carried out as w e l l ,severaltimes
sinceAndropov's
pledge). The Soviets have never explicitly stated that they possess any
space weapon of any k i n d , and they
have never promised to dismantle"their antisatellite weapon," under any
circumstances.
Fallacy # 5 : If the Soviets were to dismantle their antisatellite "killer satellite, " space would once again be demilitarized.
This is false. The Soviets also possess
an antisatellite capability based on theirantimissile system around Moscow,and short of dismantling that wholesystem (an extremely unlikely prospect) w o u l d be able to retain that capability even under the most stringent
treaty verification efforts.
Fallacy # 6 : The development of theAmerican system will "force" the Russians to "match" it.
This is false. The Soviet system already possesses all essential capabilities that the American system is supposed to have several years from now.
Fallacy # 7 : The air-launchednatureof the American ASAT missile makes it

extremely destabilizing since it is much
more flexible than the Soviet ASAT
missile.
This is false. The American systemneeds an air-mobile launcher mainly
to allow a head-on launch f r o m directly in front of a target satellite, w h i c hotherwise could pass hundreds of miles
to the east or west of the ASAT base.
W o r l d w i d e basing has no obvious advantage since any reasonable target's
orbit will always eventually carry it
within range of the United States several times a day. In contrast, the Soviet
system can use fixed launch sites because it has the speed and endurance
to wait for the precise m o m e n t thelaunch pad is carried by Earth's rotat i o n into the target satellite's orbital
plane, at w h i c h p o i n t t h e Soviet "killersatellite" goes into orbit and spends
several hours hunting d o w n its prey.
The American system is much more severely limited in lifetime and speed.
Fallacy # 8 : The U.S. ASAT is dangerous because it can kill a Soviet satellite
secretly, leading the Soviets to assume
that any satellite failure might be theresult of enemy action.
This is false. The Soviets have deployed a chain of infrared satellites

Department of Defense

Artist's conception
multipellet
blast.
8of a Soviet ASAT designed

FUSIONto destroy space targets with aJuly-August 1984w h i c h pass over North America,
watching for missile launchings. The
American ASAT booster rocket is probably big enough to be noticed by thesesatellites, providing firm confirmationof enemy action.
Fallacy # 9 : The American ASAT missile is destabilizing because it can attack Soviet
communications
andmissile-warning
satellites (while theSoviets do not have a similar capability).
This is false. While these Soviet satellites d o dip to w i t h i n 400 miles ofEarth's surface, well w i t h i n the presumed range of the ASAT missile, they
do so over the far southern oceans, off
the coast of Antarctica. The current
carrier for the ASAT missile, the F-15,
w o u l d need gross modifications and
Rube Coldbergish ad hoc rearrangements to reach these points.
Fallacy #10: There is no military needfor the American ASAT missile.
This is false. The Soviets have been
diligently developing and deploying
nuclear-powered active radar satellites for scanning the oceans for Western naval forces. These systems w o u l d ,under conventional warfare conditions, be able to p i n p o i n t fleets and todirect long-range strike forces againstt h e m . The Soviet intention to develop
such a capability was the deciding factor in the U.S. decision to develop acounter to it.
- The facts in this case need not depend on "appeals to authority" of blueribbon panels of experts. They can be
determined by a diligent examinationof the public record, including material published by the Library of Congress's Congressional Research Service, the British Interplanetary Society, the Foreign Broadcast Information
Service (for firsthand accounts of Soviet statements), the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRl), as well as many charts and tables
published by the anti-ASAT groups
themselves (particularly those released by the Federation of American
Scientists).
But until those facts enter the policy
debate, there is no prospect for any
realistic basis for either national policy
debate nor international disarmament
negotiations. Debaters w h o ignore thefacts sabotage their o w n professed
points of view.

Viewpoint

Special Report
The Soviet Embassy inWashington,
D.C: export center for a U.S. ban on
beam defense.
antidefense legislation drafted by her
contacts at the Soviet embassy to Capitol Hill, where it has then been introduced by such liberal Congressmen
and Senators as Joe Moakley (D-Mass.),
Mel Levine (D-Calif.), Paul Tsongas (DMass.), Larry Coughlin (R-Penna.),
George Brown (D-Calif.), and Larry
Pressler(R-S.D.).
Although Rosin claims that she is interested purely in fostering "better relations" between the United States andthe Soviet U n i o n , nothing could be
more absurd. The facts are that the Soviets have been w o r k i n g on their o w n
directed-energy antiballistic missile
defense (ABM) since the early 1960s,
have developed and successfully tested
an antisatellite (ASAT) w e a p o n , haveoutpaced this country in several crucial military areas, and are now w o r k ing overtime to ensure their strategic
advantage by preventingthe U.S. fromdeveloping comparable technology.

The Legislation Against
U.S. Beam Defense
To the ordinary American, eliminating the threat of nuclear war by developing a beam defense to knock out
hostile nuclear missiles in the first few
minutes after launch sounds like a goodidea. Yet, numerous bills, resolutions,and amendments aimed at crippling
the Strategic Defense Initiative, whichw o u l d develop such a beam weapon
defense, have recently been introduced in Congress. Far more amazing
than the apparent willingness of ConSpecial Reportgress to undercut the country's defenses is the fact that much of this legislation originated in the Soviet Embassyin Washington, D.C.
The shocking evidence of this factcomes from Carol Rosin, the founderand president of an obscure Washington thinktank, the Institute for Security and Cooperation in Space (ISCOS).
A c c o r d i n g t o Rosin, ISCOS has beenpassing anti-beam-weapon and otherJuly-August 1984

Rosin openly admitted recently that
ISCOS's "main goal is to alert people
to the dangers of weaponization of
space. W e are w o r k i n g closely w i t h the,Soviets on this." She boasted how she
and the Soviets collaborated on House
Joint Resolution 120, the anti-spaceweapons bill that has 128 cosponsors.
Here is how Rosin said it happened:"[Rep.] Joe Moakley saw me on TV
discussing the weaponization of spaceand called me up. I suggested that heget a resolution introduced in Congress about it. I then called Dan D u e d ney of WorldWatch, w h o w r o t e a draft
resolution. I took it to my contacts at
the Soviet embassy. They t o l d me t ochange certain language. . . . For example, I had 'weapons in space' andthey changed it to 'space weapons of
all kinds.' They thought this was a better negotiating position. The Soviets
d o n ' t like to compromise. I then got
the resolution to Moakley, and he presented it. . . . It calls for immediate bilateral talks with the Soviets for a c o m prehensive treaty banning any groundbased or space-based weapons."
House Joint Resolution 120's cornFUSION

9panion piece, Senate joint Resolution
129, was introduced by Senators Larry
Pressler, Paul Tsongas, and Gary Hart.
Target: ASATS
Rosin's group also takes credit forCongressional assault on the U.S. ASAT
program. O n May 23, the House ofRepresentatives voted 328 to 181 for anamendment to the fiscal year 1985 defense authorization bill that bans further testing of U.S. antisatellite weapons. Sponsored by Rosin collaborators
George Brown and Larry C o u g h l i n , theamendment w o u l d cripple U.S. ASAT
capabilities, which are an essential
c o m p o n e n t of an effective strategic
defense system. At this w r i t i n g , theSenate is about to begin debate on its
o w n anti-ASAT measure, an amendment sponsored by Sen. Charles Percy(R-lll.).
Rosin boasted in an April 23 press
release that ISCOS had w o r k e d handin-glove w i t h the Soviets to swing Congress behind the ASAT m o r a t o r i u m .
ISCOS, the release said, "played a rolein setting up the August 1983 meeting
between the late Soviet premier [sic]Yuri A n d r o p o v and a delegation of six
U.S. Senators in Moscow, at which A n d r o p o v announced a unilateral ASAT
moratorium and proposed a space
weapons treaty." The release also stated that ISCOS "had provided delegation members, led by Sen. Claiborne
Pell [D-R.l., an ISCOS board member]

Carol Rosin: Washington lobbyist for
antiscience legislation and Soviet policies.
10

FUSIONw i t h briefings o n the Soviet space
weapons p o s i t i o n " and had " w o r k e d
w i t h delegation members and the Soviet government to produce the A n d r o p o v statement."
Privately, Rosin disclosed that she
not only had asked one delegation
member "if he w o u l d suggest an antispace t h i n g " in his meeting w i t h A n d r o p o v , but also " d r e w up a proposalon this and gave it to the Soviet embassy. The Soviets are very cooperative
w i t h us," she said. "This message got
t h r o u g h to A n d r o p o v and he announced a complete ban on antisatellite weapons."
According to ISCOS legislative director Judith Schnidmann, the institute not only had significant input into
the development of the BrownCoughlin amendment, but also did "apretty comprehensive sweep" of Congressmen to line up support for it.
The Space Policy Working Group
Rosin's main vehicle for getting
Congress behind the Kremlin's policies is the Space Policy Working Group,
an informal Capitol Hill caucus that
Rosin set up in January 1983.
The w o r k i n g group draws staffersfrom the offices of congressmen
Moakley, Levine, Brown, John Seiberling (D-Ohio), PatSchroeder (D-Colo.),
LesAspin(D-Wisc) and Spark Matsunaga (D-Hawaii), among others. Rosinsays the g r o u p has helped produce
such key pieces of legislation as the
Mel Levine-George Brown HJR 531,
w h i c h calls for the maintenance of the1972 ABM Treaty, and HJR 536, alsosponsored by Levine and Brown, whichcalls for "cooperative ventures inspace" instead of an "arms race inspace."The latter is a result of direct KGB
orders to Rosin. She revealed that theSoviet embassy told her it was " m o r eeffective" to undermine the beamdefense program by counterposing the"positive" approach of "cooperationin space" to an "arms race in space,"rather than simply attacking it headon.
Rosin disclosed that she is now personally trying to sell this ploy to various pro-beam-weapon scientists, andis "trying to get some of them to meetw i t h the Soviets" on it. An aide to Rosin collaborator Spark Matsunaga, primary sponsor of a Senate resolution
July-August 1984

calling for "cooperative ventures inspace," recently t o l d a reporter that"there is a lot of potential for this as analternative to Star Wars."

The ISCOS Network
Rosin's claim that ISCOS conspires
w i t h the Soviets is no idle boast. Earlier
this m o n t h , Rosin sponsored t w o private tetes-a-tetes that brought together members of Congress—including
Representatives Brown and Levine and
Senator Pell—and representatives fromthe U.S. media, defense industry, andmilitary to confer with a group of highlevel Soviet officials. The Soviet group
included Georgii Arbatov of Moscow's
USA/Canada Institute, Yevgenii Velikhov, a leader of the Soviet beamweapon program and vice-president of
the Soviet Academy of Scientists, andRoald Sagdeev, the Soviet laser expert,
all of w h o m were in the United States
to campaign against U.S. beam defense development.
During one event, a reception at
Senator Pell's palatial residence wherethe " p r o b l e m " of the U.S. strategic defense project was discussed, Rosin and
Sagdeev agreed to coauthor a book on
U.S.-Soviet joint space ventures.
Rosin, w h o advertises herself as aprotege of the now deceased scientist
Werner von Braun, interfaces w i t h awide variety of groups, including therabidly anti-beam-defense Federationof American Scientists, the cultist L-5
Society, and the Heritage Foundat i o n — h o m e of Gen. Danny Graham's
low technology A B M plan, High Frontier.
ISCOS's board provides an instructive look at how deeply the Soviets havebeen able to penetrate the U.S. defense establishment. Sitting side byside w i t h such kooks as "Aquarian
Conspiracy" leaders Barbara Marx
Hubbard and Willis H a r m o n , Jim Hickman of Esalen's East-West Institute, andAlia Massavich, a Soviet "stellar expert," are Ed Winchester, controller of
the Pentagon, and Bill Johnson, vicepresident of Fairchild Industries, a major defense contractor. The board also
includes Robert von Pugenhardt, professor at the Naval Post-Graduate Institute, and Jim C h a n n o n , a leader ofthe Delta f o r c e cult, w h i c h has penetrated t o the highest levels of the Pentagon bureaucracy.
—Kathleen

Klenetsky

Special ReportTHE PRITKIN FRAUD

Promoting the Cult of Protein Deprivation
O n e of the major targets of the Clubof Rome and Global 2000 Malthusian
networks has been the w o r l d f o o dsupply, in particular U.S. agriculture.
In addition to actions to collapse foodproduction and enforce population
reduction by starvation, there are o n going complementary operations tocreate a psychological acceptance of
reduced f o o d supplies, especially animal protein. Any such reduction inprotein consumption will have an effect that is measurable in life-and-deathterms: America w i t h an average daily
consumption of more than 100 gramsof p r o t e i n , of w h i c h 70 grams are animal protein, has an average life expectancy of 73 years, whereas Africa
w i t h an average daily consumption of
55 grams, of w h i c h less than 10 grams
are of animal o r i g i n , has a life expectancy of 42 years.
The newest American chapter in theongoing attack on the f o o d supply has
been written by Nathan Pritikin, author of The Pritikin Program for Dietand Exercise. This low-fat, low-protein,high-carbohydrate diet, accompanied
by jogging, is p r o m o t e d by a numberof community-based Pritikin Better
Health Programs and a "Longevity
Center" in Santa Barbara, Calif. The
distinctive features of the diet are a severe restriction of all fats and a warning
against p r o t e i n , especially animal protein. The basis of this attack is the supposed freedom f r o m certain diseases
in the protein-deprived areas of theThird W o r l d .
Lie No. 1 :Protein Causes Cancer
If one examines these areas of thew o r l d , such as Africa, one finds p o p u lations that have a lower incidence of
certain cancers, such as c o l o n , breast,and prostate, and of certain conditions
such as atherosclerosis and hemorrhoids. However, one w o u l d expect
the incidence of these diseases, w h i c htend to occur in older individuals, tobe lower in a population w i t h an average life expectancy of 42 years than in
a population with an average life expectancy of 73 years. Moreover, theSpecial Report

Protein Deprivation Provides
Breeding Ground for Plagues
In its extreme f o r m , protein deprivation leads to death, but for thosew h o survive, the suppression of the i m m u n e system that is induced bymalnutrition leads to outbreaks of new plagues.
The killer disease AIDS, Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome, is an
example of one such new plague. AIDS now appears to be endemic
among parts of the African population. The New England journal of Medicine reported Feb. 23, 1984 that there were 23 cases of AIDS among
patients from Central Africa w h o were hospitalized in Belgium between
May 1979 and April 1983. They had no history of b l o o d transfusions,intravenous d r u g use, or homosexuality—the usual case with AIDS victims
in the advanced sector. Ten of them have died from the disease.
All of these patients were of upper socio-economic status, but either
were living in Africa at the onset of illness or frequently traveled there.
This indicates that the infectious agent is present in the African populationand spreading from the more obviously malnourished and i m m u n o depressed members of the population as the internal situation in Africa
continues to collapse under the murderous austerity policies of the International Monetary Fund.
Kaposi's sarcoma, one of the cancers that occur in AIDS patients, hasbeen a well-known disease in sub-Saharan Africa for many years, alongwith other i m m u n e system cancers such as Burkitt's lymphoma. Thesediseases are abnormal reactions of the i m m u n e system t o chronic parasitic
infection and malnutrition, especially protein deficiency. Primary livercancer is another t u m o r c o m m o n in the protein-deprived areas of theworld.
The New England Journal of Medicine c o m m e n t e d : "It is possible that
AIDS has always been present but unrecognized in Africa. However, w e
are struck by the increasing number of patients w h o have come from
Zaire or Rwanda to Belgium during the past four years to seek medicalcare. W e believe that AIDS is a new disease that is spreading in Central
Africa."As the collapse continues, these diseases will spread beyond theirconfines in the targeted populations and pose a general health threat.

July-August 1984

FUSION11

assertion that cancer is rare in thesecountries is simply untrue. As a recent
W o r l d Health Organization report
documents, cancer is mote prevalent
in the developing sector than in theindustrialized countries, and it n o w
surpasses infectious disease as theleading cause of death.
Primary cancer of the liver, one of
the most prevalent cancers in thew o r l d , is almost unknown in the UnitedStates but is c o m m o n in those areas
w i t h the lowest intake of animal protein. It is associated w i t h widespread
infection of the population by hepatitis virus. This is only one of many manifestations of chronic infection inprotein-deprived populations. In add i t i o n , cancers involving the i m m u n esystem, such as lymphomas and Kaposi's sarcoma, are endemic in theseareas and correlate with widespread
immune deficiency as a consequenceof the low-protein, low-fat diet advocated by Pritikin.

PER CAPITA ANIMAL PROTEIN IN DIET

Pritikin cites the usual collection ofcase histories. O n e can read similarly
impressive results in other books, suchas those of Irwin Maxwell Stillman andSamm Sinclair Baker, and Robert C.
Adkins, including reductions of cholesterol and serum lipid (fat) levels.
These are high-protein, high-fat, andlow-carbohydrate diets, which are diametrically opposed to the Pritikin diet.
If one wishes to say that these physicians (Pritkin is not a physician) arelying or incompetent, then one still has
to deal w i t h scientists such as the Mexican cardiologist Demetrio SodiPallares, w h o has produced significant
regression in symptoms of arteriosclerotic heart disease and reduction ofserum lipids on a diet that provides
over 50 percent of its calories as fat!

erated as long as the body's o w n stores
can make up the'deficit. In the case of
p r o t e i n , this means reduction ofmuscle mass, and, more ominously,
shrinkage of i m m u n e system tissue
such as the the lymph nodes and thymus. It is not uncommon for cold sores
and other m i n o r infections to flare up
in people w h o go on severe crash diets,
because of transient i m m u n e suppression.
In the Third W o r l d , where whatever
economy that still exists is based on
manual labor, the effects of protein
deprivation are most blatant. The populations barely exist at an animal levelof subsistence, with short life spansand hideous infant mortality rates. In
the severe states of malnutrition, thei m m u n e system is so depressed that
there is absence of some symptoms
produced by the immune response.
Health researchers for various organizations connected to the W o r l d Bankand the International Monetary Fundhave actually argued that this indicatesthat starvation has a beneficial effecton these people!

The c o m m o n denominator in thePritikin diet and in Sodi-Pallares's dietis restriction of sodium and highly refined sugar. It is this, and not restrict i o n of fat and protein, that is the most
likely cause of the improved blood
chemistry in Pritikin's clients. Weight
reduction in the obese will lower serum lipids regardless of the diet. Likewise, moderate exercise reduces cholesterol levels, helps normalize bodyweight, and maintains muscle tone andfitness.
Restriction of fat, and even of prot e i n , in obese individuals will be tol-Pritikin recommends the same restrictions of fat and protein for growing children. If one looks at populations in w h i c h severe lack of fat andanimal protein are c o m m o n , o n e sees
stunting of growth and decreased resistance to infectious disease. Low
cholesterol intake in an infant is particularly devastating because a large
component of the brain's biochemistry is cholesterol. Permanent effects on
brain development can result f r o m fat
restriction in early infancy.
W h e n this is c o m p o u n d e d by debilitating chronic infections, the poten-

12

FUSION

July-August 1984

tial for anything approximating humanexistence is very low. To argue thatsuch a diet is healthful is to imply thatthe devastating effects are the fault ofsome defect in the victim. This is racism, pure and simple. To idealize thissort of existence as benign and uncomplicated is the worst sort of cultural relativism.
Lie No. 2: Vegetable Protein
Is As Good As Animal Protein
Next comes the issue of animal versus vegetable protein. True, it is possible to combine a number of grains
and nuts to make a relatively complete
protein that approximates the aminoacid content of meat. The problem isthat not only must the elements be
consumed together, but a variety ofsuch foods must be available. This is
not the case in most Third W o r l d countries, and studies on response to immunization in children show that children w i t h a high p r o p o r t i o n of animal
protein in their diet produce better
antibodies than those w h o consume ahigh p r o p o r t i o n of vegetable p r o t e i n ,even though the total protein intake isthe same. In addition, nuts and beans,w h i c h are major sources of vegetablep r o t e i n , can become heavily contaminated w i t h aflatoxins, the most potent
carcinogens k n o w n .
Pritikin contends, along w i t h certain
W o r l d Bank supporters, that protein
deficiency is in fact just calorie deficiency, and that additional caloric intake will cure the c o n d i t i o n . But thefact is that kwashiorkor, a grave affliction in Africa, is a protein deficiency
and responds to protein supplementation, especially milk powder, anddoes not respond to simple caloric inSpecial ReportWorld Protein Supply: Going Down
The total tonnage of f o o d produced per capita w o r l d w i d e is rapidly
decreasing. In Africa, starvation has reached holocaust proportions, wheref o o d available per person has decreased for the last 11 years. Given thecurrent rates of decreases in p r o d u c t i o n , f o o d shortages are likely toappear even in t h e advanced sector nations by as early as 1985.
Overall there are about 1.5 billion tons of grain produced w o r l d w i d eeach year, a figure that has grown very little in the past few years. Thismeans there are about 16 bushels of grain per person each year, compared
to t h e 24 bushels of grain per capita that w o u l d be required to provide
sufficient feedgrains for meat, milk, and other animal proteins for a healthy
human diet. W o r l d grain o u t p u t needs to be d o u b l e d at least, and thefeedgrains c o m p o n e n t needs to be tripled.
Instead, policies are underway in the United States and Europe—thenations that account for 50 percent of all w o r l d corn p r o d u c e d , more than
50 percent of the world's milk, and high percentages of other feed andf o o d stocks—to drastically reduce farm output. A n d production declines
in parts of the developing sector have reached collapse conditions.
Last year t h e Department of Agriculture's PIK (payment-in-kind) program, unprecedented in U.S. history, took 83 million acres out of production—one third of U.S. grain and cotton base acreage. In one season, theworld's wheat acres in production d r o p p e d by almost 5 percent. Under
the 1980 PIK program and the worst drought in 50 years, U.S. grain output
d r o p p e d by 50 percent in corn and 33 percent in soybeans—key elementsin the animal protein cycle. The U.S. national livestock herd, dairy herd,
and poultry production have all declined under the impact.
In 1984 the infamous PIK plan, plus conservation programs will take 20
million wheat acres o u t of operation—5 percent of the world's total wheat
lands.
Instead of this agricultural rout, t h e United States and Europe should begearing up to specialize in energy-dense f o o d output—meat, milk, eggs,
fish—for exporting f o o d , breeding stock, and technologies around thew o r l d to upgrade nutrition levels and health. In the developing sector,
large-scale infrastructure projects are needed—road networks, water
management, and bulk storage and port facilities—that will vastly increase
the productivity of farming and international grain p r o d u c t i o n .
W i t h the exception of India and some other points of progress, production is declining or collapsing in the developing sector. In Bolivia farmers
were forced t o eat their seed potatoes in 1983. The government is pleadingfor emergency f o o d aid, which the U.S. State Department, in collaboration
w i t h the International Monetary Fund, has denied. In Mexico, 25 percentof the national dairy herd has been eliminated under the austerity program
demanded by the IMF. In Africa, 150 million people in 22 nations are
literally facing starvation.
The IMF, W o r l d Bank, and related institutions and w o r l d f o o d tradecartels (Cargill, Continental, Nestles, Bunge, and others) recommend further cuts in p r o d u c t i o n , using the rationalization that this will "conserve"w o r l d soils and resources.
—Marcia Merry

crease of protein deficient foods suchas rice or cassava.
Although conceding the necessity
for enough protein intake to maintainnitrogen balance, Pritikin contends thatanything exceeding this level is posiSpecial ReportEIR
was right
about the 1980s
depression.
All the otherforecasters
weredead wrong.
For thirteen quarters since 1979, Executive Intelligence Review has publishedsummaries of the LaRouche-Riemannmodel's quarterly forecast of the U.S.
economy. We warned that if Paul
Volcker's high-interest rate policies
continued, the U.S. economy would
slide through two dips into the worst
world depression in modern history.'
Every other econometric forecast,government and private, predicted an"upturn."
EIR was consistently right; the Brand X
forecasters were consistently absurd.
That's the standpoint from which our
independent worldwide intelligencegathering network works. And that's
why we have been right about a lot ofthings where all the media have been
wrong.

EIR••

3 months$125
6 months
225
lyear
396
Please send me a brochure on EIR.
I would like to be contacted by asales representative.

tively harmful. The problem is that theamount of protein requirement is significantly increased under certain circumstances, including the vigorous
exercise Pritikin recommends. ForexContinued on page 63
July-August 1984

FUSION

13

Fusion ReportWORLD'S LARGEST TOKAMAKJET Begins Phase 2 of Experiments
The world's largest experimental f u sion reactor, the Joint EuropeanTorus,
JET, is now in its second phase of operation in Culham, England. The JET
reactor, a cooperative project of theEuropean Economic C o m m u n i t y , inaugurated the second of four stages ofexperiments in May 1984, leading up
to the projected achievement of energy breakeven by1988. Bythatdate, JET's
fusion plasma is expected to release
more energy than was required to create the plasma.
Although the U.S. Tokamak Fusion

Test Reactor (TFTR) reactor at the
Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory
may achieve breakeven somewhatearlier, JET's larger plasma v o l u m e , larger
power o u t p u t , and greater flexibility
will greatly add to the harvest of scientific and technological knowledge
from history's first genuine controlled
fusion reactors. The successful operation of the JET facility, whose detailed
planning goes back to 1973-1975, demonstrates the c o m m i t m e n t of theWestern European nations to the commercial realization of fusion energy.

JET Joint Undertaking

The joint European Torus is expected to reach energy breakeven by 1988. A
cooperative project of the European Economic Community, JET demonstrates
the commitment of the European nations to the commercial realization of fusionenergy. Above: JET's reactor chamber.
14

FUSION

July-August 1984

In order for a fusion reactor to effectively produce energy, three main
conditions must be f u l f i l l e d :First, the fusion fuel, a mixture of thehydrogen isotopes deuterium and triti u m , must be brought to a temperatureof at least 100 million degrees Celsius.
At this temperature the fuel is in theform of a highly energy-dense ionizedgas k n o w n as a plasma. The high temperature produces a pressure several
times that of ordinary atmosphericpressure w i t h i n the reaction chamber.
Second, a plasma density of about
100 trillion (1014) particles per cubic
centimeter must be maintained; this is100,000 times less dense than ordinary
air in a r o o m .
T h i r d , the plasma must be maintained in the above conditions for atleast 1 second in order for the fusion
reactions between energetic deuterium and tritium ions to release moreenergy than was deposited in the plasma by the heating systems.
How JET Works
The JET experiment operates on thetokamak principle, w h i c h was first developed in the Soviet Union andbrought to a high degree of perfection
in U.S. experiments. Tokamak reactors utilize a system of powerful magnetic coils to create a "magnetic bott l e " capable of containing the hot plasma. These coils are grouped around a
torus- or donut-shaped vacuum chamber in w h i c h the ring-shaped plasmac o l u m n is located. The plasma particles, which are positively charged ionsand electrons, are "trapped" within themagnetic field induced by the coils.
The vacuum chamber of JET is immense—large enough for t w o m e n ,with one standing on the shoulders of
the other! The volume of the plasmac o l u m n in the JET is 180 cubic meters,
six times larger than the second biggest tokamak reactor in the w o r l d , theTFTR.
The JET has t w o coil systems (see figures). First, there are 32 D-shaped main

Fusion ReportFigure 1
TOROIDAL COIL SYSTEM
JET's 32 D-shaped toroidal coils generate a powerfulmagnetic field whose field lines run parallel to theaxis of the torus.

field coils, each weighing 12 tons.
These coils generate a powerful toroidal magnetic field, whose field lines
run parallel to the axis of the torus.
This field forms the most importantc o m p o n e n t for containing the plasma.
Second is the poloidal field system,
which consists of an inner and an outer
coil system. The eight inner coils on
the central axis form the primary w i n d ing of a transformer. W i t h the plasma
ring itself as the secondary w i n d i n g ,this is used to generate a powerfule l e c t r i c c u r r e n t o f 2 . 6 t o 4 . 8 million amperes in the plasma. This plasma current, in t u r n , generates a poloidal
magnetic field, running in the circular
direction around the plasma c o l u m n .
The poloidal field forms the second
principal c o m p o n e n t of the "magnetic
bottle."At the same time, the induced current helps to heat the plasma. The outer poloidal coils regulate the positionof the plasma column w i t h i n the reactor chamber and prevent the hot plasma from breaking out of the bottle andtouching the walls of the chamber.
25 Megawatts of Heating PowerJET uses three separate heating systems, based o n different principles, tobring the reactor plasma to the required ignition temperatureof 100 million degrees. In all, a total heating
power of some 25 million watts will be
Fusion Report

Figure 2
POLOIDAL COIL SYSTEM
JET's poloidal coil system consists of an inner coilsystem—the eight inner coils on the central axis of thetorus—and a secondary coil system going the longway around the torus.

applied in the ignition experiments
planned for mid-1988.
The first stage of heating, c o m m o n
to all tokamaks, is k n o w n as O h m i cheating. At the beginning of the experiment (called a "shot" by experimenters), cold gas is puffed into the reactor
chamber. Next, a powerful surge ofcurrent in the poloidal transformer induces an electric field in the chamber,causing the gas to become ionized andgenerating a current in the ionized gas.
This current then heats the plasma
to temperatures of up to 10 million degrees by a physical mechanism similar
to that of electric heaters: The electrical resistance of the plasma causes a
portion of the current energy to beconverted into heat.
Because the plasma resistivity decreases w i t h increasing temperature,
however, additional heating systems
are required. O n e of these systems,
which has proven very successful inearlier experiments, is called neutral
injection heating. In this m e t h o d , hydrogen or deuterium ions are accelerated to very high energies. Since themagnetic fields of the tokamak bottle
w o u l d block these charged particles,
the accelerated beams of ions first passthrough a chamber of hydrogen gas,
where they neutralize themselves by"stealing" electrons. The successfully
neutralized ions then pass through the
July-August 1984

magnetic field into the plasma and heatit up.
These neutralized ions reach 80,000
electron volts (about 80 times the energy of the ions in the plasma), depositing a considerable amount of it in theplasma—10 megawatts w h e n JET is operating at full power. However, thelimited efficiency of this heating method—almost 100 megawatts of power isconsumed by the JET's neutral heating
system, compared to the 10 megawatts"end-effect"—and the difficulty ofreaching the core of the plasma given
the limited penetrating power of theneutralized beams, dictated the needfor an additional heating system. Thisis provided by so-called high-frequency heating.
This m e t h o d exploits the fact that aplasma, a complex electromagnetic
system of ions and electrons coupledby electric and magnetic fields, is capable of numerous types of oscillations. High frequency radio waves, if
tuned to any of the characteristic resonant frequencies of the plasma, caneffectively couple their energy with thatof the plasma, thereby heating it in ahighly selective manner. In JET, the socalled ion cyclotron resonance is used.
High frequency electromagnetic radiation is fed into the plasma by meansof antennae located just outside theContinued on page 53
FUSION

15

Sandia Achieves BreakthroughIn Particle Beam Focusing
Sandia National Laboratories announced May 17 that it had d e m o n strated that beams of subatomic particles can be focused just like beams oflight. The Sandia g r o u p , under the direction of David J. Johnson, succeeded in focusing a p r o t o n beam generated by the Proto I accelerator d o w n toa spot size with a radius of 0.65 millimeters. Proto I is a high power, shortpulse accelerator in Sandia's particle
beam fusion accelerator program. The
accelerator now focuses on a spot lessthan half the size of a pellet of fusion
fuel.

The breakthrough was achieved byapplying geometrical optics to remove
astigmatism f r o m the beam (see below). Electrodynamic effects that many
had assumed must always tend to defocus the beam were completely" t a m e d " by changes in the curvatureof the beam-emitting anode "lens."
Particle beam focusing, a much discussed and little understood p r o b l e m ,is necessary in order to concentrate abeam on a target to produce nuclear
fusion. The p r o b l e m is to design the
beam-generating equipment, especially the d i o d e , so that the beam con-Figure 1
OPTICAL ASTIGMATISM
Because of the shape of the lens,light does not focus at a single
point, but at several points along
the focal plane, producing astigmatism.

verges at the same spot at the sametime. In previous experiments, the spot
size of the focus was " b l u r r e d , " so it
was larger than the size of a pellet of
fusion f u e l ; that is, too large to be ofuse in achieving fusion energy.
Some physicists, such as Kosta Tsipis of the Massachusetts Institute ofTechnology, argue that electrodynamic properties of particle beams of all
types make it impossible to produce afocused beam: The spreading of thebeam out from its source is inevitable,
Tsipis and others say, in their arguments against a beam weapon defense. The Sandia group has refuted
this, although on a small scale.
The Only Remaining Problem
Particle beam fusion and laser f u sion are the t w o principal methods
being pursued to demonstrate inertial
confinement fusion energy. In inertial
confinement, intense beams of either
ions (charged atomic particles) or laser
light irradiate, heat, and compress pellets of deuterium and tritium (isotopesof hydrogen). This w o r k is pursued fort w o immediate purposes: the develo p m e n t of controlled nuclear fusion
for electrical power p r o d u c t i o n , andthestudy of small "thermonuclear" explosions for weapons-physics research.

Figure 2
NEW DIODE USED BY SANDIA NATIONAL LABORATORIESAt left is the ion-emitting
anode surface, whose curvature is the criticalelement in producing a focused beam. At right is a fusion fuel pellet.

16

FUSION

July-August 1984

Focusing was the only remaining
problem before Sandia could scale up
its existing equipment to meet its goalof demonstrating fusion in 1988 w i t h amore powerful machine now underconstruction.
C o m m e n t i n g o n the breakthrough,David Johnson said: " F o r t h e f i r s t t i m e ,we were able to show that intense ion

Fusion Reportbeam diodes behave like optical elements. A small change in the lens curvature [the curvature of the ion-emitting, anode surface] produces a precisely defined change in the focal
spot."
Johnson is referring to the relationship between lens curvature and focus
in an optical system. Figure 1 shows
how a bad lens may focus light at several positions along a focal plane, producing what is called astigmatism. Thisis precisely what plagued the Sandia
particle beam diode.
Correcting Astigmatism
Figure 2 shows the Sandia device that
corrects this astigmatism. In beam
generation, a pulse of energy moves
d o w n transmission lines from the left
toward the striated curved surface inthe center of the figure, the anode.
The pulse creates a plasma on the anode. This then emits the beam of positively charged nuclei, or ions, acrossa gap through the cathode, a cloud ofelectrons, toward the fusion fuel pellet at the far right.
Prior to the breakthrough, the beam
was not converging as one on the pellet but separate "strands" were converging, some in front of the pellet andsome behind it—as Figure 1 shows in
the case of light. Johnson simply
changed the curvature of the anode toachieve simultaneous focus of the entire beam on the target.
The development of a new diagnose
tic procedure helped produce thebreakthrough because it permitted
Johnson to examine the focusing of thebeam more directly. "Different partsof the beam focused at different positions and did so every t i m e , " he said.
"The surprise was that the beam wasso reproducible from trial to trial. . . .
Itwas like trying to focus light througha bad lens, so I changed the curvatureof the ion-emitting surface to correct
the astigmatism."
Before this discovery it was thoughtthat beam spreading was caused by anumber of different effects, and that
extensive changes w o u l d be required
to improve the device. This previous
hypothesis was presented by Johnson
and his colleagues at the Beams '83
conference in San Francisco in September 1983.' The Sandia group asserted there that beam focus was depenContinued on page 63

Fusion Report

HYLIFE FUSION REACTOR CHAMBERThis fluid-shielded
laser fusion reactor is approximately the same size and same
power as a light water fission reactor, thus leading to considerable savings in thecost of the power produced. In general, without fluid shielding, fusion reactors
are much larger than fission reactors. The shielding provides substantial
protection for the reactor wall from neutron damage.
Hylife uses a shower bath of lithium jets. The laser beam is injected to the fuelpellet through openings in the pattern of jets.

Livermore Study Shows Fusion
Will Be Cheapest Energy Source
Fusion has the ultimate economic
potential of generating electricity forhalf the cost of the currently cheapest
methods—nuclear fission and coal.
This is the revolutionary conclusion ofa new analysis of fusion's economic
prospects by Dr. John H. Nuckolls, associate director for physics at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory's
Inertial Confinement Division.
Nuckolls used new results from recently completed advanced reactor
designs t o make this point to the European Laser-Matter Interaction Conference held in London, England, in
October 1983. "Relative cost escalation w o u l d increase this advantage,"
Nuckolls said. Fusion's potential economic advantage derives from t w ofundamental properties: negligible
fuel costs and high quality energy(which makes possible more efficient
generation of electricity)."
All previous fusion reactor studies

July-August 1984

have come in w i t h projected costs 25
to 100 percent greater than fossil andfission. As Dr. Nuckolls concluded in
his report, "This is a remarkable andexceedingly important result. . . .This
low cost economic potential w o u l dprovide strong commercial incentives
to accelerate the pace of fusion development in the near t e r m , and to installa fusion energy system in the longterm."
Although Nuckolls primarily focuses on inertial confinement f u s i o n , thetype of fusion he helped pioneer, he
noted: "These remarks about the economic potential of fusion apply to allof fusion not just inertial f u s i o n . "Nuckolls concluded that developmentof both general approaches t o fusion
to should be accelerated.
In describing the scientific prospects for inertial confinement, Nuckolls identified the crucial benefits ofpolarizing fusion hydrogen fuel. ThisFUSION17

can lead to a threefold decrease in thelaser energy required to achieve inertial confinement and to the development of entirely new approaches to inertial confinement target design. Fusion magazinewas t h e f i r s t t o p o i n t o u t
the unique applications of polarizedfusion for inertial confinement in a
special issue in September 1982.
In his economic analysis, Nuckoils
showed that spending a few billion
dollars to accelerate the developmentof fusion now will pay off in the tens oftrillions of dollars in the 21st century in
the world energy market and will guarantee the technological preeminenceof U.S. industry. Nuckolls concluded
that because of this tremendous payoff, the United States "has strong incentive to accelerate fusion research—other nations have similar incentives."

The most important new point
Nuckolls raised in his London presentation is that inertial fusion can utilize
the far more efficient magnetohydrodynamic, or M H D , m e t h o d of electricity generation in a manner that is not
only technologically feasible but also
simultaneously successful in overcoming the difficulties inherent in highenergy neutrons produced in deuterium-tritium (DT) fusion. M H D directly
converts the heat from a fusion reactor
into electric power w i t h no moving
parts.
Stuart K. Lewis

Dr. John

Nuckolls

quired to demonstrate that high gain
targets required for practical energy
applications are feasible.""Since the inception of the first experimental laser fusion program at Livermore in 1963," Nuckolls w r o t e , "thelong range strategy has been to build
a sequence of successively larger lasers until thermonuclear ignition is f i nally achieved. Beginning with the fewjoule laser in 1966, we have progressedto the 10-kilojoule Shiva laser in 1978
and the 10-kilojoule Novette shortwavelength laser w h i c h was completed last year. Next year the 100 kilojoule
Nova laser w i l l become operational.
Each laser in this sequence has beenused to conduct critical experiments,
and to develop new technologies,
w h i c h made possible b u i l d i n g of thenext tenfold-larger laser. Beyond Nova,a multi-megajoule driver will be re-In formulating his economic analysis, however, Nuckolls utilized only themost conservative estimates for target
gains, pointing to the more advanced
possibilities, such as polarized fusion,as providing a general backup.
Why Fusion Is Cheaper
In his economic study Nuckolls takes
nuclear fission, which is significantly
cheaper than coal, at its best—that is,
assuming an infinite fuel supply, possibly provided by a fission-fusion hybrid breeder, and w i t h an advanced
reactor design that can be constructedin five years: "Fusion has two principal
assets w h i c h could potentially confera factor-of-two advantage. First, thetypical fuel cycle cost for a light-water[fission] reactor is approximately 20
percent of the total busbar cost [costat the point of transmission] of fission
energy. W i t h the hybrid 20 percent escalation factor, the fission fuel costs
w o u l d give fusion a 40 percent advantage since its fuel costs are negligible.
Second, there is another possible 40
percent advantage w h i c h derives froma combination of t w o factors: the highquality of fusion energy and the fluid
insulation of fusion reactor walls [themagnetic fields in magnetic fusion reactors and liquid jets of lithium in inertial confinement reactors]. These two
factors taken together make possible
a 40 to 50 percent increase in the electrical generating efficiency. Multiplied
together, fusion's t w o 40 percent assets provide a t w o f o l d advantage overfission."18

July-August 1984

In addition to developing the new
analysis of the economic potential ofinertial confinement, Nuckolls also reviewed its current scientific and technological status: "Inertial fusion must
demonstrate that the high target gains
required for practical fusion energy canbe achieved w i t h driver energies notlarger than a few megajoules. Before amulti-megajoule scale driver is constructed, inertial fusion must provide
convincing experimental evidence thatthe required high target gains are feasible. This will be the principal objective of the Nova laser experiments. Implosions w i l l be conducted w i t h scaled
targets which are nearly 'hydrodynamically equivalent' to the high gain
target implosions. . . ."FUSION

It has often been pointed out that if
some process for directly converting
high-temperature fusion energy output into electricity existed, then efficiencies of 99.99 percent could beachieved. Nuckolls described a process that can attain at least 70 percent
efficiencies and thereby d o u b l e thepotential electrical o u t p u t of an inertial fusion reactor. In this process
Nuckolls and his collaborators at Lawrence Livermore have turned the neutron damage p r o b l e m on its head. The
solution is to surround inertial confinement exploding pellets w i t h a pillshaped mass of solid l i t h i u m . The f u sion-generated neutrons are then captured w i t h i n this solid mass, causing it
to b l o w up. But because neutrons deposit t h r o u g h o u t the volume of thelithium pillbox, the second explosion
can be shaped by properly arranging
the geometry of the pillbox.
For example, the neutron deposition can be made to generate converging shock waves. A n d the energy density of the neutron deposition is still
sufficient to transform the pillbox lithium into a high temperature plasma.
The final result is that the vast majorityof the fusion energy o u t p u t can betransformed in straightforward manner into directed plasma jets.
High-temperature plasma jets greatly simplify M H D electricity generation.
A n d , in general, plasma jets are ideal
for all kinds of energy transformations, such as microwave generation.
The reasons are easy to describe in thespecific M H D case, but it should be
noted that the general p o i n t of transf o r m i n g a high temperature " t h e r m a l "fusion output into a slightly lower temperature " d i r e c t e d " plasma jet has
p r o f o u n d theoretical implications.
—Charles B. Stevens

Fusion ReportBeam Technology Report
A REVIEW OF NEW DEVELOPMENTS

Lasers Can Propagate Through the Atmosphere
Recent developments in laser technology have disproved those scientists
w h o claim that lasers cannot propagate t h r o u g h the atmosphere. Although most of the scientific w o r k isclassified, these breakthroughs in laser propagation are undoubtedly what
informed presidential science advisor
George Keyworth to state publicly thatbeam weapon defense was feasible
based on "very recent advances that
permit us to compensate for atmospheric break-up of laser beams."
This report on optical phase conjugation of laser beams has been compiled from a survey of the unclassified
literature 1 and discussions w i t h scientists at the national laboratories.
At the May 1983 Conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics (CLEO) in Baltimore, R.C. Lind and G.J. D u n n i n g ofHughes Research Laboratories reported the first demonstration of the dynamic correction capability of opticalphase conjugation in the face of severe
distortions produced by atmosphericturbulence. 2 M o r e recently, the June
1984 Science Digest reported that scientists at Hughes had told them that
conjugated laser beams can propagate
60 miles through the atmosphere—in
other w o r d s , a distance sufficient toreach space-based orbiting mirrors thatcan redirect such a beam o n t o a ballistic missile target.
In the Hughes experiment, Lind andD u n n i n g double-passed a beam produced by a 20 milliwatt dye laser
through a 100-meter range of t u r b u lent atmosphere. After the first passthrough the range, the probe beamdisplayed high frequency phase errors, severe wander, and intensity nulls
on its axis (Figure 1). The beam wasthen directed into the conjugator. The
conjugated beam returned over therange and the corrected beam waspicked off at the transmitter. The corrected beam was nearly identical to the1 x 2 cm elliptical profile of the original probe beam (Figure 2).
The field of optical phase conjuga-

Beam Technology Report

Hughes Research Laboratories

Figure 1
BEFORE PHASE CONJUGATION: ABERRATED BEAM
Hughes Research Laboratories has demonstrated that optical phase conjugation can solve the problem of laser beam aberration in propagation
through the atmosphere. At left is the computerized profile of a laser beam
after being passed through TOO meters of turbulent atmosphere. At right isthe computerized isometric projection of the beam.

t i o n , it should be n o t e d , was f o u n d e dby Soviet scientists and continues tobe dominated by Soviet investigators.
In a recent reviewpaper, approximately one-half of the 183 references wereto Soviet journals. 3
How Optical Phase Conjugation Works
Optical phase conjugation involves
the use of nonlinear optical effects toJuly-August 1984

precisely reverse the direction of
propagation of each plane wave in anarbitrary beam of light, thereby causing the return beam to retrace exactly
the path of the incident beam.
Phase conjugators, also called phaseconjugate mirrors, do not reflect abeam the same way a conventional
mirror does (Figure 3). W h e n a beam
FUSION19

conjugation, energy p u m p e d into a liq u i d , gas, or solid excites that m e d i u m
to reflect the conjugate of an incident
laser beam. The material medium usedwill conjugate only specific wavelengths. M o r e than 300 materials havebeen identified as appropriate as conjugators across a spectrum of wavelengths from 10.67to 0.25 microns andmaterials that vary from water to crystals to gaseous mercury. 3

Los Alamos National Laboratory

Figure 3
CONVENTIONAL VS. PHASE CONJUGATE MIRROR
When a conventional minor (right) reflects a beam, the angle of reflectionis the complement of the angle of incidence; a diverging beam continues
to diverge after reflection. When a phase conjugate mirror (left) reflects abeam, it sends it back in the same direction it came from, and makes adivergent beam convergent, or focused.

is reflected from a conventional mirror, its angle of reflection is the complement of its angle of incidence, andif the beam is at all divergent it continues to diverge after reflection. Since a
conjugator sends the beam right backwhere it came f r o m , the angle of reflection equals the angle of incidence
and a diverging beam becomes convergent u p o n reflection. If it were possible to take a moving picture of theprocess, the behavior of the conjugate
wave w o u l d be portrayed by runningthe film backwards.
This effect occurs despite any beaminterference from an aberrator, suchas a broken piece of glass or turbulent
atmosphere. In other w o r d s , conjugation can enable a designer to getaround imperfections in an optical system or turbulence in the atmosphere.
For beam conjugation to be helpful inproducing a focused beam o n target,
it is necessary for the response time of
the conjugator to be faster than that of
the aberrator; that is, if the atmosphere has time to change d u r i n g conjugation, the conjugated beam may not
emerge from it focused. Lind and Dunning f o u n d atomic sodium to be a successful conjugator because of its rapid
10 nanosecond response time.
20

FUSIONIn general, the scientific c o m m u n i t ydoes not understand how optical phaseconjugation works. The process involves the relationship between matter and energy in the most fundamental way. In every case of optical phase

Optical phase conjugation " w o r k s "because of the underlying physicalcontinuity between matter and energy, the harmony between substanceand light. These are the most fundamental issues of quantum physics—issues that most physicists do not comprehend.
Beam defense advocate Lyndon H.
LaRouche, Jr. addressed these fundamental issues before a Washington audience in April 1983: "If we concentrate even a fairly small quantity of wattage on a sufficiently small area, theconcentration of energy can be madesufficient to ' b o i l , ' so to speak, any material. . . . This is described more accurately by reporting that each rangeof the upper electromagnetic spect r u m (that is, ranges of shorter wavelength) has very distinct qualities ofharmonic resonance."
Some History
There are t w o forms of optical phaseconjugation investigated today: back-Los Alamos National Laboratory

Figure 4
PHASE CONJUGATION W I T H FOUR-WAVE MIXINGIn degenerate four-wave mixing, two pump beams E, and E2 interact with adistorted probe beam f 3 in a nonlinear material or conjugator to produce,for example, the convergent conjugate of an originally divergentprobe
beam F„.

luly-August 1984

Beam Technology ReportFigure 5
BEAM DEFENSE DEVICE USING PHASE CONJUGATIONThis FEF design for an application of phase conjugators eliminates the need to orbit large laser amplifiers in a spacebased laser defense system. To destroy a ballistic missile target, a satellite equipped with a mirror and a small laser
directs its beam toward the laser amplifier/phase conjugator facility on Earth. The ground-based facility
conjugates
the beam and amplifies it to the power required to destroy the target. The amplified beam is then reflected off theorbiting mirror to the target.

ward stimulated Brillouin (or Raman)
scattering and degenerate four wave
mixing (DFWM). In 1972, B. Ya.
Zel'dovich, V. I. Popovichev, V. V. Ragul'skii, and F. S. Faizullov of the Soviet Academy of Sciences demonstrated phase conjugation with Brillouinscattering.
In backward stimulated Brillouinscattering, an intense laser beam in a
fluid produces a sound wave. The
shock front of this wave backscattersthe incoming beam as its conjugate.
This outgoing laser beam has a frequency downshifted from the incoming laser beam by an amount equal to
the frequency of the sound wave created—approximately a 0.01 percent
change in frequency. (This is an illustration of sound as another f o r m ofelectromagnetic radiation, a concept
proposed by Lyndon LaRouche.)
B. I. Stepanov, E. V. Ivakin, and A. S.
Rubanov first demonstrated distortion
correction w i t h degenerate four wave
mixing in 1970. Lind and D u n n i n g also
used a DFWM conjugator in their experiment. In degenerate four wave
mixing, three beams of the same frequency interact in a nonlinear m e d i u m
to produce a fourth beam, which is alsoof the same frequency, and is the conjugate of one of the others. Two beams

Beam Technology Report" p u m p " the m e d i u m f r o m exactly opposite planar directions (Figure 4).
The third beam (the probe) is thebeam to be conjugated; it enters themedium at the required angle and interacts w i t h it and the pumps so thatits conjugate is p r o d u c e d . In D F W M ,the power of both the pumps and theprobe determines the power of theo u t p u t conjugate beam. Therefore, it
is possible by c o m b i n i n g high-powerpumps and a low-power probe toachieve a "reflected" conjugate ofgreater power than the probe. So far,conjugates have been produced w i t hpowers 100-fold greater than theirprobes.
Applications of Phase Conjugation
Optical phase conjugation can beused for any laser application that requires
long-distancetransmission
through inhomogeneous media; forexample, laser communications w i t hsubmarines or directed energy beam
weapons. In one scenario the FEF has
p r o p o s e d , the attack sequence against
a ballistic missile in its boost phase isinitiated by a small laser aboard an orbiting mirror spacecraft (Figure 5).
First, the spacecraft directs its beam
d o w n w a r d through the atmosphere to
the Earth-bound conjugator and amplifier.
July-August 1984

Second, o n the g r o u n d , the arriving
pulse passes through a laser amplifier
enroute to the conjugator. The pulse
is conjugated and amplified on its seco n d pass to missile-kill intensities.
Third, the pulse travels upwards todeflect off the orbiting mirror at theappropriate angle to intercept the target.
There are other characteristics of
optical phase conjugation useful for
directed energy beam weapons andother systems. For example, since theoutput conjugate beam follows theprobe beam exactly, the conjugate
beam can remain locked on a target(such as an orbiting mirror) without theuse of complicated pointing and tracking mechanisms.
—RobertGallagher

Notes1. Readers are referred to C. R. Giuliano, "Applications of Optical Phase Conjugation," Physics
Today, April 1982, p. 27-35; and Barry J. Feldman, et al., "Through the Looking Glass with
Phase Conjugation," Los Alamos Science, Fall
1982, p. 9-17.
2. A report on Lind and Dunning's presentation at
the CLEO meeting can be found in Laser Focusl
Electro-optics, September 1983, pp. 12-14.
3. Robert A. Fisher, "Phase Conjugation Materials, " to appear in CRC Handbook of Lasers.

FUSION21

KRA CANAL
Cornerstone of Asian Development
by Uwe Parpart HenkeEDITOR'S NOTE
A year ago, in July-August 1983, Fusion Energy Foundation research director Uwe Parpart Henke and board m e m ber Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr. made a fact-finding t o u r ofJapan, India, and Southeast Asia. At that t i m e , LaRouche
proposed a 50-year "Great Projects" global infrastructurebuilding program to transform the economies of the Pacificand Indian Ocean basins. A key feature in the plan was theconstruction of a sea-level canal across the Isthmus of Kra
in Thailand.
In September 1983, a conference to discuss the details of
this "Great Projects" development program, cosponsoredby the FEF and the weekly magazine ExecutiveIntelligence
Review, was held in Washington, D.C., and attended by 500
representatives of the diplomatic c o m m u n i t y , government
agencies, industry, and Asian organizations. This was followed by a conference in October on the Kra Canal in Bangkok, cosponsored by the FEF, EIR, and the Thai Ministry ofCommunications.

Today, in June 1984, interest in the Kra Canal project is at
its highest level since 1973, w h e n the original engineeringstudies were submitted to the Thai government. O n March
19,1984, the FEF and EIR presented a study of the financial
and economic feasibility of the Kra Canal to 40 top corporate executives, government officials, and military observers, w h o gave the study a very favorable review. Corporate
participants included the three top shipping firms in Asia,
Maersk Lines, East Asiatic, and Sealands; Bangkok Bank,
Thai Farmer's Bank, and Chase Manhattan Bank; and interested Japanese firms, Mitsui and Mitsubishi.
Here w e present an overview of the Kra Canal project
along w i t h excerpts from the FEF/EIR study on the use ofpeaceful nuclear explosives to construct the canal.

As far back as 1793, the younger brother of King Rama Iof Thailand (Siam) had proposed to dig a canal across thepeninsula of Thailand south of the Isthmus of Kra, connecting the Lake of Songkhla and the South China Sea w i t h theIndian Ocean. The motivation at the time was to facilitate
military and naval operations against frequent Burmese invasions. However, in spite of numerous military and, evenmore important, commercial advantages, no such canal has
been constructed to date as the project remains a subjectof political controversy.

T h e Kra C a n a l P r o j e c t - P r o p o s e d Route 5 A
The Kra Canal would save about 1,200 miles in shippingtransport in Asia. It would also link the Indian Basin, which
includes Sri Lanka, Pakistan, India, and Bangladesh,with
the Pacific Basin nations. India now has ver^. little trade with
Asia, with the exception of Japan. It is essential to link up
India's skilled scientific manpower and capital-goods
production with the fastest growing region in the world.

22

FUSION

July-August 1984

From the standpoint of facilitating greatly increased tradeand rapid ocean transport between the Indian Ocean basin
and the Pacific Ocean basin and, more broadly, between
the Western w o r l d and the countries of Southeast and East
Asia, there is, however, no question about either the urgent
need for the Kra Canal or its pivotal role in the economic
development of Thailand and the entire region. The Straitsof Malacca, which now handle most of the relevant traffic,
are highly congested and will become quite inadequate by
the end of this decade based on even modest projectionsof increased trade flows.
A relatively recent feasibility study for the Kra Canal, commissioned in the early 1970s by Mr. K.Y. Chow of the ThaiO i l Refining Company, can serve as an excellent basis for
initiating the project as soon as Thai government approvalis secured. O f course, the feasibility study in q u e s t i o n , carried out by engineers and planners of Tippetts-AbbettMcCarthy-Stratton (TAMS) and Robert R. Nathan Associates, Inc. (RRNA), in collaboration with Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory of the United States and submitted in September 1973, is n o w dated and requires extensive

ASIA: CENTER OF GRAVITY OF WORLD TRADE
The Indian and Pacific Ocean basin is already the center of gravity
of world trade, as the map indicates. The trade volume for exports
and imports, shown here in millions of metric tons, was compiled
from the United Nations country statistics for 1980.
Over the past 20 years, the tonnage of imports in this area
increased from 777.6 to 912.9 million tons, while exports wentfrom 81.8 to 540 million tons. The compounded rate of growth of
two-way trade for this period was 9.1 percent per year. The perannum growth rate in trade in this period is 80percent higher than
the rest of the world's, 90 percent higher than that of the UnitedStates, and 150 percent higher than that of West Germany.
A few more statistics make the point: 49.9 percent of all iron ore
shipped in the world goes to Asia, (42.5 percent of it to Japan),44.5 percent of all coal, and 33.9 percent of all grain. In all, 2 outof every 5 metric tons moving in the world are going to Asia.
Indian Exports
U.S
EuropeAsia
Mideast & Africa
S. America & Oceania

0.2
12.2
25.3
19.4
... 0

Indian Imports
U.S
EuropeAsia
Mideast & Africa
S. America & Oceania

5.4
4.0
8.9
30.8
. 1 6

Asian Exports
U.S
43.4
Europe
23.2
Asia
175.3
Mideast & Africa
31.9
S.America & Oceania . . 20.5
Asian Imports
U.S
126.6
Europe
12.2
Asia
194.4
Mideast & Africa
313.6
S. America & Oceania . 202.9

review. Such review w o u l d principally have to evaluate economic feasibility and financing proposals. The engineering
conclusions of the TAMS-RRNS study, in the view of thiswriter, remain valid, t h o u g h in certain instances very recently developed technologies could shorten construction
time and improve final performance.
The Kra Canal Project, as detailed in the TAMS report,
differs conceptually f r o m earlier major canal projects w i t h
w h i c h it w o u l d reasonably be compared, for example, theSuez and Panama Canals. The transport distance saved bybuilding the Kra Canal—about 900 miles—would not byitself appear to justify the large expenditures in excavationand operating costs. There are t w o other principal factors
which define the overall importance and viability of the
project. These are: (1) the already mentioned growing inadequacy of the Straits of Malacca, and (2) the industrial
development potential based on construction of deep sea
ports at one or both of the canal outlets.
The Straits of Malacca are used byiwell over 50,000 ships
a year and further significant increases in traffic are inevitable. Thus the Kra Canal could be expected to attract allexcess traffic from the Malacca Straits as well as traffic w h i c hElectric cranes lined up in the port of Calcutta,

India.

assigns a premium to speed. Emphasis on speed, as will be
explained below, is a major reason why the TAMS study
selected a canal route well south of the actual Kra Isthmus.
This route, labeled 5A (see map), makes possible the construction of a sea-level canal without locks through w h i c hjuly-August 1984

FUSION23

even large (up to 500,000 dead weight ton or dwt) tankers
could pass at normal speed. The integration of one (orpossibly two) deep sea ports and associated industrial development zones w i t h the Kra Canal proper can be expected to become the single greatest long-term economic assetof the entire project.
Taking the experience of the "Europort" of Rotterdam at
the m o u t h of the Rhine River as a m o d e l , an "Asiaport"
conjoined w i t h the Kra Canal could become not only amajor trade center for Southeast Asia, capable of eclipsing
Singapore, but also has the potential—as proved by the
Rotterdam and similar examples—of serving as a focal point
for major industrial development.
A major included strategic factor also deserves the attention of Thai policy makers. Contrary to some reported o p i n ion and concern that a canal through the southern part of
the Golden Peninsula w o u l d have negative security implications, severing the ethnically and religiously ill-integrated southernmost part of the nation from the rest of the

The FEF and the Thai Ministry of Communications
cosponsored a conference on the development of the Pacific andIndian Ocean basins in Bangkok. At the podium is Communications Minister Samak Sundaravej. Seated (from left)
Uwe Parpart Henke, Lyndon H. LaRouche, jr., and Pakdee
Tanapura.
country, the opposite consequence w o u l d be the projected
outcome. The canal complex as a major industrial growthspot w o u l d function as an integrating and unifying factor,
joining together the southern, central, and northern provinces in a large c o m m o n endeavor capable of inspiring theentire nation, uplifting the economic condition of thesouthern p o p u l a t i o n , and thus reducing the potential for
dissatisfaction and dissension, while putting Thailand into
a potentially commanding strategic position vis-a-vis its
South and Southeast Asian neighbors.
Route Selection and Canal Specifications
Any canal-design study must give at least a preliminary
answer to two basic questions: First, what size ships andwhat maximum volume of traffic are to be accommodated?
Second, given preliminary answers to these questions, and24

FUSION

July-August 1984

given the geographical and geological constitution of thegeneral area under investigation, what is (are) the optimal
canal route(s) f r o m the standpoint of these considerations.
(1) Ship sizes and traffic volume projections.
It is clearthat tankers of at least 500,000 d w t must be accommodated,and handling of larger tankers may be desirable. M a x i m u msafe canal transit speeds w i t h respect to the land of about 7
knots (13 km/h) for ships of this size represent the presently
established international standard; in the view of this writer, which differs from that of the TAMS study, a two-lanecanal is necessary. The assumption that one lane, handling
mainly west t o east traffic, is sufficient is based o n the untenable premise that for a long time to come the export
potential of the East and Southeast Asian nations will besmall relative to Western imports.
The canal should preferably be sea level w i t h o u t locks,
must accommodate drafts of at least 100 feet (fully loaded
supertankers); that is, be at least 110 feet deep, and have abottom w i d t h of approximately 500 meters. The alternative
to one rather wide two-lane canal w o u l d be two one-laneroutes of about 200 meters w i d t h each.
(2) Route selection. Extensive geographical and geological investigations have been carried out to find the optimalroute for a sea-level canal of the above design specifications. Included in these investigations were considerations
concerning required canal crossings for railroads, highways, and utilities. Relative excavation costs and, in particular, the feasiblity of nuclear excavation methods wereprominently taken into account.
The preferred route settled upon by the TAMS-report(route 5A—see map) w o u l d extend from about 30 km northof the city of Satun to the Gulf of Thailand. The total canallength through land for this route is 102 k m , w i t h sea approaches of 50 km in the west and 70 km in the east respectively. This is the shortest possible route for a sea-level
canal, minimizes excavation costs, and provides for thebest possible sites on either end for harbor and industrial
development. Construction time for route 5A using conventional excavation methods is estimated to be 10 to 12
years; partial use of nuclear excavation w o u l d cut bothconstruction time and cost by at least 40 percent.
'Asiaport' and Industrial Zones
The construction of major deep sea port facilities andassociated industrial development zones at either end of
the Kra Canal is both feasible and highly desirable. However, phased port and industrial development, concentrating initially on the eastern canal outlet, appears to be thebest strategy at this point.
This involves, in particular, a most interesting concept
first proposed in the early 1970s by Mr. K.Y. Chow. Since
most Southeast and East Asian ports w i t h the exception of
H o n g Kong and Singapore are, at present, ill-equipped tohandle large cargo vessels and could only be enlarged atvery high cost, a port facility at Songkhla could rapidly develop into a major transshipment center for the entire reg i o n , capturing a very substantial portion of transshipment
now handled by Hong Kong and Singapore.
This development, however, w o u l d only be phase 1 andshould rapidly be f o l l o w e d up by construction of a compa-

Method of Construction

Canal size
(dwt)

Canal type(lanes)Cost(billions of US$1983)

500,000
500,000
500,000
250,000

2
1
1
2

nuclearconventional
nuclearconventional

14.53
13.20
8.37
19.51

250,000
250,000
250,000

2
1
1

nuclearconventional
nuclear

10.40
9.93
6.38

rable facility at the western canal outlet. Even in the initialplanning stage, both ports must also be laid out to handle
not only transshipments, but also the subtantially greater
berthing requirements that will arise out of area industrial
development. The pattern of such industrial development
requires intensive detailed study to be coordinated w i t hexisting Thai government plans for eastern seaboard development and construction of a deep sea port at Sattahip.
O n e possible outline pattern of industrial development
for the Kra Canal Complex w o u l d look as follows:(1) Initial development of industries and servicing facilities supportive of the canal and transshipment port projects. This w o u l d from the outset have to involve dry-dockand shipbuilding facilities, building a modern fleet of rapid
feeder vessels as specified above. Phase 1 development
must also take into account the immediate as well as longterm power requirements of the Canal Complex. If nuclear
excavation is used, then the right kind of expertise w o u l dalready be assembled in the region to consider construction of one or several nuclear power plants. Ideas goingback to the mid-1960s for nuclear-industrial ccmplexes
should be reviewed in this context.
(2) Phase 2 should envisage the development of large andbasic heavy industries developed both as an offshoot of thecanal construction itself and as back-up for the proposed
shipbuilding project—iron and steel as well as basic capitalgoods industries as indicated.
(3) In an environment already shaped by nuclear excavation and power plant development, having assembled therequired advanced engineering and scientific manpower,
the exciting possibility arises of developing a modern n u clear-based high-technology complex. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory experts have suggested that theworld's first nuclear isotope separation plant of a significant
scale might become associated w i t h the Kra Canal Complex. Recent developments in laser technology w o u l d inthat same context point to the possibility of developing new
high-energy laser-based industries.

Financing the Kra CanalAt a March 19, 1984 meeting in Bangkok with government, financial, and corporate representatives, representatives of the EIR and FEF presented their joint study of thecanal project and proposals for financing. A six-point, twolevel financing package was suggested. The first level involves multilateral f u n d i n g institutions like the W o r l d Bank

Table 1COST COMPARISONS FORKRA CANAL BY SIZE AND
CONSTRUCTION METHOD
The excavation and construction
costs
were taken from the 1973 TAMS study
and put in 1983 constant dollars. The
results led the EIR/FEF team to reject
the previous preference for the 500,000dwt ship size in favor of a 250,000-dwt
two-lane canal, using PNE methods ofconstruction.

Projected
Compounded
Annual GrowthType of Trade
Japanese oil imports
All other Asian nation oil imports
Bulk traffic (raw materials, grain, etc.]
Cargo traffic (manufactured goods,
capital goods, etc.)

5%
8%
8%
10%

Table 2
ANNUAL PROJECTED GROWTH RATE OF TRADE
PASSING THROUGH THE MALACCA, SUNDA, AND
LOMBOK STRAITSThe EIR/FEF study anticipates a dramatic increase ingeneral cargo traffic moving westward toward the Indian Ocean and Europe, whereas the 1973 TAMS study
predicted a significant increase in eastward-boundoiltraffic from the Middle East—that is, toward japan andthe United States. This difference argues for a twolane canal.

and the Asian Development Bank and interest-free loans
from the United States and Japan, the two primary foreign
beneficiaries of the canal. The largest share in this categoryw o u l d have to come from the import-export banks of theleading advanced-sector countries and commercial banks.
Ultimately, commercial banks w o u l d be expected to provide 40 to 50 percent of the total value of the project.
The second level w o u l d come from regional and Thai
sources, preferably both government and private, and government-sponsored preferential participation in construction contracts for Thai companies.
In c o m m e n t i n g on the FEF/EIR study, Dr. Nimit Nontapunthawat, vice president and chief economist of the Bangkok Bank and manager of the bank's Economic and Marketing Research Center, reviewed the increased debt burden to Thailand over the decade required for canal construction and other infrastructural commitments. His conclusion was that after 10 years, Thailand's debt-service ratio
w o u l d be about 2 or 2.5 to 1, based o n an estimated total
debt of $38 billion and an export-earning potential of about$15 billion. This is dramatically better than other countries
in the region, such as the Philippines, where the debtservice ratio is 5 to 1.

July-August 1984

FUSION25

Using Nuclear
Explosives For
Construction
by Dr. Steven Bardwell
and Charles B. Stevens

The development program for the Pacific and Indian
Ocean basins intersects a global economic development
process that is the advent of an industrial revolution at leastas great as the industrial revolutions of the past. This is anindustrial revolution based on new physical principles, highintensity electromagnetic radiation, coherent forms of thatradiation, and plasmas and their various technological spinoffs.
The fact that it coincides w i t h the industrialization of the
Pacific Basin gives that industrialization process a new
unique advantage in the history of human economic progress. This process in the Pacific Basin does not need toreplicate the stages of technological development that went
on in the United States or Europe. Rather, that development
can skip over a number of those stages and take advantageof the most m o d e r n , most efficient technologies, w i t h o u thaving to go through the intermediate steps of different
forms of more primitive industrial technology.
This is especially true of these large infrastructure projects proposed by the Fusion Energy Foundation and the
Executive Intelligence Review. Here we describe the equivalent in terms of earth-moving technology of lasers for cutting metal or plasmas for refining metal—the construction
equivalent of those new technologies.
In the most general sense, what characterizes present
industrial technologies is that they are all based on mattermoving or shaping other matter. In the simplest sense, wehave not moved much beyond the potter's wheel in termsof shaping metal. The lathe, the milling machine—all theseare devices w h i c h t u r n matter and have other pieces ofmatter rub against the t u r n i n g matter to cut it, shape it, toturn it into some useful f o r m . The ideas on w h i c h the plasma and laser are based are using energy to cut matter. Matter never touches matter to turn it into a different shape; abeam of energy accomplishes that j o b .
In the area of construction technologies, the equivalentis the use of high-energy explosives to move earth, rather
than a bulldozer or steam-shovel. This is using very highlyorganized, highly directed blasts of energy to move thatearth.
The basic idea is to bu ry, at a precisely determined d e p t h ,a small, precisely determined size of nuclear b o m b . The
depth and size depend on how big a hole you want, howmuch dirt you want to move, and what the soil and waterconditions of the g r o u n d are. This device, because it is so26

FUSION

July-August 1984

N. Seshagiri, The Bomb!. (New Delhi: Vikas Publishing House PVT, Ltd., 1975).

Three views of the Pokaran landscape in India's Rajasthan
Desert, site of the May 78, 7974 PNE explosion. Top: Before
the explosion; center: a new hill on the horizon seconds
after the explosion; bottom: aerial view of the crater.

intense, generates a very precisely calculable series of shockwaves that d o not merely b l o w things u p , but in a very
precise way, move earth from one place to the other. The
idea then is not only to get dirt out of the way, but to use it
as part of the construction material. The final form createdis a crater, not just a hole, in w h i c h part of the ejectedmaterial forms a higher side of the crater; thus the result is
not only a hole, but the sides of a hole that are desired,created by this precisely shaped explosive charge.
This idea is one that has a tremendous number of otherapplications in laser f u s i o n , and other more exotic advanced industrial technologies—using focused pulsed
power to create new forms of matter.
O n e of the few tests done that is in the open literature, a
50 kiloton blast 15 years ago, resulted in a very neat looking
piece of w o r k . In the middle of a desert at the Nevada test
site, where weapons experiments are d o n e , it looks from

TYPICAL PEACEFUL NUCLEAR EXPLOSION
Cross-section of a typical peaceful nuclear explosion showing the crater and its geologic make-up. The blast in thisSoviet experiment exceeded 100 kilotons (TNT equivalent
explosive power) at a depth of 200 meters.

Source: Milo D. Nordyke, "A Review of Soviet Data on the Peaceful Uses of Nuclear
Explosions," Annals of Nuclear Energy. Vol. 2, p. 657 (1975).

the air like a big ant-eater has been there. These blasts drillvery precise conical h o l e s w i t h p e r f e c t l y f o r m e d l i p s a r o u n dthem.
The application of this technology to moving massive
amounts of earth has been much studied, and the economic impact of that technology is absolutely phenomenal. In
all the studies done so far, it is uniformly shown that thecost of moving large amounts of earth can be decreased bya factor of four. That is, it costs about one-quarter as muchto move earth using nuclear explosives as using bulldozers,
and it takes about one-half the time. Most of the time ittakes to d o nuclear excavation is spent waiting for the right
weather—in order to keep the blast from b l o w i n g in directions that it shouldn't. The time is spent waiting for what
they call "blast days," days w h e n one of these explosives
can be set off and the results will be predictable.
The applications of peaceful nuclear explosives, besides
earth-moving, include: extracting oil f r o m oil shale; stimulating natural gas deposits; creating u n d e r g r o u n d storage
cavities for gas, oil or nuclear wastes; in situ mining of lowgrade ore t h r o u g h nuclear rubblization and chemical leaching; stimulating the flow of oil fields; extracting ore fromtar sands; deep seismic sounding to determine geologicalstrata; deep coal and other mineral m i n i n g ; extinguishing
oil and gas-well fires; stimulating geothermal reserves;
generating high-pressure steam for the production of electricity, fusion, and fission fuels; and stimulating underg r o u n d water resources.
However, the main application currently discussed is for
excavation of earth.
The only place this has been done on an industrial orcommercial scale is the Soviet U n i o n . A map taken from a
Soviet publication shows a major water-diversion project,which is going to take one of the many water systems thatruns f r o m north to south in the Soviet U n i o n and reversethat direction. A map was prepared by Lawrence Livermore
National Laboratory and shows the sites at w h i c h k n o w nexperiments using PNEs in the Soviet Union were done
between 1965 and 1979. Most of these experiments were

for the purpose of water diversion. In Siberia, the Soviets
have been conducting a very extensive series of tests using
PNEs to stimulate natural gas p r o d u c t i o n . A b o u t 100 PNEexperiments have been conducted there over the past 15
years for various purposes. This is a very real, economically
viable technology in use in the Soviet U n i o n , but not in use
in the United States, purely for political reasons.
Prospects for the Pacific Basin
The original studies for both the second Panama Canaland the Kra canal, using PNEs, were done more than 10
years ago, and were based on the state of the art in PNEs atthat time. In the intervening p e r i o d , there have been tremendous advances, including vast reduction in the amountof radiation released. The amount of radiation released bya PNE can now be reduced by a factor of 100, w h i c h meansthat these explosives can be employed in relatively p o p u lated areas. If the size of the explosions can be reduced tothe point that has been done in weapons tests today, this isin the ballpark of being able to construct in very precise
ways, small craters or series of small craters.
The neutron b o m b and the reduced-radiation weapon
are weapons technologies that are also the key to the small,cheap, and clean nuclear explosives that will revolutionize
construction technologies over the next 20 years.
What is most striking in the Panama Canal proposal is thespaced craters that are f o r m e d in the first phase of construction. After this first set of craters is f o r m e d , it w o u l d w i t h o u t
d o u b t be one of the most remarkable feats of human engineering to watch the completion of that canal in the periodof half an hour as the second series of explosions goes off.
There w o u l d be a p l u m e , the earth w o u l d subside, andt h e n , out of n o t h i n g , a complete canal w o u l d be created—
literally in half-an-hour's time.

Steven Bardwell was formerly editor-in-chiefof Fusionmagazine and Charles Stevens is the fusion technology editor.

July-August 1984

FUSION

27

France
Takes theNuclearLead
by Laurent Rosenfeld

Since July 1983, more than half of France's electricity generation has been produced by nuclear power, a figure thatputs France in first place among the world's nations in termsof the share of electricity coming from nuclear energy. Belgium is second, w i t h 45.9 percent; then Finland w i t h 41.5
percent, Sweden with 36.9 percent, and Taiwan w i t h 37
percent. Trailing behind are the large industrial countries
whose size and population are comparable to France, suchas West Germany, the United Kingdom, and Italy, as wellas the industrial giants, such as the United States, the Soviet
U n i o n , and Japan.
France is not only number 1 in terms of the share ofenergy coming from nuclear power, but also in terms of its
nuclear growth rate. During the first quarter of 1984, thenuclear share represented 54.6 percent of France's overall
electricity generation, and it is expected that the annual
figure for 1984 will be on the order of 55 percent. In addit i o n , this heavy share of nuclear energy makes France's
electricity one of the cheapest in the w o r l d , surpassed onlyby those countries, like Norway or Quebec, where the electricity comes chiefly from inexpensive hydroelectricity.
The key to the French nuclear success is the high level ofstandardization of the French nuclear program. During1981,
1982, and early 1983, an average of six nuclear units wereconnected to the power grid per year—one every otherm o n t h . Except for a few minor details (for example, o p e nor closed cycle water cooling), all these plants were identical. The reactors and steam generators were all constructedby the same company, Framatome, while the conventionalparts of each unit—the thermodynamic cycle equipment,
turbines, and alternators—were all built by Alsthom-Atlantique. In other w o r d s , the t w o companies were able to build
the heavy mechanical engineering and the electromechanical parts almost o n an assembly line basis.
W h i l e a w e b of regulations and environmentalist delays
strangles the U.S. nuclear industry, France's nuclear safety
regulations, although modeled on those of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Agency and just as stringent, are organized to
get nuclear plants on line quickly and efficiently. For example, once a particular design for a nuclear reactor has
been approved, each subsequent reactor of tha,t same design does not have to be resubmitted for approval. The only
things that have to be approved are any eventual engineering modifications, any new parts that replace elements thathave been f o u n d to be defective, and any environmental
specifics, such as the type of cooling or cooling towers usedor the particularities of the river or seawater used for cooling. As a result, commissioning new reactors takes only acouple of months. In addition, the reactor constructor andthe utility company are not compelled to retrofit alreadyexisting equipment to new regulations, and there are no
lengthy juridical contests.
The effect of this streamlined regulatory process is that
France's nuclear plants have a construction time of 6 years,
Four nuclear units at Dampierre, France. France's nuclear plants have an average construction
time of 6
years, and in some cases as little as 55 months; this isless than half the time it takes to put a nuclear planton line in the United States.

and, in some cases (Cravelines 4 and Blayais 4) only 55
months. This is less than half the construction time of manyother countries, including the United States. Of course,
the financial cost of the investment is correspondingly reduced. This advantage, added to the standardization of prod u c t i o n , makes the investment cost per nuclear unit far lesscostly than it is anywhere else in the w o r l d . At present, thetotal investment cost for a 1,300-MWe nuclear unit is about$600 million—5 billion French francs. The corresponding
figure in the United States is t w o to three times as large.
How France Took the Lead
How is it possible that France, which is about the size of
Texas, w h i c h has one-fifth the population of the UnitedStates, and w h i c h began its industrial development relatively late, is so far ahead of the United States in developing acrash nuclear program w i t h a complete nuclear fuel cycle? 1
The answer lies in Charles de Gaulle's dirigist view of therelationship of science and advanced technology to national independence and security.
De Gaulle set up the French Atomic Energy Commission(CEA) immediately after W o r l d War II as a crucial part of his
independent force de frappe (strike force) military policy.
De Gaulle's philosophy was explained by Pierre Cognard,a Gaullist involved in the five year plan (1966-1970) of the
dirigist French Planning Commission, in a September 1964
issue of Le Progres Scientifique, a government review:
It w o u l d be most grievous if national independence,w h i c h is assured on the military plane, should be insidiously destroyed in the scientific d o m a i n . . . . Let us
feel assured that the objective of the plan is that thenation, w i t h the support of all, w i l l be able to guard its
scientific and technical independence, the keystone tothe development and independence of a modern nation.
This five year plan d o u b l e d national expenditures in R&D
in the civilian sector and also d o u b l e d the number of research scientists. It encouraged every area of advanced
technology—including an ambitious space program—that
bore on the development of advanced and independent
military capability.
To prevent this crucial policy from being sabotaged by
the scissors-wielding finance minister, de Gaulle placed the
CEA directly under the prime minister's control. Labor andprivate industry were coaxed into compliance w i t h the CEA
and its subsidiaries t h r o u g h favorable financial arrangements. A t each point in the development of the French
nuclear program, the population was organized from the
top d o w n , starting w i t h the president himself, to support
the nuclear policy on the basis of French independence
and sovereignty as well as its fiscal soundness as an inexpensive source of energy. The rapid development of breeder technology—which the United States has kept on a perpetual back burner—facilitated this militarily necessary energy independence.
The forcefulness of the de Gaulle policy has prevented
any antinuclear environmentalist movement f r o m destroying the French nuclear program, as the U.S. antinuclear
movement has done in the United States. In 1972, for ex-

1970

1980

1990

2000

Year

Figure 1
NUCLEAR AS A PERCENTAGE OF TOTALELECTRICITY CONSUMPTIONFrance Compared to the United States
By the year 1990, nuclear power will produce about 70
percent of France's electricity; by the year 2000, 80
percent. By contrast, nuclear power accounted for 12
percent of the U.S. electrical energy generationin
1981-82. Furthermore, the U.S. Department of Energy
is revising its projections downward and has no figurefor 2000.
The United States produces more nuclear energy inabsolute terms than any other country, although thepercentage of nuclear-generated
electricity to total
electricity production is smaller. U.S. nuclear capacity
installed in 1980 was 55.0 gigawatts, compared toFrance's 16.1. By 1990, nuclear capacity installed will
jump to 56.0 CW in France, 116.2 GW in the UnitedStates.
The rate of growth of electricity demand has collapsed 8 percent per capita in the United States since1980. In France, although industrial demandslowedfrom the 1960s to the 1970s, the demand from households increased.
Source: North American Electric Reliability Council, Electric Power Supply and
Demand, 1982-1991, Aug. 1982; Memento sur I'Energie, French Atomic Energy
Commission, DPG, 1979; Department of Energy; Nuclear Power In an Age ol
Uncertainty. (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment.
OTA-E-216.Feb 1984).

ample, w h e n the U.S. antinuclear movement tried to gaina f o o t h o l d in France, the nuclear industry placed preemptive ads in the newspaper of the Communist trade u n i o n ,the CGT, explaining that the economic future of skilledworkers, as well as the nation as a w h o l e , was tied to an
aggressive expansion of nuclear energy. The antinuclear
movement failed to take hold, gaining adherents only among
July-August 1984

FUSION

29

Francois Mitterrand's Socialist Party and its CFDT tradeunion.
The Scope of the Nuclear Program
French industry initially developed its o w n successful design for nuclear plants, the so-called U N G C , or natural uranium-fueled, graphite-moderated, gas-cooled reactor.
However, after a bitter political battle, it was decided in theearly 1970s for commercial reasons to shift to the pressurized water reactor, the PWR, which was licensed by Westinghouse and w h i c h at that time dominated the w o r l d nuclear market. In March 1974, in the aftermath of the oilcrisis, Pierre Messmer, then prime minister under Georges
P o m p i d o u , launched an ambitious nuclear program that
included the construction of 12 nuclear units and possibly
4 more. Under President Valery Giscard d'Estaing, this program was accelerated.
The first 34 PWR units, some of w h i c h are still underconstruction, were 900 M W e reactors on nine different sites.
In the late 1970s, the size of these units was scaled up to
1,300 M W e . These larger reactors are designed entirely by
French industry and Framatome, w h i c h is now the largest
nuclear reactor constructor in the w o r l d . (In fact, Westinghouse is n o w buying licenses f r o m Framatome.)
At the pace established in the 1970s, six reactors came online every year d u r i n g the early 1980s. As of May 1984, theFrench utility company, Electricite de France, is operating
36 nuclear power plants (see map): 28 PRWs, 6 UNGG reactors, 1 gas-cooled heavy water reactor (the Monts-d'Arree unit in Brennilis), and 1 liquid metal fast breeder (thePhenix in Marcoule). In all, the 36 power plants represent a
total power of 25,000 M W e , or 25 GWe.
In addition, 28 other units are n o w under construction,
representing another 33 GWe. In total, by the end of thedecade, France expects to have a nuclear power capacity of
56 G W e , taking into account the decommissioning of a few
of the older UNGG units, w h i c h will no longer be operatingt h e n . In 1990, nuclear power will produce about 70 percent
of France's electricity, thus providing approximately 30 percent of the country's overall primary energy c o n s u m p t i o n .
Mitterrand and the Environmentalists
All is not rosy in the French nuclear picture, however.
The Socialist government of Francois Mitterrand has decided to reduce the pace of nuclear starts to five units for thet w o years 1984-1985, and is likely t o try to reduce it further
in the years to come. This "go-slow" approach of the Mitterrand government creates problems for the companies
that build the power plants, w h i c h have investments thatoutweigh the reduced number of prospective orders inFrance and also in the depressed foreign market. Both Framatome and Alsthpm-Atlantique are still making profits,
but the situation is expected to worsen in the next t w o tothree years. Framatome's profits have d r o p p e d significantly, and the f i r m is no longer able to fill the gap created by
the huge losses in other sectors of its mother company,
Creusot-Loire, which is now verging on bankruptcy.
Before c o m i n g to power, Mitterrand and his party had
published a white paper attacking nuclear energy. O n c e inpower, however, they were unable to carry out this policy
30

FUSION

July-August 1984

fully because of factional fighting within the party and because of considerable popular support for nuclear energy.
Polls showed that 60 percent of the population backed astrong nuclear policy, w i t h 20 percent against it and 20 percent undecided.
In 1981, w h e n Mitterrand attempted to halt the construction of a four-plant nuclear project in Cattenom, a " C o m mittee to Save C a t t e n o m " was f o r m e d and waged an aggressive campaign to continue the project and to discredit
the antinuclear environmentalists as Malthusian dinosaurs.
The committee, w h i c h succeeded in reversing the government attempt to stop Cattenom, was initiated by the French
affiliate of the Fusion Energy Foundation, the European Labor Party, and the Metz branch of the Young Giscardians,
and it was soon joined by the Gaullist mayor of Cattenom
and the head of the Republican Party of the Moselle region.
Today, construction is proceeding o n the f o u r t h Cattenom
reactor, and soon four 1,300-megawatt reactors will exportenergy to the coal and steel regions of Luxembourg and theSaar district of West Germany.
M u c h of the antinuclear movement in France continues
to be orchestrated from the outside, by such groups as the
Natural Resources Defense Council and Friends of the Earthin the United States and Ecoropa and the West German
Green Party in Europe. All of these groups sent organizers
into France in the late 1970s to try to slow d o w n the p r o n u clear m o m e n t u m . In particular, w h e n these groups tried torally protesters in 1977 against the Superphenix fast breeder
at Creys-Malville, they f o u n d no support from the surrounding p o p u l a t i o n . M o r e recently, in January 1982, agreenie group lobbed five Soviet-made rockets at the CreysMalville site, in the name of "ecologie pacifique." Needlessto say, such "peaceful" activity gained the environmentalists no local support.
Nuclear Energy Develops Flexibility
W i t h more than half of its electricity production c o m i n gfrom nuclear power, Electricite de France, the state-owned
utility company, has had to solve the problem of adjusting
the power supply to meet the variations of electricity consumption. For example, only one-third of the electricity
used at 8 p.m. is used at 4 a.m.; more electricity is used on
Sundays than during weekdays; and one-and-one-half times
the electricity is consumed in the winter months than in thesummer. The low cost of nuclear electricity for home heating has, in fact, accentuated the seasonal variation in consumption.
To solve this problem in the past, the utilities have used
the nuclear power plants for 6,000 or more hours per year
to provide the "base" of c o n s u m p t i o n ; that is, the b o t t o m line amount of electricity that is being used at any time ofthe day, week, or year. The demand peaks have been met
by the use of conventional thermal plants as well as hydroelectric dams, w h i c h can regulate their production more
flexibly than nuclear plants (or than hydro plants w i t h nodams). The utilities have also tried to schedule, insofar as
possible, the yearly shutdown of nuclear stations for refueling and overhauling in the periods w h e n little electricity
is needed.
In addition, EDF has had import-export agreements with

Figure 2
NUCLEAR POWER STATIONS IN FRANCE, 1984
Electricity de France operates 36 nuclear power plants,
with 28 additional units now under construction.
By
the end of the decade, these plants will be supplying
56gigawatts electric. This ambitious nuclear construction program was launched in 1974, in the aftermathof the oil crisis.
In contrast, no U.S. utility has put through a neworder for a nuclear plant since 1978, and since 1975,
every one of the new orders on whichconstruction
had been started has been canceled. Thus, in the
United States, no post-1974 plant is still under construction. Of the 91 U.S. nuclear plants now being
built, it is estimated undercurrent circumstances that
48, more than half, will never be completed.
Since
1982, 24 U.S. nuclear plants have been canceled orindefinitely
mothballed.

other countries that have little nuclear energy or that havepeak demand periods at slightly different hours.
N o w , w i t h a more sizable share of electricity coming f r o m
nuclear generation, these solutions have become insufficient, and EDF has developed what it calls the "gray-mode"piloting of nuclear plants. This gray mode consists of a new
type of control rod system (colored gray, hence the nameof the system) that allows the energy produced to be regulated very flexibly. EDF is now introducing the system progressively in all operating PWRs and w i l l install the system
in all its new units.
Completing the Fuel Cycle
Since its creation by de Gaulle in 1945, the Commissariat
a I'Energie atomique, CEA, which is responsible for all research on civilian and military nuclear power, has been
w o r k i n g on the complete nuclear fuel cycle. CEA specialists
and its industrial subsidiary that deals w i t h nuclear materials handling and processing, Cogema (Compagnie Generale des Matieres Nucleaires, have become among thebest in the w o r l d in all areas of the nuclear fuel cycle—fromprospecting and mining uranium ore, to uranium enriching, fuel pellet and rod fabrication, and spent fuel reprocessing and waste disposal.
The nuclear research centers at Marcoule, Cadarache,
Pierrelatte, and other locations have developed a masteryof all these processes over the past 20 years. For example,

the CEA has run an isotope separation plant based o n gaseous diffusion in Pierrelatte for 20 years. Originally mainly
for military use, the plant takes natural uranium, U-238,
w h i c h contains only about 0.7 percent of fissionable uraniu m , U-235, and enriches it to contain about 3 percent U-235
in order to make it usable as fuel for a PWR.
Based o n this solid experience, the CEA created Eurodif,
an international company with Belgian, Italian, Spanish,
and Iranian partners to build a large industrial enrichment
plant in Le Tricastin. The enormous electrical power required for the plant is supplied by four nuclear units of 900
M W e each, built o n the same site. Completed t w o years
ago, the Le Tricastin plant is able to produce 2,670 tons ofuranium enriched at 3.15 percent per year—enough to fuel
100 GWe of nuclear power. This production capacity represents about 30 percent of the w o r l d production of enriched uranium for civilian use.
Even more important internationally is the mastery CEA
and Cogema developed in fuel reprocessing. Unlike theother nuclear countries, France decided that it was necessary to reprocess its spent fuel for several reasons. First,
France wanted to separate the low-level radioactive wastefrom the more radioactive nuclides. In this way, the quantity of the high-level waste could be reduced to a very small
amount—just a few cubic feet per year per plant—making
it easily disposable. Second, the spent fuel from fission
power plants is of a higher grade than natural uranium andJuly-August 1984

FUSION31

thus requires less isotopic separation w o r k to transform
into new fission fuel. Third, p l u t o n i u m could be recoveredfrom the spent fuel to be used in fission power plants aswell as in breeder reactors. It was also speculated—but notproven—that the military wanted to procure larger quantities of p l u t o n i u m .
After its experience in running a small-size reprocessing
plant in Marcoule for 20 years, which was largely used to
extract p l u t o n i u m for the military, the CEA decided to build
an industrial reprocessing plant in La Hague, Normandy.
W i t h the possible exception of a plant in the Soviet U n i o n ,this is the largest reprocessing plant in the w o r l d , having acurrent reprocessing capability of 800 tons per year—enoughto process spent fuel f r o m 35 nuclear units of 900 M W eeach. Next year, w h e n the second La Hague unit comes online, this capacity w i l l d o u b l e .
The CEA has also developed some important solutions to
the waste disposal p r o b l e m . After the extraction of the useful radionuclides—uranium, p l u t o n i u m , and some o t h ers—from the spent fuel and the separation of the nonradioactive elements, the amount of waste to be disposedof is reduced to just a few cubic feet per year per plant.
Most of this is high-activity fission products that have ashort lifetime and decay almost completely after a coupleof years in temporary storage. The rest of the waste, longlife radionuclides consisting of some fission products andtransuranic elements, are then processed in a vitrification
plant; there they are vitrified, embedded in melted glass toprevent any leakage. The containers of this glass can thenbe stored in special geological formations.
Superphenix: Transmuting Matter
The most exciting accomplishment of the French nuclear
program is the fast breeder. After having built several research fast breeder reactors w i t h such poetic names as Harmonie, Masurca, Cabri, and Rapsodie (this last breeder
reaching 40 M W t ) , the CEA built the 250 M W e Phenix fast
breeder in Marcoule. Phenix produced its first kilowatt hourfor the power grid in December 1973, and reached full power in March 1974. In the first sixyears of its operation, Phenix
was the largest fast breeder reactor in the w o r l d (until theSoviets put the BN600 on line in Beloyarsk). Based o n its
experience with the Phenix, the CEA decided to build anindustrial-size reactor, the Superphenix, in Creys-Malville.
W h e n in operation next year, the1,200-MWe Superphenix
will be the largest fast breeder in the w o r l d and the firstindustrial-size breeder.
The French Superphenix, a commercial-size breeder, costslightly more than $1 b i l l i o n ; in contrast, the United States
has spent $4 billion in the last three decades on breeder
development, w i t h an estimated $10 billion more required
to develop a commercial prototype.
Although the United States pioneered in breeder reactor
development—its Experimental Breeder Reactor I was thefirst nuclear reactor to produce power in 1951—its breeder
program now lags 10 or more years behind France. The
Clinch River Demonstration Breeder Reactor Project in Tennessee is practically dead, having been mortally w o u n d e dby the Carter administration in the 1970s, and left to die by
32

FUSION

July-August 1984

the Reagan administration, w h i c h abandoned the projectto "free enterprise."
Visiting the Superphenix in Creys-Malville f r o m Paris,
this writer was struck w i t h the fact that one encounters
frontier technologies f r o m the very beginning of the t r i p :The TCV high speed train that links Paris to Lyons travels at
160 m p h . As much as this means of reducing the distances
between the t w o cities is a milestone in technology, theSuperphenix reactor has even more far-reaching consequences for the nation and the w o r l d : The Superphenix
will produce more fissile fuel than it consumes (in the formof U-235 and p l u t o n i u m ) . The excess fuel is produced bytransmutation of uranium-238, w h i c h cannot be used for
producing energy in conventional nuclear reactors.
Thus, for the first time, the dream of the alchemists becomes reality—transmuting matter. The Superphenix,
however, this philosopher's stone of m o d e r n times, will
not transform lead into gold as Paracelsus's followers wanted to d o . Instead it will transform uranium-238—a metalthat w o u l d otherwise have no value and could even beconsidered waste—into p l u t o n i u m , one of today's very precious metals. At a value of about $6,000 per p o u n d , approximately $410 per ounce, p l u t o n i u m truly has the value ofgold.
Consider this analogy to the advantages of a breeder.
Imagine a man stranded in a mountain refuge during a
violent snow storm. Suppose that the refuge has a two-day
supply of dry w o o d for heat. If he carelessly consumes thew o o d , he w i l l die of cold o n the t h i r d day. But if he makes
sure to pick up wet w o o d around the chalet and leave it todry in front of the fire, his w o o d reserve may last longer. In
fact, if he manages to dry as much or more w o o d than heconsumes, his w o o d reserve might last forever, assumingthat there is an unlimited supply of wet w o o d around his
refuge. O u r stranded man will have created a "breeder" ofburnable w o o d .
The dry w o o d of o u r example is uranium-235, the only
fissile isotope of u r a n i u m , which represents just 0.7 percent
of natural uranium. The rest, the 99.3 percent of uraniumthat is uranium-238, like the wet w o o d , is unburnable, atleast in ordinary reactors. The task of the breeder is to "drythe wet w o o d " ; that is, to transform the nonfissile U-238,
which is 140 times more abundant than the U-235 fission
fuel, into a combustible (fissile) material—plutonium-239
for nuclear reactors. This means that there can be no foreseeable energy shortage. If known reserves of natural uranium ata given price allow the production of the equivalent
40 years of the p r e s e n t w o r l d electricity c o n s u m p t i o n , thenbreeder reactors, at least in theory, can make those same
reserves last 140 times longer—5,600 years.
The ABCs of Fast Breeders
All nuclear reactors are based on a chain reaction: A
neutron is used to hit a uranium nucleus, and under theshock, the nucleus splits or fissions, usually into t w o fragments (the fission products) plus t w o or three neutrons.
These neutrons in turn can produce new fissions. In general, U-235 is easier to split w i t h slow neutrons; however,the neutrons expelled by the fission process are fast neu-

Reactor dome and vessel of theSuperphenix inconstruction.
Figure 3
SUPERPHENIX: WORLD'S LARGEST BREEDER
Superphenix is an integrated or pool reactor; that is, the entirety of the primary coolant loop lies near the core within
the vessel, including the heat exchangers and the primary pumps. The core itself is comprised of 364 vertical fuelassemblies, each made up of 271 fuel pins that are 2.7 meters long with a diameter of 8.5 mm. The pins contain fuelpellets, about 15 percent of which is composed of fissile nuclides—uranium
and plutonium oxides. In all, the coreof the reactor has a volume of 10 cubic meters and contains about 5 tons of plutonium and 108 tons of uranium. The
core is surrounded by 233 fertile blanket assemblies of natural uranium or depleted
uranium.
Every second, 5 tons of liquid sodium enter the core at 400 degrees Celsius. The sodium circulates among the fuelpins, leaving the core at a temperature of 550 degrees Celsius. This sodium is then pumped by four primary pumps
into the four primary loops, each of which has two heat exchangers. Overall, the reactor vessel contains 3,500 tonsof sodium, which gives the system a very large thermal inertia. When asked of the significance of this amount of
sodium, Gilbert Labat, the chief of operation for the Superphenix and a veteran of the Phenix research reactor, put
it this way: "If something happens, you need not have quick reflexes. You can start by smoking a cigarette andfiguring out what is actually going on. You have all the time you need [about a half-hour! to think twice before taking
action."Surrounding the main reactor vessel of the Superphenix is a safety vessel containing an inert gas that can containand recover sodium in the case of a leak. This safety vessel itself is topped by a metallic safety dome. Outside thevessel are the secondary pumps and the barrel used to manipulate the fuel assemblies. All of this is housed in a
concrete reactor building. The rest of the Superphenix power plant is purely conventional:
The secondary
sodiumleaves the reactor building to heat up water in four steam generators, which activate two turbo alternators, each witha power of 620 MWe.

trons that usually bounce off the uranium nuclei w i t h o u t
triggering fission. In ordinary reactors, a moderator (water,graphite, carbon dioxide, or heavy water) is used to slow
d o w n the neutrons. The fast neutrons bounce off the lightnuclei of the moderator thus giving most of theifroriginal
kinetic energy to the moderator and ending up in thermal

equilibrium with the medium used. These neutrons are
therefore called "thermal neutrons." W h e n their speed has
decreased e n o u g h , these thermal neutrons become able totrigger new fissions.
In a breeder reactor the fast neutrons are used directly(hence the name fast breeder). Because fission is more
July-August 1984

FUSION33

difficult to obtain with fast neutrons, the fuel used in thebreeder has a higher concentration of fissile nuclides. Solving the particular problems involved in the breeder produces a series of advantages. First, fast neutrons are able,
albeit inefficiently, to fission U-238. In a reactor like theSuperphenix, between 10 and 15 percent of the fissions are
obtained directly from U-238. Those neutrons that do notcause the U-238 to fission can be captured to create neptunium-239, a radionuclide that decays rapidly into p l u t o n i u m 239. This process also occurs in PYVRs; however, in thebreeder these fast neutrons are able to split p l u t o n i u m .
The main advantage of the breeder, however, is that it
breeds new fuel. The reactor core where the chain reaction
is maintained can be surrounded w i t h a fertile blanket,
walls made of natural uranium or, even better, of the "waste"
depleted uranium f r o m an enrichment plant. Bombarded
by neutrons from the core of the breeder, the U-238 in theblanket is transformed into p l u t o n i u m . In this way, the reactor produces more p l u t o n i u m overall than the p l u t o n i u mand U-235 that are consumed as fuel in the reactor core.
This p l u t o n i u m product is then reprocessed to serve as newfuel for reactors, thus closing the nuclear fuel cycle.
An additional economic advantage is that the core size ofthe breeder reactor can be much smaller than a conventional PWR, because it has a higher concentration of fissile
fuel and because it does not need a moderator.
The Sodium Coolant
The French nuclear program pioneered in breeder technology and solved one of the problems that the now neardead U.S. breeder program had set out to solve in the
1970s—designing a steam generator system that does notleak. The steam generator in a breeder system has a veryt h i n , 0.10 inch barrier between two extremely incompatible
heat transfer fluids, the liquid sodium coolant and water. If
sodium and water mix, a turbulent reaction occurs, in which
the sodium burns and hydrogen is p r o d u c e d . Fabricating alarge steam generator that does not leak, or leaks rarely,
required higher quality materials manufacturing, fabrication techniques, welding methods, and quality assurance
methods than previously achieved in the heavy e q u i p m e n t
industry.
All breeders today are cooled with liquid sodium, w h i c hhas been f o u n d to be by far the best coolant. Since the coreof the breeder has a very high power density, the coolant
must have a good thermal conductivity and absorption capacity. A liquid metal is therefore ideal. In addition, thecoolant must not moderate or slow d o w n neutrons, w h i c hmeans that it must be made up of relatively heavy nuclei.
Sodium fits the bill neatly: The metal melts at 98 degrees
Celsius and boils at 882 degrees Celsius, thus providing avery large spread of temperatures in the liquid phase.
The main drawback of the sodium coolant is that under
neutron b o m b a r d m e n t , it can capture neutrons and become radioactive. Therefore, the breeder reactor has tohave a secondary cooling loop to keep the activated sodium
within the reactor vessel. This secondary sodium loop, whichheats the steam for the thermodynamic cycle of the reactor,
along w i t h some sodium purification e q u i p m e n t , increases
the cost of the breeder.
34

FUSION

July-August 1984

A second inconvenience w i t h sodium is, as noted above,that it is a strong chemical reducer w i t h a great affinity foroxidizing substances, specifically for oxygen and water. Because of these chemical properties, any free surface of sod i u m must be covered with inert gases, argon or nitrogen,and the reactor must have a d o u b l e wall between the sod i u m of the secondary (nonradioactive) loop and the waterof the thermodynamic loop.
The additional costs incurred by the use of sodium'—theextra cooling loop and the use of more stainless steel compared to PWRs—are partially offset by the savings it allows
for the reactor. As mentioned above, the reactor vessel canbe smaller, because of the high density of the fuel in thecore, and thus less costly to b u i l d . Also, since the sodium
is used at temperatures far f r o m its boiling point, the vessel
has m u c h smaller physical mechanical constraints and does
not need to be pressurized. Finally, sodium can be operated at a higher temperature, w h i c h allows a thermodynamic
efficiency of 40 percent, higher than the 30 t o 33 percent of
the PWR. This in t u r n allows for a smaller (and thus lesscostly) turbine and reduces the thermal losses. Overall,however, the kilowatt hour produced by a fast breeder
should remain a bit more expensive than that of the PWR,
so long as the price of uranium remains level.
After the Superphenix: W i l l France Keep Its Lead?
The construction of the Superphenix was completed in
May 1984. The sodium is in place, and part of the inner coreof the reactor is on site. In July 1984, the conventional partof the reactor will be tested w i t h auxiliary heating boilers.
By the end of 1984, the fuel will be loaded and other tests
will continue over several months. If all goes w e l l , the power plant will supply its first kilowatt hours to the power gridin mid-1985.
Unfortunately, the French nuclear program has not decided on any follow-up to the Superphenix, although a
Superphenix II is under consideration. Claude Aycoberryof Cogema and Jacques Leclercq of EDF presented a planfor twin breeder reactors, Rapides 1500, in July 1982. Directly derived from Superphenix, these reactors would havem i n o r modifications, such as full power of 1,500 M W e tobe reached by optimizing the reactor equipment.
As veterans of the French nuclear program have argued,
the w o r l d needs fast breeders. W e cannot b u r n o u r "dryw o o d " in a few decades w i t h o u t preparing for the future.
Even if thermonuclear fusion, and perhaps fission-fusion
hybrid breeders w i l l ultimately replace fission energy, w eneed to fully explore and take advantage of state-of-the-art
fission technology if we are to get on w i t h the task of industrializing the w o r l d and lifting mankind out of the mud ofpoverty.

Laurent Rosenfeld is editor-in-chiefof theguage magazine Fusion, a quarterly publication
dation pour I'Fnergie de Fusion.

French-lanof the Fon-

Note
1. A full histqry of the French nuclear program can be found in "How France
Took the Nuclear Lead," by Dana Sloan, Fusion, August 1980. p. 36.

Steven Bardwell

The target chamber for the Kalmar laser, approximately
40 cm in diameter.
calorimeters, and so on) are attached to the portholes around the sphere.

The various diagnostics(x-raycameras,Thermonuclear Laser Fusion
In the Soviet Union
by Dr. Nikolai G. BasovThis review of the Soviet laser fusion program by Soviet
Academy of Science member Basov appeared in the January
1983 issue of the Russian-language magazine Priroda (Nature) and is published here with the author's permission. It
was translated by Michael Masterov, a student intern with
the Fusion Energy Foundation in New York City.

At the present time, the volume of physical informationcollected over the many years of thermonuclear laser fusion research allows us to evaluate this approach as a whole,as well as to analyze the scientific and technical difficulties
that must be overcome to realize and utilize controlled
thermonuclear reactions. In essence, the time has come,w h e n , on the basis of the analysis of available data, it isnecessary to select the most reliable and promising path forfurther research, using all the strong points of the laser
approach to this p r o b l e m . The research, conducted in everincreasing v o l u m e , is already aimed not only at the search
for a feasible variation of thermonuclear laser fusion, butalso at the development of the optimal way of solving the
problem of obtaining thermonuclear energy.
The Physical Concept of Thermonuclear Laser Fusion
The concept of thermonuclear laser fusion w i t h inertial
confinement is that of a fusion reaction initiated at the center of a super-dense plasma, concentrated in an area w i t h asmall characteristic diameter (on the order of 100 micrometers), and causing a burn wave to spread f r o m the center
over the entire volume of the plasma during a time determined by the inertia of the substance. W h e n this time elapses, the plasma disassembles and the thermonuclear reaction ends. The duration of the inertial " c o n f i n e m e n t " depends on the size of the plasma and its temperature; fortargets with a starting size of nearly 1 mm it is 10~10sec.
The amount of energy created at this time is a function of
the plasma density, w h i c h , in t u r n , is related to the characteristics of the target and the parameters of the laser impulse. However, even simple calculations based on the lawof conservation of energy (confirmed by exact numericalcalculations) lead us to conclude that in order to achieve

July-August 1984

FUSION35

considerable energy yields the target must be compressed
to densities thousands of times greater than the density ofliquid thermonuclear fuel, a mixture of deuterium and tritium.
The spherically symmetrical laser radiation falling o n thetarget heats it and causes it to evaporate. As this happens,
the reactive pressure of the disintegrating plasma causes aradially inward impulse in the shell. In the process of theshell's movement toward the center it is important that thetemperature of the thermonuclear fuel remain sufficiently
l o w for as long as possible. Otherwise, the compressed
plasma will create considerable thermal pressure directed
outwards from the center, w h i c h will slow d o w n the shell,in this way limiting the maximal density of the plasma core.
In this case, the achievement of a high level of fuelcompression is the most important indicator of the promise
shown by one or another regime of compressing and heating thermonuclear targets.
The hydrodynamic regime of compressing and heating
thermonuclear fuel is the basis of the physical concept ofthermonuclear laser fusion being developed in the Soviet
U n i o n . It is characterized by a continuous pressure change
and requires relatively low (to 10'4 watts/cm 2 ) laser radiation
power densities to be applied to a hollow-type target. W i t ha sufficiently high energy irradiation for targets w i t h aspectratios (the ratio of shell radius R to shell thickness A-R)
nearing 100, it is possible to achieve significant compression and heating of the thermonuclear fuel. The comparatively low power density of the irradiation allows us to get
rid of some undesirable phenomena, the most importantof w h i c h is the target preheating by fast electrons, f o r m e d
w h e n the plasma is heated by laser radiation.
The role of the fast electrons in the absorption of theintense laser radiation by the plasma is illustrated by experiments performed by American researchers at the Shiva
laser thermonuclear installation [Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California] w i t h the energy of 10 kj.
These experiments resulted in a record neutron output (almost 1010 neutrons per impulse), w h i c h was 4 orders ofmagnitude below the planned o u t p u t . This was the resultof a high (almost 10'5 watts/cm 2 ) radiation energy density
applied to the target. The " i m p l o d i n g liner" regime used inthese experiments efficiently generated fast electrons whichcaused a great deal of target preheating, and, as a result,the compression level of the plasma was not great.
The Soviet Concept
At the present time the concept of thermonuclear laser
fusion developed in the Soviet U n i o n on the basis of analyzing the vast volume of theoretical and experimental developments and numerical calculations has received universal acceptance. It is based on the f o l l o w i n g tenets:(1) A m o n g the many possible regimes of interaction of
the laser radiation with the thermonuclear target, the optimal is the hydrodynamic regime of ablation, characterized
by the continuous acceleration of the substance and theabsence of powerful hydrodynamic disturbances.
(2) This regime may be realized by using laser impulsesof the simple triangular form w i t h a pulse duration of several nanoseconds, usuallyformed in powerful pulsed lasers

36

FUSION

July-August 1984

MAIN CHARACTERISTICS OF LASERS A N D
TARGETSPower density of radiation
on target
Pulse length
Laser energy
Wavelength
Laser power
Radiation divergenceLaser efficiency
Hydrodynamic efficiency
Plasma compression (byvolume)Compression velocity (shell
velocity)
Aspect ratio (multishelltargets)
Precision in shell
production
Thermonuclear
amplification coefficient10" watts/cm2
5-30 nanosec.
106-107j
0.3-0.6 micrometers10"1 watts
10 ,4 rad5%
10-15%
10"
2 x 105m/sec
100
1%
1-100

Dr. Basov is head of the Soviet laser fusion program. He
won the Nobel Prize in 1984 for developing the maser andlaser principle of producing high-intensity
radiation.
with a power density on the order of 1 0 " watts/cm 2 .
(3) For such parameters of irradiation, the absorption
processes and further energy transformation are classicalto a considerable degree, which means that the effect offast electrons on the compression and heating of the target
can be ignored.
(4) The hydrodynamic regime of ablation allows us tocount on a sufficient stability of these processes even w i t htargets having high aspect ratios (R/A-R approximately 10100).
(5) The conditions for realizing a thermonuclear flash
w i t h the hydrodynamic regime of compression can, in theory, be created by profiling the starting structure of thetarget. (Depending on the on the amount of applied energy, meaning the expected thermonuclear yield as well, it isnecessary to use multilayer pellet targets of various construction.)(6) Laser radiation of about 10" j with a power of about 10'"watts corresponds to a thermonuclear amplification coefficient on the order of 102. The question of the optimal
wavelength still remains open. From the point of view ofthe physical interaction between the target and the laser
radiation, shortwave lasers are preferrable; however, there
exist possibilities (which will be discussed below) where
longwave radiation can be used effectively.
Based on the above-mentioned, we can already formulate a fairly clear idea of the criteria for building optimallaser-target systems for various output energies from thelasers directed at the targets and for thermonuclear amplification coefficients.
At the present time there is no doubt as to achieving
breakeven in thermonuclear reactions using the laser approach. Calculations, conducted by the Institute of Physics
and Applied Mathematics of the Academy of Sciences of
the Soviet Union, and the analysis of experimentally collected data, as well as the reliability and relative simplicityof the physical model for heating processes and target
compression, which allows us to extrapolate for a higher
level of energy, all lead us to conclude that breakeven may
be achieved with an energy of irradiation close to 105 j andpossibly even lower in the case of multiple profiling (thatis, simultaneously using impulses of different wavelengths). With this energy level of laser irradiation, a very
simply structured target may be used, though the stability
problem still causes stringent precision requirements (approximately! percent) and symmetry of irradiation requirements.
This way, from the physical point of view, thermonuclear
energy "surplus" can be effected with laser energies notexceeding 105 j , while the realization of commercially justifiable thermonuclear reactors requires the availability oflasers capable of pulses of several megajoules. At the current stage, the main task for solving the problem of thermonuclear laser fusion is the creation of lasers with irradiation energies of 105-106 j . As the modern concept of thermonuclear laser fusion is based on the use of several laser
beams, the installations of this scale require special modules (each forming a single laser beam) which must be developed to output energies of about lOMO5 j . The development of these modules is the most important task of contemporary quantum electronics.
Lasers for Thermonuclear Laser Fusion in the Soviet Union
The thermonuclear laser fusion research program in theSoviet Union is basically oriented on the glass laser as theone most accepted by industry. In 1981, the Physics Institute of the Academy of Sciences, in cooperation with theabove-mentioned concept of thermonuclear laser fusion,
established the Dolphin-1 installation and equipped it witha neodymium laser currently capable of 2 kj pulses several
nanoseconds in duration.
What are the possibilities of developing other types oflasers? Simple physical considerations (high absorption,

Figure 2
LASER RADIATION ABSORPTION VS. TARGET
DIAMETER
The dependence of laser radiation absorption, coefficient K, on target diameter d achieved at the Kalmar
installation. Target materials and construction werevaried. With diameters of more than 200 micrometers,
the absorption coefficient reaches 50 percent. The
vertical axis is the percentage of laser radiation absorption and the horizontal axis is the target diameterin micrometers.

July-August 1984

FUSION37

Figure 3
X-RAY MICROPHOTOGRAPH OF IRRADIATED THINSHELLED TARGET
X-ray plasma microphotograph,obtained when irradiating thin-shelled
glass target (diameter 140 and
thickness 2.2 micrometers), filled with gaseous deuterium under pressure (35 atmospheres).
We see acore compressed 1,000 x .

lack of fast electrons, and rapid ablation, w h i c h means ahigh hydrodynamic coefficient of useful action [efficiency])
require that w e give preference to shortwave lasers. However, the question of efficiency and the possibility of generating nanosecond impulses in the shortwave band remain unclear at this time. Apparently, the most promisingin this approach are the eximer lasers, which can theoretically achieve an efficiency of about 10 percent if the amplification cascades are o p t i m i z e d . However, the creation ofsuch a laser installation is problematic because of the unif o r m saturation of the w o r k i n g substance of the laser w i t helectronic beams that have the energy of several MeV andthe suppression of the effects of the high-intensity parasitic
X-ray radiation on the properties of the optics in use andthe active m e d i u m .
In terms of efficiency and the frequency of repeating theimpulses, the carbon dioxide lasers appear to be the best,
but the data existing today on h o w the carbon dioxide laser
radiation interacts w i t h the substance of the target seem toindicate the tendency t o f o r m fast electrons. This effect isdetrimental to laser ablation and requires the use of " t h i c k "protective layers. As calculations have s h o w n , there is atheoretical possibility of designing an external layer of thetarget in such a way that the regime of a "collapsing shell"
can be implemented as a result of preheating by fast electrons.

38

FUSION

July-August 1984

Figure 4
X-RAY MICROPHOTOGRAPH OF ASYMMETRICALLYIRRADIATED PLASMA
X-ray microphotographofaplasma obtained by asymmetrical (30%) irradiation of a polystyrene target (diameter 179, thickness 6.9 micrometers).
Below, thesolid line shows experimental and the dotted lines
shows the theoretical spread of intensiveness of Xradiation. The asymmetry of irradiation does nothing
but move the core in relation to the center, having noappreciable effect on the level of compression.

Main Physical Results
Let us m e n t i o n the main experimental results justifying
the aforementioned concept of thermonuclear laser f u sion. The main problems facing researchers trying to determine the optimal regime of compressing and heating thermonuclear targets are the f o l l o w i n g :(1) D e t e r m i n i n g t h e laser radiation absorption coefficientin thin-shelled targets in the power density range of 10"10" watts/cm 2 ;(2) Researching hollow shell target compression stability
w i t h various aspect ratios;(3) Determining the effect of n o n u n i f o r m irradiation (unequal intensity of radiation over the target surface) o n the
maximal level of compression;(4) Studying the fast-electron-generating mechanisms ina plasma under the effects of p o w e r f u l laser radiation, andtrons by velocity showed that w i t h a radiation power density
corresponding to the hydrodynamic regime of ablation, theamount of fast electrons is several orders of magnitude lessthan the amount, observed in experiments conducted in
the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory w i t h power
densities on the order of 1 0 " watts/cm 2 .
W h e n determining the promise for thermonuclear laser
fusion of hollow shell targets, one of the most important
problems is the p r o b l e m of compression stability of targets
with high aspect ratios (R/A-R greater than 100). The use ofsuch targets allows us to considerably increase the amountof laser radiation that hits the target and is converted into
the energy of a substance moving toward the center (hydrodynamic efficiency) and the velocity of the shell. This willin turn increase the level of compression of the t h e r m o n u clear fuel.
Experimental research into the possibility of stable
compression of hollow shell targets with aspect ratios greaterthan 100 was performed at the Dolphin-1 installation w i t h
the laser radiation energy at the target equaling approximately 2 kj. In these experiments w e were able t o register
stable compression of simple h o l l o w glass targets w i t hstarting radii in the area of 200 micrometers and shell thicknesses of 0.7 to 1.7 micrometers.
Registering the compression level was achieved using Xray microscopy, by determining the spatial spread of theplasma emission density in the X-ray portion of the spect r u m . Simultaneously, X-ray electrooptics were used tomeasure the shell velocity toward the center. (Maximal
compression by volume exceeded 3 x 103, at which times
the shell velocity reached 1.6 x 105 meters per second.)

the effect these electrons have on the dynamics of target
heating and compression.
Besides this, the search for the optimal target construction that could serve as a prototype for thermonuclear targets, as well as many other problems are as important.
Until the end of the 1970s, the main thermonuclear laser
fusion research in the Soviet Union was conducted at the
9-channel laser installation Kalmar, w h i c h allowed the realization of compression and heating of spherical targets
using a hydrodynamic regime of ablation, with the laser
radiation that hits the target on the order of 100 j . As a resultof this research, the main tenets of the concept outlined
above were c o n f i r m e d . It was shown that in the power
density range corresponding to the hydrodynamic regime,
the laser radiation absorption coefficient may reach 50 percent. In these same experiments, a thousandfold gas
compression was reached for a target w i t h an aspect ratio
of about 35. It was also determined that w h e n the irradiation
asymmetry does not exceed 30 percent, there is no appreciable change in the compression level, which indicates thestability of this regime. Measuring the separation of elec-

Experiments p e r f o r m e d on the Dolphin-1 installation allowed us to discover the filamentation p h e n o m e n o n (theformation of string-shaped clots), indicating the formationof instabilities in the plasma corona, the thickness of w h i c hincreases w i t h the increase in the laser radiation energy.
These string-shaped formations are seen most clearly inplasma photographs made by the plasma's own X-rays, mostprominently in the plasmas of low-density targets (polystyrene). Analyzing the experimental results shows that despite the filamentation, it is still possible to achieve hightarget compression.
Laser Thermonuclear Reactors
W i t h i n the boundaries of the controlled thermonuclear
fusion research program in o u r c o u n t r y , in the last few years
some projects were also developed for a laser energy re-July-August 1984

FUSION39

CHARACTERISTICS OF LASER TARGET SYSTEMSFOR THERMONUCLEAR REACTORS
Radiation energy
Power
Radiation Divergence
Repeat frequency
Laser to target distanceDiam. multilayer cryogenic
target (D-T ice)
Thermonuclear amplification
coefficient
Neutron output[1-5] x 10 6 j
10'4 watts
10 ,4 rad1-10 Hz
Greater than 50m
0.5-1.5 cm
10-10010,7/impulse

Figure 6
MICROPHOTOCRAPH SHOWING F O M E N T A T I O N
IN A HOLLOW POLYSTYRENE TARGET
X-ray microphotographof a plasma from a hollow
polystyrene target. String-shaped formations are visible, indicating that a filamentation
phenomenonisdeveloping in the corona.

actor. As a result of these developments, requirements forthe laser-target system for an energy reactor were f o r m e d .
Projects exist for three types of reactors: the " p u r e " reactor (which uses only fusion energy), the hybrid (fusion
and uranium fission in a blanket), and t h e breeder reactor,
w h i c h creates more fuel for standard atomic power plants
and w o u l d be built together w i t h a fission plant to form asingle power complex.
The most difficult t o realize is t h e " p u r e " reactor, as it
requires a laser w i t h sufficient efficiency (about 5 percent)and a target with a thermonuclear amplification coefficient
greater than 10. Furthermore, even if the aforementioned
requirements are met, the cost of electricity in the " p u r e "power plants w o u l d be twice as high as in t h e second andthird possibilities. Economic calculations show that thecheapest electricity is obtained f r o m the laser-target systemfor p r o d u c i n g nuclear fuel to be used in an atomic power
plant. In this case t h e laser efficiency can be as l o w as 0.5
percent.
It is interesting t o note that the laser cost is no more than
10 percent of the electricity costs (with lasers costing 100
rubles per joule, an efficiency of 5 percent, and a capabilityof something on the order of 10* impulses per year).
The closest to reaching the aforementioned parametersis the electroionizing carbon dioxide laser. Another possible candidate is the eximer laser. Looking at the problem

40

FUSION

July-August 1984

Basov's laboratory and the Kalmar laser in 1980. The laser
and amplifier rods are along the back wall of the laboratory.
In the center is the target chamber protected with a plastic
dust cover.
optimistically, it is necessary to note that the creation oftechnologically applicable and commercially useful megajoule lasers is a very difficult task.
In conclusion, I would like to mention that the progressin understanding the physics of thermonuclear laser fusion
was achieved with the efforts of scientists from many countries. When developing megajoule lasers (under conditions
when the optimal type of laser is still difficult to pick andthe creation of laser thermonuclear installations as a whole
requires great effort and expenditure) it is difficult to getalong without widespread international cooperation. This
cooperation in the boundaries of member nations of [theSoviet bloc] or even on a wider scale (as this is already taking
place in the case of thermonuclear installations with magnetic confinement) will allow a significant acceleration inrealizing the thermonuclear laser fusion program.

Why
I Must Attack
Albert Einsteinby Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.

Dr. Albert Einstein, circa 1930.

July-August 1984

FUSION41

EDITOR'S NOTE: An "Einstein debate" emerged after the
100th birthday celebration of Einstein in 1979, in w h i c h thename Einstein has been repeatedly misused solely tostrengthen cultural pessimism and the antiwar movement.
This article contrasts sharply w i t h the so-called Einstein debate, and treats w i t h scientific precision the question of
morality in scientific w o r k .
The origins of the ugly Einstein debate are as follows: In
November 1980, an essay by the West German physicist
Unsold p i n n e d on Einstein the blame for atomic weapons,
and therefore all modern warfare. W r i t i n g in the official
publication of the German Science Association, Unsold
vented his anger over the just-concluded "Einstein Year"celebration: "[HJardly anyone dared to remind us," hew r o t e , "that Einstein's name is also closely associated w i t h
w i t h atomic b o m b . . . . M u c h has been said in 1979 about
the 'responsibility of scientists.' But of Haber's poison gas
and Einstein's atomic b o m b . . . w e hardly heard a single
w o r d . " (The year 1979, it should be n o t e d , was the year
NATO made the bilateral decision t o station middle-range
missiles in Western Europe.)
The green and peace movements immediately put U n sold o n their lecture circuit, giving h i m the o p p o r t u n i t y to
spread his ideas o n "scientists' responsibility" t h r o u g h o u tWest Germany. His speeches against Einstein soon provoked an international outcry, including charges that Unsold's attack was motivated by antisemitism. The British
magazine Nature, for example, reported April 16,1981 that
" U n s o l d , a theoretician, now 75, appears to have begun his
attack o n Einstein at a [university] symposium . . . w h e n
he said that Einstein was guilty of crimes, no less serious
than those of Hitler. . . . Unsold has been charged w i t hantisemitism." W h y the peace movement w o u l d so zealously rely o n Unsold's view of "scientists' responsibility,"
becomes clear from the f o l l o w i n g citation from the abovem e n t i o n e d Unsold article against Einstein:Man's psyche apparently possesses tworegions,
w h i c h operate according to quite different rules. . . .
The deliberative, goal-oriented and critical activity ofour " I " resides . . . in the neocortex. . . . Opposed tothis is the genetically more ancient limbic area, or brain
stem, w h i c h is where the instincts, the " I d , " reside.
This latter p o r t i o n has remained unchanged since thestone age. Thus w e understand that, even in humans
w i t h extremely differentiated t h i n k i n g and investigative capacities—people w i t h "exceedingly high intelligence"—the o l d stone-age instincts are lurking in the
background, instincts primarily aimed at acquiring
power, acclaim, etc., and w h i c h w o u l d not hesitate todestroy anything w h i c h could get in the way.
In Unsold's twisted and antihuman view of man—as inthat of the green and peace movements—there is no place
for moral or statesmanlike activity, and no notion of how
science and technology enable mankind to not only survive, but to develop. The Einstein debate spurred by Unsold
p r o m o t e d n o t h i n g useful scientifically; it served only to
p r o m o t e the European peace movement's simple-minded
formula that "Science = W e a p o n s . "42

FUSION

July-August 1984W

ith great personal reluctance, I find myself obliged
to attack certain features of the w o r k of the late
Albert Einstein publicly. This reluctance bears
u p o n Einstein as a m a n , not as a physicist. Although I am
not a physicist or mathematician as such—chiefly because
I early a b h o r r e d , morally, certain leading features of contemporary textbook and classroom mathematics—I am not
awed by Einstein's reputation in science. I k n o w enough of
the absolute fundamentals of scientific w o r k to know withcertainty that important aspects of Einstein's w o r k depend
upon childishly outrageous blunders of assumption andm e t h o d . W h a t I like about Einstein is that, although hepermitted himself to be used and corrupted to a certain
degree, he drew the line beyond w h i c h he w o u l d not permit himself to be used for corrupt purposes. For that latterreason, and for reason of certain important issues o n w h i c h
Einstein was morally on the right side, I w o u l d prefer todefend h i m , than t o be obliged to attack his memory.

My motives for attacking Einstein's memory are eminently, urgently practical ones, reasons he w o u l d admit are ofan obligatory moral as well as practical character. Briefly,
the threat of a . n e w general war, this time probably athermonuclear war, and the threatened collapse of theworld's economy—unless a technological revolution intervenes—require a very special kind of "crash-program" effort in development of three interrelated areas of scientificinvestigation and technological applications. These threeareas are: (1) controlled thermonuclear fusion and related
aspects of relativistic physics; (2) a general, radical revisionin the theory of quantum electrodynamics, w i t h emphasison the need for a comprehensive and coherent doctrine ofcoherent radiation—new, rigorous distinctions between
energy and work; and (3) revolutionary breakthroughs inbiophysics, centered upon control of aging of tissues w i t h in the w h o l e processes of human bodies, a fundamental
breakthrough in the physical definition of the w o r d life.
These three breakthroughs cannot be accomplished w i t h out t h r o w i n g overboard the axiomatic notions of a statistical theory of heat, axiomatic notions embedded in much ofEinstein's w o r k , and the root of every major error in hiswork.
In these matters, my o w n special variety of competencelies both in my mastery of empirical principles of economic
science, and a life dedicated chiefly to mastery of what isbest described as "the third level of scientific hypothesis,"what Plato's writings define as the notion of an hypothesisof the higher hypothesis. In my o w n case, my susceptibility
to the Platonic (or, Neoplatonic) viewpoint was an outgrowth of a c h i l d h o o d and youthful saturation w i t h mattersof theology, most emphatically that of the Gospel of St.
John. It was consistent that d u r i n g my 13th and 14th year, I
should have been w o n totally to the methodological outlook of Gottfried Leibniz, most emphatically the Leibniz of
the Leibniz-Clarke correspondence and the Monadology.
This theological point of entry into scientific w o r k has been
no defect, as the instances of St. Augustine, and the f o u n d ing of modern science by the 15th-century Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa best indicate the connections to be noted.
What turned me away from mathematics, as I encountered taught mathematics in the textbooks and classrooms

of my y o u t h , was the recognition that the lattice structuresof a logically consistent mathematical edifice depend upon
the validity of the axiomatic and postulational assumptions
which underlie all mathematical systems. It has always appeared morally indefensible to me to assert that anything istrue mathematically merely because of plausible empiricalconsistency w i t h mathematical schemas. If the underlying
assumptions are in error, then the entire edifice of existing
mathematics collapses. Perhaps, at any given point in progress of knowledge, it may not be possible to settle these
problems respecting underlying assumptions, and scientific w o r k must not be halted merely because we know somemore or less pervasive defect to exist in given mathematicalphysics. Yet, at the same t i m e , it is morally w r o n g , andultimately destructive of scientific w o r k , to pretend that theexisting mathematics is self-evidently right as to principles
w h e n it is demonstrable that some underlying assumptions
are of a dubious character.
This d o u b t proved most fruitful. The Wiener-Shannon
doctrine of " i n f o r m a t i o n theory," derived from the statistical theory of heat, expresses the most immoral features ofexisting scientific o p i n i o n , depending most directly u p o nassumptions which are provably absurd, assumptions conclusively proven absurd long before the work of Boltzm a n n , Gibbs, et al. Negentropy, it appeared to me duringlate 1947 and early 1948, when I first encountered the WienerShannon dogma, is characteristically the quality of living
processes. Life as an active, efficient principle, must be
adduced directly, empirically, from living processes. It was
my preferred argument t h e n , and still today, that the professor w h o undertakes to discover whether or not life ispossible, from the standpoint of the statistical theory ofheat, or the mechanistic standpoint otherwise expressed,
is posing actually the question whether he himself exists tohave the power to express an o p i n i o n on any matter ofinquiry. Therefore, I was led through the w o r k of Nicholas
Rashevsky on mathematical biophysics, to challenging
Rashevsky's methodological assumptions. This led ultimately to a year of wrestling w i t h Ceorg Cantor's notion oftransfinite orderings, a vantage point which made the essential, underlying features of the w o r k of Bernhard Riemann directly accessible. M y o w n fundamental discoveriesin economic science, dated f r o m 1952, were the result ofthat.
Energy unquestionably exists, to the effect that increaseof measurable energy-flux density of processes is the proper first-approximation measure of w o r k accomplished bythermodynamic processes. Yet, "energy" and " w o r k " arenot the same thing. W o r k produces energy, and the conversion of energy into w o r k is the crux of the matter. It isthe comparison of the work gained with use of energy against
the w o r k required to produce energy in the form required,w h i c h is the essential d e f i n i t i o n . This recognition, and its
bearing upon the measurability of technology as such, wasthe basis for my original discoveries of 1952, a discovery
which has undergone a radical improvement in depth andscope d u r i n g the recent five years—chiefly due to my collaboration w i t h Uwe Parpart Henke, Dr. Jonathan Tennenbaum, and others, w h o have enabled me to locate my earlier conceptions w i t h i n the broader range of fundamentals

of mathematics and mathematical physics.
The most recent developments in my o w n work begand u r i n g 1980. The LaRouche-Riemann method of economic
forecasting has proven itself the only competent forecasting m e t h o d in existence today, but there are shortcomings
w i t h i n the present f o r m of the forecasting practice, suchthat the m e t h o d is of the highest accuracy presently available for short-term general forecasting, but not satisfactory
to the same degree for short-term forecasting of subsectorsof the same general economic process. Therefore, a constant improvement, refinement, in the program has beencharacteristic of the work since it was launched in December 1978.
The direction of these continuing refinements took aw r o n g turn during mid-1980, a w r o n g turn I recognized tobe disregard for the deeper implications of the " d e l t a " inLeibniz's formulation oi the differential calculus. This, I
warned my associates t h e n , obliges us to emphasize thefact that the notion of a quantum-value in physical processes is nothing but Leibniz's notion of the fallacy of "infinite
divisibility," one of the points upon which he based his(accurate) argument, that Newton's form of the calculus
was useless and false to physical reality. To solve certain
tasks of refinement in economic analysis, I c o n c l u d e d , it isindispensable to brush aside prevailing, accepted interpretations of the quantum-notion and to derive the necessityof this notion from the same basis as Leibniz's approach,rejecting the assumptions underlying what is called quant u m mechanics. W h e n my associates failed to effect quickly
enough the breakthrough of the form I saw necessary, I
mobilized myself to set the required solution into m o t i o n ,demanding that w e examine the matter from the standpointof a rigorously synthetic-geometrical approach to construction and interpretation of conical (complex) functions.
This program began, during 1981, w i t h an attack on thesimplest p h e n o m e n o n of all conical functions: the determination of the correct, well-tempered values for the m u sical scale as an elementary exercise in differential geometry, as completed by Jonathan Tennenbaum and Ralf
Schauerhammer during autumn 1981. This l e d , further,
Tennenbaum's reconstruction of Minkowski's doctrine of
special relativity t h r o u g h use of paired cylindrical functions, in respect to w h i c h I insisted this must be correctedby an additional, crucial step, of substituting conical functions for the cylindrical. This led to Tennenbaum's discovering a fresh view of Gauss's arithmetic-geometric mean.
Through the collaboration with Tennenbaum, I pointed outthat the view of generalized elliptic functions, as subsumed
by Gauss's derivation of the arithmetic-geometric mean,
was the basis for both Riemann's famous 1854 habilitation
dissertation, " O n The Hypotheses W h i c h Underlie G e o m etry," and the proper basis for defining both the principleof the quantum and Leibniz's "delta."
The o u t g r o w t h of Tennenbaum's c o n t i n u i n g work o n thismatter gave us a much more powerful apparatus than I had
previously employed for economic science. This, and its
general implications, I reported to the July 3-4 [1983] conference of the International Caucus of Labor Committees
in Reston, Virginia. The included judgment is that a "general theory of relativity, "as distinct from "special relativity,"
July-August 1984

FUSION43

us to overthrow one or more of the fundamental assumptions underlying contemporary scientific w o r k . A successful higher hypothesis produces a greater or lesser scientificrevolution, and, by implication, greater or lesser technological revolution.
(3) Hypothesis of the higher hypothesis. This presumes
that a succession of scientific revolutions represents anorderable series of higher hypotheses, o n the condition
that the succession correlates w i t h an increase in the potential per capita power of society over nature. This poses thequestion, whether a succession of higher hypotheses meeting that requirement is demonstrably the result of somec o m m o n principle of discovery. In other w o r d s , is there
some principle of discovery w h i c h can be successively applied t o successive scientific revolutions t o generate thenext scientific revolution in that series? Experiments w h i c htest hypothetical principles of discovery of this sort define
the notion of an hypothesis of the higher hypothesis—thethird level of hypothesis.

Figure 1
SELF-SIMILAR SPIRAL O N A CONE
A self-similar spiral (a) is the proper mathematical definition of work. The self-similar characteristic of the
figure is that a cut made anywhere parallel to the baseof the cone produces a smaller cone and spiral identical to that of the larger cone, except for its scale androtation. Each cycle of the spiral defines a circularcross section of the cone.
In projection (b), the spiral on the cone becomes a
two-dimensional
spiral.

does not exist, that the search for a unified field w i t h i n thescope of a supposed general relativity is a result of w i l d ,unrecognized fallacies embedded in an incorrect formulation of what is called "special relativity," This argument
does not d e p e n d upon any complex analysis of the matter;the errors are entirely of the most elementary k i n d , themost primitive errors of assumption, w h i c h therefore admitof direct, simple demonstration.
I summarize the bare essentials of the case w h i c h I presented to that conference, beginning w i t h a definition of
the notion of an hypothesis of the higher hypothesis.
The Three Levels of Hypothesis
In scientific w o r k , there are three levels of hypothesis:(1) Simple hypothesis. The underlying assumptions ofprevailing scientific knowledge are assumed to be valid,both for scientific work generally, and also for the particulararea of inquiry to w h i c h some experimental hypothesis isaddressed. The assumption of consistency w i t h existing
structures and underlying assumptions of scientific w o r k ,especially mathematical physics, is the basis for design andtesting of the experimental hypothesis.
(2) Higher hypothesis. This is an experimental hypothesis addressed to the question whether evidence requires
44

FUSION

July-August 1984

There is a current of m o d e r n science, beginning w i t h thediscovery of the isoperimetricprinciple
by Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa d u r i n g the 15th century, w h i c h insists that all of
the fundamental questions of scientific knowledge exist forcomprehension only o n the third level of hypothesis. This
current of science is typified by Cusa, Leonardo da V i n c i ,Johannes Kepler, Gottfried Leibniz, the Carnot-Monge Ecole
Polytechnique, Karl Gauss, and Bernhard Riemann—a current sometimes identified in English literature as " c o n t i n e n tal science. "This is the current to w h i c h this writer adheres.
This adherence takes the practical f o r m today of the writer's specifications for design of a needed "crash p r o g r a m , "both to implement the President's strategic doctrine e n u n ciated first on March 23, 1983, and to cause that w o r k inmilitary technology to spill over efficiently into the w o r l d ' scivilian economy, to foster a general explosion in economicg r o w t h . The designs proposed by this writer are modeled,
as a matter of reference, on the combined military, scientific, and educational w o r k of the Ecole Polytechnique under Lazare Carnot and Gaspard M o n g e . Otherwise, thewriter situates within that model of reference the questionof a governing administrative-methodological principle approach to make such a social instrument of "crash-prog r a m " w o r k effective for the specific objectives in view
today.
The importance of this approach is most readily d e m o n strated from a military standpoint. In opposition to those"systems analysts" whose influence has ruined the defenses of the United States, military technology defines a domain of accelerating technological attrition. The best measures deployed today produce countermeasures, countermeasures w h i c h require more advanced measures to overcome t h e m . The succession of measures and countermeasures so defined is sometimes named "technological attrit i o n , " and is sometimes called an "arms race." There is noalternative to such an "arms race," but to prepare to lose
the next war.
The same principle of " c o m p e t i t i o n " exists in the n o n military economy. However, one may ignore this principleof " c o m p e t i t i o n , " on the assumption that a nation may survive national economic bankruptcy, but might not survive

Spiral on a cylinder

C J

Spiral on a cone

^ ?

1 fullrotation
Jrotation

ttrC<

Figure 2
IDEAL REPRESENTATIONS OF
ENERGY A N D WORKAt left, a spiral on a cylinder, the ideal mathematical representationof energy. Half the
spiral's rotation occurs at a point on the cylinder that is one half the height of a complete
cycle of rotation.
At right, a spiral on a cone. At one halfrotation, the spiral has reached a height,
measured along the central axis of the cone,that is less than one half the height of a complete cycle of rotation. The height of the spiral after making a half-rotation
will be thegeometric mean (C) between the height at
the beginning and end of the cycle of rotation. The arithmetic mean (A), the midpointof the vertical distance traversed by the total
action, is at a point more distant.

losing a war. Hence, it is the unfortunate reality of modern
history, that great advances in technology of civilian economies have often been a by-product of mobilization forwars. It is not that war is the indispensable instrument ofLevel circle

EllipseLevel circle

Volume (shaded)

Figure 3
ELLIPSE CHARACTER OF CONICAL ACTION
The path of the spiral up the cone defines the first
integral of the complex variable. The shaded area between the two circles represents the volume and defines the second integral, net work. The character ofthis volume is the ellipse cut between the two level
circles.

progress—usually it is not; it is that nations refuse to dowhat they should have done in pursuit of peace, until the
hot breath of war is upon their necks.
Technological attrition converges upon the notion of
successive scientific revolutions, at least, successive technological revolutions. The distinction between the two isthat a technological revolution is a scientific revolution put
into practice—too often, belatedly. The idea that there exists a "world-line'' based on successively ordered series ofscientific breakthroughs, or technological breakthroughs,
is the implied feature of technological attrition, and therefore the implied feature of all "crash programs" resemblingthat w h i c h we have proposed. This represents the ideal casefor direct application of the third level of hypothesis.
Conical Functions Defined
The fundamental fallacy of the work of Einstein—and manyothers—was his refusal to accept the fundamental principle
upon which the preceding development of European science d e p e n d e d : the treatment of the implications of thefive Platonic solids from the vantage point of Cusa's rediscovery of the isoperimetric principle: the principle that theaction of circular rotation, Leibniz's Principle of Least Act i o n , is the only form of action self-evidently existing invisible (Euclidean) space. All of Einstein's major errors arederived from this consideration, including his misinterpretation of Riemannian physics.
Briefly, circular action in a measureless, formless v o i d ,creates a circular area of measureless extent. The repetitionof this same action upon that circular area creates the straight
line, and also creates the first degree of measure: divisionof circular rotation by one-half. This is the only definitionof a straight line permitted w i t h i n a rigorous mathematicalphysics. The same circular action repeated upon a semicircle creates a point. From circular action, and the line andp o i n t created by circular action (singularities), all forms
constructible in visible (Euclidean) space are constructed,using no other means but the hereditary principle of c o n July-August 1984

FUSION45

Figure 4
PROJECTION OF ELLIPSE O N T O PLANE
The arithmetic-geometricmean of Gauss's theory of elliptic functions follows immediately in viewing the projection of this ellipse onto a plane. The arithmetic mean,A, defines the semimajor axis of the projected
ellipse.
The geometric mean, G, will then be the semiminor axisof the ellipse. One focus of the projected ellipse lies
upon the central axis of the cone.

J
struction f r o m the starting-point of circular action. N o axioms or postulates are permitted in rigorous mathematicalphysics, or geometry.
The limitations upon construction in visible space aret w o . First, only five kinds of regular polyhedra can be constructed in visible space—the five Platonic solids. All ofthese solids ( 4 , 6 , 8 , 1 2 , and 20 sides respectively) reduce toone elementary such solid, the 12-sided dodecahedron
whose sides are equal, regular pentagons. The pentagon
and the dodecahedron are both constructed on the basisof a harmonic characteristic called the golden section.
Nothing can be constructed in visible space except by reference to the unique feature of the golden section. The
second, ultimately identical limitation, is the fact that certain classes of occurrences within visible space cannot be
constructed within visible space, those constructions which
depend upon transcendental functions—includingthe regular heptagon.
However, all existences w i t h i n visible space can be constructed as projections of continuous, conical functions
upon visible space. These conical constructions have theelementary f o r m of a self-similar spiral on the outer surface
of a cone. This spiral has the 2-space projection of an Archimedes spiral whose characteristic proportion is thegolden section. Each cycle of the spiral defines a circularcross-section of the cone. All existences in visible space arethus defined by transcendental conical functions. The conical self-similar spiral of the reflected continuous
manifold
46

FUSION

July-August 1984

is the only self-evident form of physical action in the universe (Figure 1).
This is the foundation of all rigorous forms of mathematical physics. This is the elementary root of the third level ofhypothesis for mathematical physics.
Pacioli, da Vinci, and Kepler emphasized that all living
processes have the morphological characteristics of growthand function of the golden section. Functions with suchcharacteristics are negentropic
functions.
Kepler proved, and that conclusively, that the Platonic
harmonic system, as presented by Plato's Timaeus, is thebasis for the universal laws of astronomy. W i t h aid of corrections supplied chiefly by Karl Gauss, Kepler's astronomy
is valid to the present date, whereas all opposed doctrines
are not.
The most fundamental breakthrough in science after
Kepler and Leibniz's, was the discovery of the arithmeticgeometric mean by Karl Gauss. W i t h o u t this discovery, nofundamental discovery of post-1830 European sicence w o u l dhave been possible (after Legendre, Fourier, and Poncelet).
This is what Einstein rejects implicitly.
The most elementary complex variable is the stretchingof a rotating radius-line as the radius rotates around the axisof a cone. The simplest case is that in w h i c h the radiusincreases by a fixed ratio as it rotates, such that, after eachcomplete rotation, the radius has increased by the ratio ofsome fixed number. If the ratio of the radius's increase is" 1 , " the result is a constant spiral o n the outer surface of a

Figure 5
THE Q U A N T U M OF ACTION
Following the elliptical cut made in
Figure 3, a succession of ellipses may
be cut from the cone, each definedby the arithmetic
andgeometricmeans of the previous cut. Points
Av A,, A3 on the cone define thearithmetic means of the successive
ellipses; points C v G,, and G, markthe geometric means. At the smallest possible self-similar
subdivisionof the spiral achieved by this process, the recursive process
muststop. Here, the volume defined by
the two foci of the last ellipse equals
the quantum of action.

cylinder, the ideal representation of energy. If the ratio isgreater than " 1 , " the result is a self-sirtiilar spiral on theouter surface of a cone, the ideal representation of work
(Figure 2).
In the second case, the Gauss arithmetic-geometric meanfollows immediately.
The first integral of such an elementary complex variable
is the spiral-action (for an interval of time). The second
integral (for our purposes here) is the definite integral of
the spiral-action for one completed cycle of rotation: thevolume defined by t w o successive circular cross-sectionsof the cone, at the beginning and end of that cycle. The
characteristic of this volume is the ellipse defined by any
diagonal cut of the volume by a plane (Figure 3).
If the volume is cylindrical, the spiral rotates half its rotation at the midpoint of the v o l u m e : The geometric andarithmetic means are coincident. The elliptical cross-section
defines energy, but not w o r k .
If the volume is conical, the spiral rotates less than half
the distance along the central axis of the cone during thefirst half of the rotation. In this case, the geometric meanlies below the arithmetic m e a n ; the two are not coincident.
Imagine the cone standing on a plane and project theboundaries of the spiral d o w n to the plane. The distance
between the t w o points on the plane defines the major axisof an ellipse in the plane. The vertex of the cone forms one
focus of this ellipse (the position of the sun in the Earth's
orbit). The semimajor axis of the projected ellipse has thesame length as the radius of the circle that is located at thearithmetic mean on the cone. The semiminor axis has thelength of the radius of the circle located at the geometricmean (Figure 4).
Let us imagine that the ellipse on the plane is projectedfrom an ellispe located in a cone. We can generate a seriesof similar ellipses, each b o u n d e d by the arithmetic andgeometric means of the previous ellipse. Repeat this oper-

ation a large number of times. The question is: W h e n does
one stop this recursive process? This is the kernel of Gauss's
theory of elliptic functions.
At whatever point the recursive process ceases, the remaining volume defined by the t w o foci of the last ellipse
defines a degree of rotation of the spiral generating thecone, and also defines a relative value for an interval of
displacement along the central axis of the cone. In a universe whose metric is the speed of light, this will correspond to a wavelength, a frequency. If this is determinedin some necessary way, we have Leibniz's "delta" and thenotion of the quantum of action (Figure 5).
The physical significance of this was first established inavailable scientific literature, by Riemann's 1854 habilitation
dissertation, " O n The Hypotheses Which Underlie Geometry." Assume the prior self-elaboration of the universe asa w h o l e , or some phase space to correspond t o some welldefined number N, such thatthe singularity of theGaussian
elliptic-function series for the conical interval represents
N+ 1. This means that action corresponding to a welldefined notion of w o r k acts upon the universe (or phasespace) as an entirety, such that that action is b o u n d e duniquely, in scope and division of itself, by the relationship
implied by values N+ 7 and N. This defines a smallest division of action, below w h i c h only a singularity in physicalspace can occur. That is a quantum of action, a value w h i c hvaries relativistically as the universe evolves to higher states,or as the phase space evolves similarly.
That is what the quantum represents from the standpointof the third level of hypothesis: a smallest wavelength ofcontinuous action, b e l o w w h i c h o n l y a singularity can exist.
This was the basis for Riemannian electrodynamics, in
w h i c h retarded potential, rather than notions of the statistical theory of heat, is characteristic. This has been the underlying issue of the factional furor within physics for morethan a hundred years.
July-August 1984

FUSION47

However, this quantum can be measured empirically not
only as a smallest wavelength of a continuous (for example,
electromagnetic) f u n c t i o n . Changes in the value of theq u a n t u m , relative to functional notions associated w i t h N
and N+l, also correspond to relativistic metrical changes
in the characteristic rates of action w i t h i n the phase spaceconcerned, as Riemann specifies. This, f r o m the standpoint, again, of the third level of hypothesis, defines relativistic physics.
Contrast to Newton and Maxwell
Any system for describing physical processes w h i c h ismodeled u p o n the syllogistic system of Aristotle, eliminates
representation of such forms of action as "create" and"cause" w i t h i n the mathematical system itself. The use of
the equal-sign or inequality-signs has the same function as
the middle term in the Aristotelian syllogism. Hence, mathematics usually confronts us with the ludicrous spectaclethat w e speak of creation of the universe, and speak of andobserve causal relationships in physical processes, but can
f i n d no expression of either in conventional mathematicalschemas.
The paradox does not exist in a rigorous geometry of thesort w e have indicated here. Circular action, as the mirrorof conical-self-similar action, is the f o r m of the verb "tocreate," and also the description of action congruent w i t h
the verb " t o cause." Creation and causation are one andthe same, at least essentially. This requires, of course, that
we cast aside all of the axioms and postulates of Euclid's£ / e m e n t s , o r a n y t h i n g r e s e m b l i n g t h e m , a n d replace entirely the syllogistic lattice-work of deductive theorems by the"hereditary principle" of rigorous construction of synthetic
geometry f r o m the unique principle of circular (conical selfsimilar) action, Leibniz's Principle of Least Action.
Most of the formal fallacies which afflict mathematics andmathematical physics are derived not f r o m physical experiments as such, but f r o m substituting an axiomatically algebraic mathematical structure used to describe physicalprocesses for those processes themselves. In a w o r d , nominalism. Since such mathematics does not tolerate the existence of a creation, such as our universe, and prohibits
specification of causation as a term of description, it should
not be surprising that such mathematics is often inappropriate means for studying principles of causation in a created, existing universe. Such mathematics has merit as alanguage of description, but it is a fool's enterprise to attempt to w r i n g out of such mathematics any evidence bearing u p o n causation: o n e w o u l d have better luck attempting
to w r i n g b l o o d from a stone. When one uses such a language of mathematical description, one must be aware at
all points of what this mathematics can and cannot accomplish, and not employ it for the sort of analysis which itprohibits on axiomatic principle.
The same general problem arises in connection with notions of probability. The same w o r d , probability, has m u tually exclusive meanings from the standpoint of Gauss on
the one side, and Descartes or LaPlace on the other. In
Gauss, it signifies the necessarily determined division ofaction according to principles of a conically defined continuous manifold. In LaPlace, it has a mechanistic-numerol-

48

FUSION

July-August 1984

ogical interpretation. In the latter c o n n e c t i o n , we locate
the intrinsic fallacies of assumption underlying popularized
notions of a statistical theory of heat, and of related notionsof statistical dynamics, quantum mechanics. There is nod o u b t that the action described probabilistically occurs asa p h e n o m e n o n in more or less the form described. The
issue is that of what sort of causal notion one might w r i n gout of the t w o , mutually exclusive modes of d e s c r i p t i o n Gauss's versus LaPlace's, for example. The latter prohibits
incorporation of causation into mathematics: Lo and beh o l d ! Such mathematics argues f r o m examining its o w nprobable navel, that causation does not exist!
Admittedly, the sort of notions w e have described for thethird level of hypothesis do not provide us an elaborated
physics. They provide only what that level of hypothesis isdefined as p r o v i d i n g : principles of discovery. However, theprocess of experimental refinement of such principles of
discovery converges upon the underlying principles of lawfuness of the universe in general, and thus constitutes asmuch as w e can know respecting the fundamental laws ofthat universe. Not only does this level of hypothesis definea method, it also defines as much as w e can know respecting the lawful ontology of the universe as a w h o l e . Not onlyis science fundamentally methodologicallytransfinite; theuniverse explored is itself ontologicallytransfinite.
This addresses an issue w h i c h much occupied Germanscience at the beginning of this century, a shift f r o m theontologically transfinite standpoint of Cusa, Kepler, Leibniz, Gauss, Riemann, et al., to the only-methodologicallytransfinite approach of German science at the turn of the
century. This latter represented a limited concession to
Helmholtz, Boltzman, e t a l . , the leading enemies, together
w i t h Maxwell, Rayleigh, e t a l . , of the rigorously geometricalapproach to physics. The geometrical m e t h o d was degraded from a m e t h o d of physics, to a m e t h o d for clever intuitions into matters bearing upon the interpretation of mathematical physics' problems.
The legitimate p r o b l e m , w h i c h the purveyor of statisticalmechanics cites against the mechanistic system of Descartes and N e w t o n , is that action in the universe does not
c o n f o r m to the notions of one-on-one interactions amongisolated particles in empty space. There are determinations
w h i c h belong to the manifold as a w h o l e , w h i c h override
what might appear to be inferred f r o m a mechanistic misinterpretation of space. Probability appears to fill the gap
between the t w o , a n d , w i t h i n limits, appears to provide an
efficient guide to practice in those matters for which themechanistic m e t h o d fails otherwise.
The fallacies intrinsic to statistical mechanics generally,and quantum mechanics in particular, are, therefore, these.
(1) It overlooks the fact that physical reality cannot be
constructed w i t h i n visible space, but that this reality can beconstructed only as projections of a continuous manifold
upon the discrete manifold of visible space. O u r senseperceptual apparatus is such, that we distort the real universe (the continuous manifold) into the form of the visible(discrete) manifold of sense-perception. The result is as if a
distorting mirror were everywhere embedded in space, suchthat we see only the distorted reflection, not that w h i c h isreflected. Therefore all inductive-empiricist m e t h o d is in-trinsically false as to principled features of the cause ofphenomena.
(2) It assumes that least action is straight-line action as
defined by a naive view of the discrete manifold as selfevidentally reality, whereas the only real form of action in
the universe is least action defined by the projection of selfsimilar-spiral conical action as the isoperimetric principleof visible space. Thus, mathematical physics is made intrinsically incommensurable w i t h the action causing thephenomena.
(3) It makes energy and w o r k simply equivalent, and ignores the fact that all action is essentially negentropic w o r k ,congruent in principle w i t h increase in the areas of conicalcross-sectional circles defined by a self-similar, harmonic
conical f u n c t i o n . It confuses mere effects with work, andtherefore distinguishes entropy and negentropy as a mere
construct of such effects, rather than properly recognizingthat effects are singularities of negentropic or entropic action as primary realities.
These problems vanish once the successive standpointsof Gauss and Riemann are adopted.
This does not signify that w e can derive physics simply
and directly from the third level of hypothesis. It is merelya m e t h o d for effecting improvements in physics, and also
for judging what is outrightly absurd in existing physics'
doctrines respecting fundamental matters. It is simply arigorous way of t h i n k i n g about the universe, which meansthat a physicist employing such rigor is vastly superior toone of equal training lacking such rigor.
Economics and Physics
Popular o p i n i o n is so much conditioned to confusing
economics w i t h monetary doctrines, that the connectionof economics to physics is simply overlooked or violently
denied. It is forgotten that m o d e r n economic science was
f o u n d e d by Leibniz, w h o defined economics as "physicaleconomy," as did the f o u n d i n g fathers of the United States(for example, Hamilton's Report On the Subject of Manufactures).
What we measure, ultimately, in economy, is the relative
increase or decrease of the power of a population to sustain
its o w n existence. This is best described as the potential
relative population-density of a society (economy). Thismeasures man's per capita power over nature, and thus
defines what changes in behavior correspond to an increase or decrease in man's knowledge of the lawful ordering of the universe.
Those changes in behavior which overcome effects ofdepletion of natural resources, or w h i c h advance mankind's potential relative population-density absolutely, areincreases in technology. Thus, the net w o r k accomplishedby society is properly defined as the role of w o r k in mediating advances in technology for the practice of the society
as a w h o l e . This form of w o r k is intrinsically negentropic,
corresponding to the simplest sort of ideal conical function
indicated above. That is our proper definition of w o r k , andthe proper measure of technology's equivalence to w o r k .
This connection was the discovery the writer effected in1952 on the basis of implications of Riemann's 1854 habilitation dissertation.

In other w o r d s , increase of the potential relative p o p u lation-density of an economy is the unique experimental
authority for determining what are in fact valid scientificconceptions. Any purportedly scientific notion which contradicts such criteria is ipso facto scientific absurdity. Anyn o t i o n , however correct, w h i c h cannot account for itself inthese terms of reference, is to that degree scientificallyilliterate.
This was understood by Leibniz, w h o developed thermodynamics from the vantage point of his development of
economic science: his generalization of the implications of
the heat-powered machine for increasing the power of anindividual operative to perform w o r k . The fact that t w omachines, consuming the same amount of coal per hour,
contribute differently to an operative's power to accomplish w o r k , is the basis for the notion of technology.
Technology, in t u r n , reduces, in the case of machines, t o
the Principle of Least A c t i o n : conical functions as we haveindicated here. This is generalized for electromagnetic act i o n . Although we have failed to solve this for chemistry
and biology, the terms of mechanical and electromagnetic
work-action have proven adequate even for biological processes. Today, we reduce the formal aspect of technology
to electromagnetic equivalents, and measure increase inproductive power per capita in such electromagneticgeometrical terms of reference for measuring technology.
By correlating technology so defined with the w o r k represented as increase of potential relative population-density,
we correlate technology with economic g r o w t h , the latter
properly defined. Thus, we prove that those principles of
discovery generating successive scientific revolutions are
consistent w i t h man's increase of per capita power over theuniverse. That is the ultimate scientific experiment, uponw h i c h the authority of all scientific knowledge ultimately
depends.
There is much talk of the function of morality in science,a matter which was of great concern to Einstein, but a conception which eluded his grasp, and w h i c h thus misled him
and his associates into many immoral directions. Reason
and love are inseparable qualities of the Logos. A love of
reason (the Logos) expresses itself as a love for the improvement of the condition of mankind through technologicalprogress, and a love for that potentiality w i t h i n each humanpersonality which corresponds to the power to develop,
assimilate, and apply technological progress. This is loved
not merely because it enables mankind to improve his material conditions of life, but because this improvement relies upon the development of those powers of the humanindividual w h i c h converge upon agreement w i t h the Logos,
with the divine.
The problem of Albert Einstein, in matters of science, isthat he fell in with such political company as the most evil
man of the 20th century, the late Bertrand Russell, as did
the "Dr. Strangelove" of the Pugwash Conference, Leo Szilard.
Lyndon H. LaRouche, jr., an economist, is a member ofthe board of directors of the Fusion Energy Foundation. He
is currently a candidate forthe Democratic Party presidential
nomination.
July-August 1984

FUSION49

Washington

Congress Slashes the Fusion Budget
During deliberations on the fiscal
year 1985 magnetic fusion energy
budget this spring, Congress joined
forces w i t h the budget slashers in the
Reagan administration to inflict deadly
wounds on an already inadequate
budget proposal. For the past threebudget cycles, the fusion program has
been barely treading water, sufferingsuch small increases that it has not evenkept pace w i t h inflation.
This is the first year that Congresshas not added money to the administration's budget request, but has instead gone w i l d w i t h cuts. Fusion scientists fear that promising programs
already in progress may get axed outof the budget entirely.
"These cuts are an inevitable outcome of the program allowing itself tobe pushed into the mode of a 'purescience program,' " commented Edw i n Kintner, f o r m e r f u s i o n d i r e c t o r f o r
the Department of Energy.
The administration requested a fiscal year 1985 magnetic fusion energy
budget of $483 m i l l i o n , compared to a
fiscal year 1984 f u n d i n g level of $471

m i l l i o n . This increase of less than 3
percent represents a real cut w h e n inflation is taken into account.
The key issue is whether the proposed next-step engineering device,
the Tokamak Fusion Core Experiment(TFCX), will be f u n d e d . Not only did
b o t h the House and Senate committees emphatically reject this next stepin fusion development; they also reco m m e n d e d such severe cuts in theadministration's request that much of
the engineering and technology development already underway will haveto be curtailed.
The full Appropriations Committeeof the House passed a bill May 15 that
included a $64 million cut in the fusionbudget request. This is approximately
the size of the entire Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory magnetic
m i r r o r f u s i o n program. The Senate Appropriations Subcommittee f o l l o w e dthis action May 24 w i t h a recommended cut of $27 m i l l i o n .
W h e n the subcommittee mark-up
went to the full committee June 5, $14
million of the cut was restored by anamendment offered by Senator Pete
Domenici (R-N.M.). The budget will
still have t o go t h r o u g h House-Senate
conference committee deliberations,and a compromise is expected that issomewhere between the $13 million
and $64 million cut.
No Fusion Engineering
The emphasis of the administration
and Congress o n science only, as opposed to a crash program to develop
fusion as an energy source in the next
20 years, has long been the rationaleof the "go-slow" faction that w o u l d put
fusion development on a 50-year
schedule. Three years ago, for example, presidential science advisor
George Keyworth told the Fusion Energy Foundation that pushing ahead
into fusion engineering w o u l d destroy
the scientific w o r k of the program.
According to Kintner, scientists in the
program did not put up a fight to prevent this return to a fusion "science"program. " O n c e you prove fusion has
no practical end use, you can't justify
spending so much money," he stated.
Kintner said that the congressional
committees have recommended thatthe DOE " d o away w i t h remaining
technology development programs.""I f i n d it surprising and difficult tounderstand how the fusion p r o g r a m —w h i c h has a hope of leading to a practical and useful product—could be cut,w h i l e high energy physics and militaryresearch and development programs
are growing so fast," Kintner c o m mented. "It is also surprising," he said,"that this program, w h i c h has contributed so many defense applications,doesn't justify additional budget support."

PPPL

CUTAWAY VIEW OF THE PROPOSED TFCX DESIGNThe Tokamak Fusion Core Experiment, shown here in an artist's
illustration,
could be the next-step fusion device—if Congress reverses the budget cuts forthe fusion program. The TFCX is planned as a joint effort by the national fusion
laboratories, with Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory serving as the lead organization.
50

FUSION

July-August 1984

The inertial fusion budget, including laserfusion experiments, has beenslashed, as w e l l . Eliminating an additional research capability that could
contribute to the president's beam defense technologies programs, theadministration cut the budget from$170 to $138 m i l l i o n .
—Marsha Freeman
Washington

In his Jan. 25 State of the Union address, President Reagan committed thisnation to build a manned space station
within a decade. "A space station will
not be an end in itself but a doorway
to even greater progress in the f u t u r d ,the President said."
The response f r o m the military, andmuch of Congress and the space science c o m m u n i t y , however, has beeh
to think small. Manned missions cost
too m u c h , these pragmatists say, andbesides, man gets in the way of science.
In a report issued in November1983,
the Space Science Board of the National Academy of Sciences stated that it
could "see no need for this space stat i o n " for space science missions for the
next 20 years. The British magazine Nature called the Space Shuttle a "disaster" for scientists and said that the
space station w o u l d be just another"tragedy."
Some space scientists have evenmade the argument that the manned
space missions have stolen moneyfrom planetary and other science programs. It was for this reason that Dr.
James Van Allen proposed a few years
ago that NASA should cancel its

Washington

This TRW design for NASA's space station has a central berthing hub with modules for living quarters and laboratory work, a utility module with solar arrays andthermal radiators, and a replaceable logistics module that provides a renewablesupply of food, water, and air.
manned flights.
However, as NASA Administrator
James Beggs emphasized in congressional hearings in May, NASA is totallycommitted to keeping the space science portion of the NASA budget
growing. As the overall NASA budget
has been increasing since 1980, he said,
the space science budget has been increasing as w e l l . In the previous threebudgets, space science f u n d i n g increased $440 million or 43 percent.
Astronomer Robert Jastrow succinctly answered all those w h o w o u l dprefer man to go backwards instead of
into space in a May article in Science
Digest: "The move of man off the faceof the planet is the most important stepin evolution of life on the Earth since
the fishes left the water 350 million
years ago," Jastrow w r o t e .
'Crowing a Space Station
NASA has c o m m i t t e d itself to build
an $8 billion space station, made up of
several separate modules delivered tolow-Earth orbit by the Shuttle.
July-August 1984

The first set of modules w i l l probably consist of living facilities, laboratories, a supply station, and satellite
repair and check-out facilities. To expand the station's capabilities d u r i n g
this decade, international cooperat i o n , particularly w i t h Western Europe
and Japan, will likely add more m o d ules, and increase the number and variety of tasks the station can p e r f o r m .
Administrator Beggs has asked the Europeans to consider spending about$2 billion on the station, and the Japanese about $1 b i l l i o n . These nations
are currently shaping out what theircontribution to the station will be.
In this way, NASA plans to " g r o w "the station by making its facilities available to U.S. allies, w h o in return will
add real capabilities to the system.
Considering the experience the Europeans have gained by building theSpacelab, w h i c h flies inside the Shuttle, it is likely that they will choose tob u i l d a scientific laboratory as themodule they contribute to the station.
FUSION51

This will open up unimagined frontiers
for space science.
Man Versus Science?
O n e small-minded scientist, John
Pike of the Federation of American Scientists, c o m p l a i n e d , "for most legitimate missions of a space station, people get in the way." Of course, astronauts moving around inside the station might disturb highly sensitive
telescopes and other equipment, but
as serious space scientists have suggested, such instruments can be contained in small, unmanned platforms
that are co-orbital w i t h the station.
Real science can never be independent of the minds that designed theexperiment and will interpret the data.
A n d w i t h o u t man in space, of course,
repairs w o u l d not be possible. As Robert Jastrow pointed out, observatories
like the Space Telescope that areplanned in the next decades are enormously expensive: "If they stop working, they will never be replaced in our
lifetime. Keeping the observatories inservice will be one of the space station's greatest contributions to scientific progress."

Boeing Aerospace Company

A computer-generated image of a spacestation designed by Boeing Aerospace
Co. is shown here on a video screen
where engineers can modify it quickly
to meet NASA requirements. There are
four modules, each about the size of amobile home, plus a hangar that canbe used to service spacecraft.
As for other research in space, it
should be obvious that experiments inspace biology and medicine cannot be
conducted without people in the spaceenvironment. Treatment for heart disease by lowering the gravitationalpressure o n the cardiovascular system
for the elderly, studying the long-term
adjustment of man to zero gravity before he ventures to Mars and even farther away, and producing life-saving
pharmaceuticals in space for use on
Earth are a small sample of the challenges for these fields of space science.
Can most of these tasks be accomplished by using automated robotic
systems rather than man? "A fully automated plant is possible in theory, but
experience o n the g r o u n d shows that
automated factories break d o w n andrequire constant maintenance," according to Jastrow. In fact, astronauts
on recent Shuttle missions report thatmany of the industrial and scientificexperiments on board required constant supervision. Alhough a pharmaceutical-producing factory in space
w o u l d be automated, w h o w o u l d want
to wait weeks or months for a Shuttle
repair mission if something broke?
Professor Peter Banks f r o m Stanford
University is heading a 23-member task
force on the "Scientific Uses of theSpace Station," w h i c h is suggestingstation designs to NASA. Banks stated

52

FUSION

July-August 1984

that the station w i l l likely have ten
modules, including t w o that w o u l d be
devoted to scientific research.
Calling the station "a relatively inexpensive project, compared to otherprograms," Banks pointed out that the
1960s Apollo program w o u l d cost $80
billion in today's dollars. The $8 billion
NASA station includes $800 million for
the t w o unmanned plaftorms the task
force has recommended for scientificequipment.
Budget-Slashing Congressmen
Opportunistically j u m p i n g on the"save space science" bandwagon, an u m b e r o f congressmen havedictatedt h r o u g h the budget process that NASA
must spend $15 million next year to
study b u i l d i n g an unmanned platform,
instead of a manned space station.
Both the chairman and the ranking
Republican o n the House Appropriations Subcommittee responsible for
the NASA budget have insisted that thestation will cost too much and could
be replaced initially w i t h an unmanned platform, in conjunction w i t han extended duration capability for theSpace Shuttle. T o p NASA officials havemade it clear that the point of the Shuttle is t o keep it flying and not tied up
in o r b i t , and that the orbiter is an uncomfortable place for people to live
for more than a few days.
A manned space station will make itpossible to put into space scientific experiments that are at the leading edgeof technology because repair services
will be available. It will make it possible t o continually update the instruments, and replace them with the mostadvanced, state-of-the-art technique.
Man in space will mean that experiments can be altered in real t i m e , andopportunities w i l l not be missed because changes can be made on thescene.
Space science o n the station will lay
the basis for man and his instruments
to travel to the planets and beyond.
Like all new capabilities, no one caneven imagine what w i l l develop. As
Gerry Gray of the American Instituteof Aeronautics and Astronautics has
replied to scientists w h o have " n on e e d " for the space station: "people
did not k n o w what they w o u l d everuse a telephone for before it was available."—Marsha Freeman

Washington

jet Begins Phase 2
Continued from page 15
plasma c o l u m n . Experiments in France
and the United States have d e m o n strated heating efficiencies of 50 percent by this m e t h o d . JET uses 15 megawatts of high frequency heating.
Art Ambitious Research Program
The overall purpose of the JET experiments is to generate and study
plasmas whose parameters correspond to those of future fusion reactors.
This includes: studies of thermonuclear plasma processes; studiesof the interaction of the plasma withthe walls of the vacuum chamber (thisinteraction determines the rate of"poisoning" of the plasma by heavy ion
impurities from the walls, whose effect is to greatly increase energy losses
by radiation from the plasma); studiesof heating system f u n c t i o n ; and studies of the effect of alpha particles generated by fusion reactions.
The research program of JET is projected to last seven years, and consistsof four phases:
Phase 7. Begun in June 1983, this isthe "breaking-in" phase in w h i c h thereactor was operated w i t h hydrogenor d e u t e r i u m , using only O h m i c heating.
Phase 2 (mid-1984 to mid-1986). Inaugurated with ceremony in May, thisphase will have additional heating systems installed, beginning w i t h a neutral beam injector of 5 megawatts. A
year later, a second neutral beam injector will be added, together w i t h thefirst unit of high frequency heating. At
that p o i n t , a total of 16 megawatts ofheating will be available. If this phasesuccessfully demonstrates the projected performance of the machine,then the go-ahead will be given for actual ignition experiments in the final
phase.
Phase 3 (mid-1986 to mid-1988). The
full heating power of 25 megawatts will
be brought o n line in this stage. Hydrogen and deuterium plasmas will be
generated under conditions approximating those required for the later ignition experiments w i t h deuteriumtritium plasma. This will set the stage

for the most spectacular event in fusion research.
Phase 4 (from mid-1988 on). This is
the decisive phase. For the first t i m e , alarge D-T plasma will be ignited and,for a short interval of t i m e , significant
fusion power will be generated.
It is not yet determined whether JET
will be able to reach complete ignitionof its plasma. Detailed computer simulations have shown, however, that therequired ignition conditions will beachieved at least in the central core of
the plasma: a temperature of 120 million degrees, a density of 1.2 x 10'4
particles per cubic centimeter, and acontainment time of 0.5 to 1.5 seconds.
The projected sequence of events in
the JET ignition experiments is as follows: First, 0.05 grams of cold deuterium and tritium gas mixture are puffed
into the vacuum chamber at a chamberpressure of one millionth of an atmosphere. Second, the magnetic coil systems will generate a toroidal magnetic
field of 3.5 tesla and a plasma currentof 5 million amperes.
Third, heating systems will bring theplasma to a temperature of 120 million
degrees for ignition. At this temperature, the average pressure of the plasma is 2 atmospheres; the magnetic
pressure of the containing bottle
field—which must be stronger because of diffusion of the plasma acrossthe field—is about 50 atmospheres.
Ignition
At this point, ignition should occur.
The plasma core should rapidly reacha temperature of 350 million degrees,as energetic alpha particles (helium
nuclei) are produced by the deuterium-tritium reaction w i t h energies 250
times larger than the original plasmaions.
The investigation of these alpha particles—theirgeneration,
containment, and interaction w i t h the rest of
the plasma—is the most important goalof the final research phase. Thisknowledge is crucial for the design offuture magnetic fusion power plants,
in which the heating of the plasma byenergetic alpha particles produced byluly-August 1984

the fusion reaction must maintain f u sion conditions, once the process has
been "ignited'' by the reactor's heating systems.
The second product of the D-T f u sion reactions is high energy neutrons. These neutrons carry away mostof the energy of the fusion reactions.
In future fusion power plants, the neutrons will be absorbed by a "blanket"
of special material surrounding theplasma, thereby generating the heatthat will then be converted into electrical energy via heat exchangers andturbines. For the JET, however, w h i c h
is a plasma research reactor w i t h o u t
energy conversion systems, theseneutrons are a nuisance. They b o m bard the structural material of the apparatus and cause it to become radioactive. As a result, advanced remotecontrol robotics will be used to conduct maintenance and repairs once thereactor goes into D-T operation.
JET is expected to produce about 10 M
neutrons per shot, corresponding to a
power o u t p u t of about 80 megawatts.
Since this figure is much larger thanthe energy p u m p e d into the plasma by
the heating systems, JET will therefore
be operating in a condition of "scientific breakeven." JET will still be under"net breakeven" conditions, however,since the heating systems consume
several times as much energy as they
deposit into the plasma. To be economical, future fusion power plants
will operate at much higherfusion output levels, w i t h substantial improvements in heating efficiency.
Researchers plan to carry out a totalof 10,000 "shots" in the final phase of
the experiment.

The Future
JET will lay the basis for the construction and operation of an even larger
European experiment, called the Next
European Torus, NET, which is alreadyin the early phases of conceptual design. NET is a technology-oriented
power reactor designed to test and develop the technologies that will be usedin actual commercial fusion power
plants. T o g e t h e r w i t h t h e r e s u l t s o f t h e
TFTR and the large Japanese tokamak
experiment, JT-60, JET will open the way
to harnessing the unlimited potentialof fusion energy for m a n k i n d .
—Heinz Horeis andJonathanTennenbaum
FUSION53

How Plants Grow in
The 'Golden Mean' Ratio
by Ned Rosinsky, M.D.
Why do plants grow in the shapesthat they do?
This question has fascinated scientists for thousands of years. Although the shapes of plants can become quite complicated, a great deal

a/b = b/(a + b)
Figure 1
THE GOLDEN MEAN RATIOThe golden mean is the ratio ofdivision in which the smaller part,a, is to the larger, b, as b is to(a + b).

can be understood simply by considering what the plant needs in orderto function. First, it needs to be exposed to sunlight for photosynthesis, so it will tend to grow in a shapewith a large surface area exposed to
the Sun. Second, it needs room togrow, so it will tend to grow in sucha way that one part of the plant does
not crowd another part.
These simple ideas, if examined
carefully, lead to interesting conclusions about how the plant must be
shaped and howthe plant must growinto its proper shape. I will show herethat the kind of shapes and growing
forms that best allow the plant to do
its work are all related to a particularmathematical ratio called the golden
mean, which is approximately 1.62.
The golden mean is the ratio in which
the smaller part of a quantity is to thelarger part of that same quantity as
the larger part is to the whole (Figure1). The quantity can be just a line you
have drawn on paper and then divided, a container full of marbles thatyou divide, or something living, likea plant.
To understand the importance ofthe golden mean, you must first notice that living things usually grow bymultiplication, rather than addition.
For example, if you start with 1 bacterium, after about 20 minutes it will
have divided in half and produced 2
bacteria; after another 20 minutes, 4bacteria, then 8, then 16, and so on.
Every 20 minutes the number of bacteria doubles or, in other words,
multiplies by 2.
A series of numbers that grows bymultiplication is called a geometricseries, such as 2,4, 8,16, and so on.

Figure 3
SNAIL SHELL

Figure 2
SELF-SIMILAR GROWTH

As the spruce tree grows, its overall shape does not change much, only its
size. This gives it self-similarity in its shape as it grows.

The snail grows at a rate proportional to its size at any particulartime. Therefore, its rate of growthis always increasing. Since theshell is turning as it grows, it produces a spiral shape.

- ^ r Figure 4
SPIRAL PHYLLOTAXISIn this plant the thorns are arranged
around the stem in a spiral pattern. If
you start with a particular thorn, canyou see how many thorns you have topass through above that thorn until you
reach one exactly above the thorn you
started with?
Source: Patterns in Nature by Peter S. Stevens, (Boston:
Little, Brown and Company, 1974), p. 158.

Figure 5 t^~
THE PHYLLOTAXIS RATIOIn Figure 4 you saw that two thorns thatgrow at the same position on the plantstem are separated along the stem by acertain number of thorns. The phyllotaxis ratio is the ratio of the number ofturns in the spiral you had to make toget from your reference thorn to a thorn
growing at the same position on thestem, divided by the number of thorns
you passed through. Here it is two turns
and five thorns, giving a ratio of 2/5.
In contrast, a series that grows byaddition, such as 2,4,6,8,10, and soon (here, 2 is added each time), iscalled an arithmetic series. The main
point is that plants tend to grow bygeometric series, and that this kindof growth causes certain kinds ofshapes in the plants (see Figure 2).
Self-Similar Growth
The reason that plants grow iri
geometric series (for example, doubling in size every six months) is thatthe entire plant is growing as one
overall unit. This means that if itweighs 1 pound and it takes a month
to grow another pound, then when
the plant weighs 2 pounds it will takeanother month to grow another 2
pounds, and so on. The speed atwhich it grows increases, and is related to the plant's current size at any
particular time. This causes the size
to increase as shown in Figure 2.
Since the plant is growing overall asa unit, it tends to keep the same
shape even though it gets bigger.
This is called self-similar growth.
If you look at the shape of a snail
you can see the same pattern of geometric growth, only now since theshape of the snail is turning as it
grows, it produces a spiral (Figure 3).
This geometric spiral, also called alogarithmic spiral, is the main kindof shape you see in plants. If you can

The Young Scientist

understand how this spiral works inplants you will begin to see why they
are shaped the way they are.
A good example of a spiral in aplant is the way the leaves or thorns
are located on a plant stem in manykindsof plants (Figure4). Look at theoverall shape of a spruce tree, which
is a cone. The branches of the tree
stick out in a pattern that spirals
around the tree's cone shape (Figure2). Now, let us see how this geometric growth connects to the specificratio of the golden mean.
If you look at various types ofplants, you find that the leaves
around the stem are arranged in different kinds of spiral patterns. If you
pick any leaf and call it a reference
leaf, and then start counting leaves
above it as they spiral around up theplant stem, sooner or later you willfind a leaf that is directly above thereference leaf on the stem. You may
have to go a number of times aroundthe spiral before you find this leaf.
Now, if you count up the turns
around the spiral you made, and divide it by the number of leaves you
went through, you get a ratio that ischaracteristic for each plant species.
For example if you made 5 turns andpassed 13 leaves, the ratio is 5/13.
This is called the phyllotaxis ratio.
(Phyllotaxis comes from the Greek

words for leaf, phyllon, and order,
taxis; the plural of taxis is taxes.) See
Figure 5.
The Phyllotaxis Ratio
These phyllotaxis ratios form aninteresting series of fractions: 1/1,1/2,1/3, 2/5, 3/8, 5/13, 8/21, 13/34, andso o n . What is interesting is that all
the numbers come from a series
called the Fibonacci series, named
after the 12th-century mathematician who discovered it. The Fibonacci series is formed by starting with
1, adding another 1, and then getting
each next new member of the series
by adding the previous two members: 1 + 1 = 2 , 1 + 2 = 3, 2 + 3 = 5,
3 + 5 = 8, and so o n . This forms theseries 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, andso on. (See Professor von Puzzle, p.
59.)
The plant phyllotaxes are ratios
formed by taking two numbers fromthis series that are separated by one
number; for example 3 and 8 or 5
and 13.
This particular series has some interesting geometrical properties.
Take a circle and divide it into a number of parts according to one of the
Fibonacci numbers, say, 13. Then
count off sections of the circle by the
Fibonacci number that is two numbers behind 13, which is 5. This gives
you the pattern shown in Figure 6.

)uly-August 1984

FUSION55

Figure 6
UNPEELING THE FIBONACCI SERIESIn this example we choose a Fibonacci number, 13, and divide a circle intothat number of parts (a). We then begin with one of the sections and start
counting off sections around the circle according to the number that is two
numbers back on the Fibonacci series, 5 (b). Call the original point on thecircle A and the next point B. Notice that B has divided its space of 13
sections into two parts of 5 and the remaining 8.
Next we continue the process by counting off another 5 sections to arrive
at C (c). Point C divides its space, which is the 8 sections from B backaround to A, into two parts of 5 and 3. Next, we go around another fivesections, passing A and arriving at D (d). Note here that D divides its space,which consists of the 5 sections bounded by A and B, into the two parts of
2 and 3.
In e, two more points have been added: E divides its space into the parts
2 and 3, and F divides its space of 3 sections bounded by C and A into theparts of 1 and 2. In the final figure, f, the process is continued for the full
13 points, until the spiral returns to A.
Note several interesting things: First, all the divisions are Fibonacci ratios, including all of the remaining points after E. Second, each section of
the original 13-section division of the circle has been used exactly once inthis process. Third, notice that the counting-off process has revolved aroundthe circle five times exactly, and has used up 13 spaces, which in a plant
would give a phyllotaxis ratio of 5/13.

CALCULATIONS OF FIBONACCIRATIOS FOR THE FIRST FEWTERMS OF THE FIBONACCI SERIES
1/1

2/1
3/2
5/3
8/5
13/8
21/13

34/21

56

FUSION

July-August 1984

1.00002.00001.50001.66661.60001.65001.6154
1.6191The Young Scientist

As you can see, each new placecounted off on the circle divides its
space into a Fibonacci-type ratio,
either 1/1,1/2, 2/3, 3/5, 5/8, 8/13, andso on. Notice that these ratios are
the same as the ones you would haveproduced if you had counted off 8
spaces going around the circle in the
opposite direction. The Fibonacci
phyllotaxis can also be obtained bytaking two consecutive Fibonacci
numbers, 13 and 8 (that is, withoutskipping a number in the series), andgoing around your circle in the opposite direction (Figure 7b).
You will obtain a similar picture bystarting out with a circle divided into
equal parts by any other Fibonacci
number, such as 21. (With the circle
divided into 21 parts, you would thencount off segments in groups of 13.)
Looking Down at the Plant
Now, consider the sectioned-off
circle you have drawn as a diagramof a plant, looking down at the plantfrom the top, with each of the above
countings in the circle representing
a new leaf sprouting out. You can
see that each leaf is dividing its space
into a Fibonacci ratio. What can you
tell about these ratios?
First, each place you have marked
off on the circle divides the previous
space marked off on the circle nearlyin half. Thus, each new leaf is almost
evenly placed between two previous
leaves, giving«it lots of space in whichto grow. Second, each leaf also haslots of space togetsunlight. In thesedivisions, the space on one side of aleaf is never more than twice thespace on the other side.
Now, calculate the ratios you havemarked off as they get farther alongin the series, dividing the numerator
by the denominator. You can see thatthe ratios get closer and closer to theratio 1.62, which is the golden mean(see table). Some plants, in fact, havethe golden mean ratio as the angleof the separation of consecutive
leaves (Figure 8).
What about other ratios? Let us try
an experiment with a ratio that is notfrom the Fibonacci series. Keeping
the 13-divided circle, if you count off
by 7 sectors at a time (instead of 8 asin the Fibonacci series) you get within one section of the first leaf after
justtwo leaves, causing unnecessary

The Young Scientist

Figure 8
GOLDEN MEAN SEPARATION
OF LEAF ATTACHMENTLOCATIONS
Here the circle is divided by the
golden mean, which is approximately 1.62 or 137.5 degrees (outof 360 degrees). Notice that the
points are located in positions
that give thorn ample room aseach is successively laid down.

Figure 7
ALTERNATE FIBONACCICOUNTING
In a, the 13-sector circle is counted off in groups of five, giving
the points A, B, and C. In b, thesame circle is counted off ingroups of 8, in the opposite direction, giving the exact same location of the points A, B, and C.
We see, therefore, that theneighboring Fibonacci number to13, which is 8, can be used togive the same results as 5.
If you work out this example
all the way, as was done in Figure
6, you will see that all 13 sections
are used up. Now, however, instead of 5 complete rotations
around the circle, there are 8,
giving a phyllotaxis ratio of 8/13.

crowding. If you use 4 to count off,or rotate, you get again within one
section of the start within three leaves(Figure 9). You can try this with othernumbers of section divisions and rotations.
To see why the Fibonacci numbers
work so well, look more carefully atwhat happens in the above example
of a circle divided into 13 sections bycounting off 5 (or the equivalent, 8,
in the opposite direction). The first
counting divides the circle into8and
5, which are the two previous terms
in the Fibonacci series. The next
counting, or rotation, of 5 sections
divides the space of 8 sections between the first and second leaves into
two portions of 5 and 3, which are
the next numbers counting backwards in the Fibonacci series.
Now, the next counting of 5 goespast the first leaf and divides thespace of 5 sections between the firsttwo leaves into two portions of 2 and3. Again, this is done by moving
backwards in the Fibonacci series,
continuing the process (Figure 6).
This is really like an "unpeeling" ofthe Fibonacci series by subtraction!
Since the Fibonacci ratios get progressively closer to a constant value,
the golden mean, the series becomes close to a geometric series inwhich the golden mean is the constant factor of multiplication. Plants
frequently flip from one phyllotaxis
to another in the course of early development, or in the evolution of
new species of plants. Since the ratios are in a geometric series, thisJuly-August 984

FUSION

57

The reference point and thepoint at the same angle 13
places down the spiral are bothmarked x. The points arespaced apart by 360 degrees•*• 8/13 = 148.5 degrees.
Figure 10
SPIRAL ARRANGEMENT OF LEAF POSITIONS
Here the circle representation is uncoiled to reveal the underlying spiral ofleaf arrangement.
In this example the 13-section circle becomes a 13section spiral. After 5 turns above a given point in the spiral, there is anotherpoint at the same angle on the spiral. Again, another spiral could havebeen drawn through the same 13 points but in the opposite direction, Thisspiral would have had to turn 8 times between the matched points. The
top view of this spiral is shown in a, and the side view of the spiral, lookedat obliquely, is shown in b.

Figure 9
NON-FIBONACCI DIVISION OF
THE CIRCLE
Using the circle divided into 13
sections, we try somecounting
number other than 5 (or theequivalents), such as 4. Here thefirst added leaf, B, divides its
space up into 4 and 9, which isless symmetric than the 5 and 8
division. The second leaf added,
C, divides its space between B
and A of 9 sections into 4 and 5,
a good division, but then its next
leaf, D, divides its space o f 5 sections into 4 and 1, a highly unequal division. Similar highly unequal divisions occur with otherchoices of the counting
number,such as 3 or 7.

s t e m . T h e p l a n t always g r o w s in sucha w a y that it expands i n t o a n e w sizeb u t keeps a similar c o n i c a l shape.
The Question of C r o w d i n g
The same q u e s t i o n of c r o w d i n gapplies t o t h e small piece o f planttissue at t h e g r o w i n g t i p of t h e plantw h e r e the n e w leaves actually sprout.
This tissue is called t h e meristem, a n dmeasures less than 1/32 o f an inch

across. T h e n e w leaf b u d s c o m e o u tof this tissue at t h e same angles theyw i l l have o n t h e stem as a d u l t leaves.
Therefore, the crowding question forg r o w t h a n d s u n l i g h t is exactly t h esame as it is in t h e case o f starting t h eleaves o u t w i t h r o o m t o g r o w o n t h emeristem in t h e first place (Figure 11).
This shows that t h e q u e s t i o n o f
w h a t t h e best leaf spacing is f o r s u n -aspect o f e v o l u t i o n is really a geom e t r i c j u m p , f r o m o n e ratio t o ano t h e r similar ratio. This is a n o t h e r
aspect o f self-similar g r o w t h t h a t is
m o r e easily seen in t h e overallg r o w t h o f t h e snail o r t h e overall
shape o f a t r e e as it g r o w s .
N e x t , take t h e circle o n w h i c h y o uhave d r a w n t h e leaves a n d re-draw itback t o its o r i g i n a l spiral shape (Figure 10). H e r e y o u can see that as t h e
Fibonacci series is " u n p e e l e d , " t h eleaves are spread o u t vertically, sothat n e i g h b o r i n g leaves o n t h e circle
are far away f r o m each o t h e r o n t h e
g r o w n plant. The outward g r o w t h ofe l o n g a t i o n o f t h e leaf stems makes
sure that t h e n e w leaves d o n o t s h a d o w t h e o l d leaves, w h i c h may b e d i rectly u n d e r t h e m o r near t h e m i n
t h e circle m o d e l .
This c o m p l e t e s t h e overall pict u r e , s h o w i n g t h a t t h e p l a n t is generally shaped like a c o n e w i t h a spiralof leaves c o m i n g o u t of a central

58

FUSION

July-August 1984

The Young Scientist

light, for growth, for growing out inthe meristem, and for evolution as
well, are all really the same. These
problems require the same solutions, and the best solutions are allbased on self-similar geometricshapes related to the golden mean.
Some Experiments
In order to look at these ideas moreclearly you can do several kinds ofexperiments. First, do the example
described above of dividing a circle
into a Fibonacci number of sections
and then counting off sequences ofsections according to the next smaller Fibonacci number. Notice how theaddition of each leaf divides thespace for that leaf in a Fibonacci ratio.
You can try this exercise with other numbers that are not from the Fibonacci series to see whether the leaf
spacing is as good.
Second, collect plant samples thathave the various Fibonacci ratios intheir leaf or thorn patterns aroundthe stem. Examine these specimensfrom various angles to see the effectof the spacing on sunlight exposureand growth crowding. A few common examples are the 1/3 ratio in
beech trees, the 2/5 ratio in oak, the
3/8 ratio in poplar, and the 5/13 ratio
in willows.
Third, dissect the meristem tip ofa plant under a low power microscope or strong hand lens, to see thepattern of leaf buds and how they
form a Fibonacci geometry. Noticethe extremely close crowding ofgrowth at the meristem tip.
Fourth, take snapshot pictures ot
a growing plant every day at the sametime from the same place, in order
to visualize the growth patterns that
follow the self-similar patterns you
have outlined.
Fifth, a more challenging experiment would be to investigate whysome plants that may start out in a
conical shape change to othershapes. I'll give you a hint: The increase in crowding of the plant (itspopulation density) may affect its
shape as it attempts to maximize exposure to the Sun or to ground water.
For example a lone oak may be wider
at its base, but an oak in a crowded
forest may be wider on top.

The Young Scientist

Brother Bonacci's Rabbits
Filius (Brother) Bonacci, who wasborn in Pisa, Italy, in the year 1170
AD, discovered a unique series ofnumbers that have ever since borne
his name—the Fibonacci series.
Brother Bonacci is said to have discovered the series observing the reproduction of rabbits.
Suppose we want to raise rabbits,
and we start with a newborn pair—amale and a female. Let's assume forsimplicity that each rabbit pair takes
one month to mature to the pointthat it can produce offspring, and thatthe female carries h e r y o u n g f o r o n emonth. That means it will take twomonths from the birth of the firstrabbit pair to produce the first offspring. Let's also assume for simplicity's sake that each litter consists ofone male and one female rabbit.
Now let's look at the growth of the
July-August 1984

rabbit population by month. In thefirst month we have one pair, and so
also in the second. At the beginningof the third month a new pair is born.
Now we have two rabbit pairs. At the
beginning of the fourth month, thatnew pair is maturing, and the original pair give birth to another pair.
The total number of pairs now equals
three.
What do you think happens in thefifth month? Let's see. The originalpair gives birth to yet another pair,making four pairs. But the pair thatwas born at the beginning of the third
month also has a pair. So the total
number of pairs equals five.
The chart helps you to see how
this growth continues, producing theseries named after Filius Bonacci:
1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,. . .
This series has two very important
FUSION59

properties. First, any term in the series is equal to the sum of the two
previous terms. For example:
2= 1+1,or13 = 5+ 8
Knowing this, you can produce theseries just beginning with 1 and 1.
Second, the ratio of any twoneighboring terms of the series is almost equal to the number 1.618,
which is the ratio of the golden section or golden mean (see "How Plants
Grow," p. 54). The higher we get in
the series, the more true this is. Try
it yourself. Use the first property I
have just shown you to write out the
Fibonacci series a few terms beyond
the highest number (21) that I havegiven you. Now take any two neighboring numbers and divide them, thehigher by the lower. (For example
21+13 = 1.615). You may use a calculator to facilitate this long division.
You see that the higher you go in
the series, the closer it gets to theratio of the golden section, which isapproximately 1.618. This is called
convergence. The ratio of neighbor-ing terms in the Fibonacci series
converges on the golden section.
A Geometric Construction
You can also produce the Fibonacci series by a geometric construction. Start with a square whose sides
we consider to be 1 x 1 . Now, youneed only follow a simple rule togenerate the Fibonacci series. The
rule is: Always add a square to thelongest side of your figure. Since we
begin with a square, no side is thelongest; we can add a square to it on
any side (Figure 1).

But now we have a figure twice aslong as it is wide (2x1). So we add asquare to its longest side (Figure 2).

BEAM DEFENSEAn Alternative to Nuclear
Destruction
By the Technical Staff of the Fusion
Energy Foundation
For 30 years the world has been held hostage to the threat ofnuclear holocaust. The nuclear-armed ICBM has been called theultimate offensive weapon, against which there can be no defense. But now new directed energy beam technologies makepossible the development of defensive weapons that can knockout nuclear missiles in the first few minutes of their launch, preventing them from exploding. Beam Defense: An Alternative to
Nuclear Destruction describes in detail what these technologies are, how they work, how fast we canhave them, and how they would change the strategic situation, ending the era of Mutually Assured
Destruction (MAD). Equally important, the book outlines how the development of beam technologies will bring us into the plasma age with the unlimited, cheap energy of fusion and therevolutionary applications of plasma technologies to industry, medicine, and science.

ISO charts, photos, illustrations

60

FUSION

176 pages (16 color) SoftboundJuly-August 1984

Now our figure is 3 x 2 . As we keep
adding squares to the longest side,
we get figures of 5 x 3 , 8 x 5 , 1 3 x 8 ,and so on. As the figure grows larger, the proportions of the rectangle
hardly change. This is self-similar
growth. The size increases, but not
the shape. All living things grow thisway.
Now for the puzzle: What will
happen if you start with any rectangle and construct a square on its longside, making a new, larger rectangle? Repeat the process a number oftimes. Then make a series of numbers from the lengths of the rectangles you have constructed. What can
you discover about these rectangles?
—Laurence Hecht

The Young Scientist

BooksTall Tales About Fusion
The Man-Made Sun
by T.A. Heppenheimer
New York: Little, Brown and Company
1984, $19.95

Washington headquarters to meetgoals, and the international scope of
fusion development that helped solve
this and other difficulties the research
program faced over its 30-year history.

The Man-Made Sun is the only popular book to be written o n the important topic of thermonuclear fusion research in many years, and therefore it
has attracted much attention. Unfortunately, it muddies an interestingpresentation of the science and development of fusion w i t h some tall tales
about the people and circumstancesof fusion's progress.

Unfortunately, Heppenheimer hasinterwoven this positive story of man's
increasing mastery of a potentially limitless and cheap energy source w i t hsnide comments about the allegedly
near-constant warfare between scientific teams w o r k i n g on competing f u sion concepts. Reading his account,
one w o u l d conclude that the scientists
at Livermore and the Princeton Plasma
Physics Laboratory spent more timesquabbling w i t h each other and c o m peting for f u n d i n g than doing research. It is as if Heppenheimer views
science history as nothing more thanan installment of "Dallas" on television.

In particular, individuals w h o havemade major contributions to the fightfor fusion development, and indeed,
individuals w h o assisted author Tom
Heppenheimer in the preparation of
the book, received inexplicably nasty
treatment.
Struggling with Plasmas
O n the positive side, one of thehighlights in the book is the story of
how Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory solved some initial problems in their magnetic mirror fusion
program. Heppenheimer recounts
h o w early problems w i t h plasma "leaking" out the end of the cylindrical mirror, made scientists pessimistic about
ever being able to design a usable
power reactor.
By a series of scientific interventions—including the idea of "plugg i n g " b o t h ends of the cylinder by creating a tandem mirror and developinga thermal barrier to the plasma loss—
today's generation of successful mirror configurations was created.
Evident in the story is the commitment of the scientific teams, the constant direction and pressure from the

AUTHORS WANTED BY
NEW YORK PUBLISHER
Leading subsidy book publisher seeks manuscripts
of all types: fiction, non-fiction, poetry, scholarly
and juvenile works, etc. New authors welcomed.
Send for free, illustrated 40-page brochure H-<78
Vantage Press. 516 W. 34 St., New York, N.Y. 10001

Books

The real life-and-death battle for f u sion is the still-ongoing fight w i t h theenemies of progress in this country
w h o think it's fine if the fusion program—along w i t h other scientific advances—is put off until the distant 21st
century.
Short Shrift
Particularly disturbing is the shortshrift given to crucial figures in the f u sion effort like Edwin Kintner, former
head of the Department of Energy's
magnetic fusion program. Heppenheimer does all but call Kintner, a pioneer in the Nuclear Navy program
under Admiral Rickover, a bystanderin the war!
As this magazine has d o c u m e n t e d ,Kintner fought hard to maintain scientific m o m e n t u m in the program andto bring fusion into the engineering
stage. Not publicly k n o w n is the factthat Kintner was also very supportiveof Heppenheimer's efforts in w r i t i n g
this book.
Equally astonishing is Heppenheimer's treatment of Fusion magazine
and the Fusion Energy Foundation. His
one reference to the 10 years the f o u n dation has p r o m o t e d fusion development and popularized information
July-August 1984

about fusion w i t h its 200,000-circulation magazine is limited to one nasty
mention of the role the FEF played in1978 in making the stunning results of
the Princeton Large Torus (PLT) into
international news.
Heppenheimer refers to the FEF as"a small but well-financed offshoot of
the U.S. Labor Party," w h i c h of course,
as Heppenheimer knows, is not true.
The FEF was not small (at that time it
had 20,000 members), was not well-financed (it is a member and subscription supported nonprofit organization), and was independent of the former U.S. Labor Party (which was disbanded in 1979).
According to Heppenheimer, whatever legitimacy the FEF may have had,came only f r o m the fact that its first
executive director, Dr. Morris Levitt," w o u l d go on to become editor of thewell-respected physics journal, Laser
Focus."
So much for the organization thatbrought the news of the Princeton PLT
breakthrough to scientists t h r o u g h o u t
the w o r l d and whose scientific concepts for laser fusion research havebeen adopted by researchers in Japanand other places.
In all, this is a disappointing bookfull of the author's subjective observations. The U.S. fusion program deserves a better history.
—Marsha Freeman
FUSION61

Stopping the Lies
About Nuclear Power
Before It's Too Late
A Scientist's Case FOR Nuclear Energy
by Bernard L. Cohen
New York: Plenum Publishing Corp.
1984, $16.95
In a nation choked in a fog of misinformation and outright lies about thesafety of nuclear power, Bernard Cohen's Before It's Too Late is a muchneeded breath of fresh air. C o h e n , along-tenured physics professor at the
University of Pittsburgh and an expert
in radiation physics, thoroughly d e m onstrates the negligible risk nuclear
power poses to public health as well as
the tragic misconceptions the public
has about the nuclear power industry.
He uses memorable analogies t o allow the layman to visualize the miniscule probability of radiation releasefrom all elements of the nuclear powerindustry, and he documents authoritatively the much-lied-about impact of
low-level radiation o n the human bodyin terms of the risk of cancer and genetic disorders. He also demolishes thegreat media m e l t d o w n myth.
Citing the minor release—1 millirem—of radiation at Three Mile Island
as an example of the gross exaggeration of the press, Cohen documents
h o w the human body is subjected to
85 millirems per year of natural backg r o u n d radiation from the Sun andsuch natural things as the potassium inour bodies. What is the heightened riskof contracting cancer to those exposed to radiation near Three Mile Island? Quantitatively, it's equivalent totaking three puffs of a cigarette.

You Can't Trust
The London Financial Times
Nuclear Power in the Developing
Countries
by Judith Perera
London: Financial Times BusinessInformation, Ltd.,
1984, $75
There are t w o things about Nuclear
Power in the Developing Countries thatstruck me as strange even before reading it. First, it's unusual these days tosee any new study coming from one of
the industrial nations on the subject of
nuclear energy technology export, especially an organization like the Lond o n Financial Times, not k n o w n to beo n the side of technological progress.
Second, the author, Judith Perera, isa specialist not in nuclear technology
but in Mideast politics. Perera's previous publications include such titles
as "A Survey of Chemical and Biological Warfare," and "Can the Arabs W i n
the Nuclear Arms Race w i t h Israel?"
The purpose of this b o o k , it turns
o u t , is to make the case against nuclear
62

FUSIONpower in the developing countries.
Aside from the tedious though wellcatalogued mass of impressive looking
charts, graphs, and official statistics
with w h i c h Perera fills the pages of thist o m e , the bulk of the text is a facile andoften brazenly inaccurate rehash ofwhat might pass for a Friends of the
Earth primer on the "evils of nuclear
technology.""The developing states have been
conducting a strange love affair w i t h
nuclear power since the mid-1950s,"
she writes.
For the most part, Perera insults theintelligence of her readers—especiallyso since the intended audience for thebook is presumably potential nuclear
suppliers and financiers. For example,
she catalogues the potential for nuclear terrorism, b o m b diversion, and the"risks" to industrial nations as the"double-edged s w o r d " eJf nuclear
technology transfer.
Continued
July-August 1984

on page 64

The media, Cohen says, has consistently ignored the findings of highly respected scientific organizations and,instead, have reported only the discredited works f r o m a handful of antinuclear scientists. According to a pollof over 300 scientists taken by C o h e n ,these antinuclear scientists so respected by the press have an extremely low
level of credibility among their peers.
A n d how does an American public
brainwashed w i t h radiation scare stories regard nuclear power? W h e n Cohen p o l l e d a number of college students and members of the League ofW o m e n Voters and asked them tochoose w h i c h of 30 activities held thehighest "present risk of death" to theaverage American, the majority chose
nuclear power. Yet, the facts are thatrisk estimates put the death rate from
nuclear power at 10 per year, whiledriving motor vehicles kills 50,000 per
year, and cigarette smoking accounts
for 150,000 deaths annually.
Cohen completes the picture w i t hcomprehensive scientific evidence thatshows how continued use of coal togenerate electrical power carries highrisk to public health and property,
while solar and w i n d alternatives areunreliable, land-intensive, and much
more costly than nuclear power. As forthe bugaboo of nuclear waste disposal, Cohen shows that it is a technologically trivial task w i t h essentially no risk
to the public.

Books

Political Babe in the Woods
Although Cohen builds a strong casefor nuclear power, he is a babe in thewoods w h e n he ventures i n t o a discussion of politics—how this country evergot into such an antitechnology mess.
For example, he brushes off the media's misrepresentation of facts as simply their quest for "entertaining" scarestories.
As for the irrational antinuclear activists, Cohen lamely says, "Somehow
their political philosophy told them that
nuclear power is bad . . . ."Cohen also makes no connection
between the antinuclear activists, theirlegions of attentive reporters, and theideological o u t l o o k that regards mankind as a mere beasts, dominated by
the w h i m of mother nature and seeking only to maximize pleasure w i t h o u tregard for the well-being of generations to c o m e . He fails to look b e h i n dthese antitechnology puppets at theirmasters—the international power brokers in organizations like the Council
on Foreign Relations, the W o r l d Bank,
the United Nations, the Club of Rome,
and, i n d e e d , the liberal w i n g of the
Democratic Party w h o are consciously
planning a new dark age. In this darkage, not only w o u l d nuclear power be
destroyed, b u t also most of the material and cultural advances of Western
civilization, and most of the world's
people.
W i t h o u t naming the names of thoseindividuals w h o are responsible forf u n d i n g and directing the antinuclear
movement and attacking their feudalist w o r l d v i e w , it is of course, impossible to stop the process of devolution.
In all, Bernard Cohen's Before It's
Too Late is a valuable book that belongs in the library of all w h o are concerned to stop the lies about nuclear
power. It belongs as well in every public library and school library, t o counter the reams of yellow journalism
churned out of the environmentalistpresses. It is certainly a convincing
weapon to have in one's arsenal; but
if we are to w i n the battle for progress,
readers must be willing to wage a hardpolitical fight to restore the nation totechnological progress and to thosepolicies that nurture the well-being andcreative potential of human beingst h r o u g h o u t the w o r l d .
—KevinBooks

Schmidt

Sandia Achieves Breakthroughdent o n the curvature of the anodesurface A plus three independent effects of magnetic and electric fields inthe d i o d e : (1) the b o w i n g of the magnetic field 8 applied to insulate the ano d e ; (2) the bending of the magnetic

field generated by the beam itself 5,and (3) the b o w i n g of the electric field
E equipotential surfaces w i t h respect
to the applied magnetic field.
They formulated this dependencewith an equation for the beam focal
length w i t h four factors as follows,
where L = focal length in centimeters:

The Pritikin Fraud
Continued from page 13
ample, studies have indicated selective depletion of leucine, an amino acidmost easily obtainable from meat, inpersons performing vigorous exercise. Leucine also plays a key role inthe body's tissue i m m u n e system. Thisaccounts for the i m m u n e suppressionc o m m o n l y observed in manually laboring populations of the Third W o r l d .
The Cult of Deprivation
Pritikin's diet, along w i t h the general p r o m o t i o n of vegetarianism, "natural f o o d s , " and sundry attacks o n f o o dpreservatives, is preparing the cultural
conditions for acceptance of a reduction in the quality of the U.S. diet as aconsequence of policies that are undercutting the U.S. meat and dairy industry and destroying grain production as well. The consequences of thesepolicies will be more palatable to a
population that has been conditioned
to believe that a lower-quality diet is infact healthier. A most effective way to
d o this is to create a cult that promotes
deprivation as a positive value.
Guyana in 1979 banned the importof milk, supposedly in the "national
interest," but actually in compliancew i t h IMF loan conditionalities thatcalled for cutting imports to have morecash available for loan repayments. Last
year, the United States, along w i t h the
IMF, took the additional step of cutting
off the remainder of Guyana's f o o d imports.
It is predictable that the incidence ofheart disease may decrease as the population succumbs to starvation and infectious disease. However, as w h e n
one reads about the decreased incidence of arteriosclerosis f o u n d at autopsy in concentration camp victims,
it is useful to remember what condit i o n the victims were in w h e n the observation was made.
—John Crauerholz,
M.D.
July-August 1984

VLF = 1ILA + VLB + 1/LS + VLt
In fact, only the first term of thisequation, anode surface curvature, isrelevant.
Sandia's ). Pace VanDevender explained in a laboratory press releasethat some feared that the electromagnetic effects w o u l d be arbitrary: " H i g hcurrent ion diodes [like the one usedin the Sandia experiments] have somany electrons and ions runningaround t h e m , " he said, "that scientists
had feared that they w o u l d slosharound like ocean waves and disrupt
the ion focusing."
Instead, although the electromagnetic effects shape the geometry w i t h in w h i c h the beam must propagate,
they do not d o so arbitrarily. The result
is that changes in the curvature of theanode surface focus the beam in that
determinant geometry. Johnson is delighted w i t h the simplicity of the solution and has told this writer that his
earlier f o r m u l a t i o n of the relevance ofelectrodynamic effects was simply incorrect.
—Robert Gallagher
Note
1. D.J. Johnson, Ft. J. Leeper, W. A. Stygar, and S.
A. Slutz, "Proto-I Axial Focusing Experiments,"
paper presented at Fifth International Conference on High Power Particle Beams, San Francisco, Calif., (Sept. 1983).

Contributions to the FEF
are tax deductible!

FUSION63

TREASONIN AMERICA
From Aaron Burr
to AvereU Harrimanby Anton Chaitkin
What Harvard's History Books
Won't Tell You
Did you know that...
• Aaron Burr was not a reputable New
York lawyer, but a spy for the British andthe Swiss opponents of the American
Revolution?
• The Secretary of the Treasury of theUnited States in 1800-1813 was a direct
agent of a Swiss noble family?
• The "respectable" Boston Brahmins madetheir fortunes through trading in opium,slaves, and treason?
$ 5 - 4 5 (postage paid)
Order from your bookstore, or from:The New
Benjamin Franklin House
Publishing Company, Inc.
304 West 58th Street. 5th floor, New York, NY 10019
Mastercard/Visa holders, call (212) 247- 7484

AN FEF SLIDE SHOWDIRECTED
ENERGYBEAMS
A Weapon For Peace
Recent scientific and engineering breakthroughs
make possible the development of anhballistic
missile directed energy beams—lasers, X-rays,
and particle beams—capable of destroying ICBMs
in flight. Defensive beam weapons can end thethreat of nuclear holocaust.
30 color slides from the U.S. Defense Department, the Army Ballistic Missile Defense Command, NASA, Fusion, and more. Script included.
Also available:
The World Needs More People
A set of 30 color slides of charts, graphs, bar diagrams
and maps showing world and regional population densities
of today and past epochs. The material illustrates the conceptof expanding energy as the necessary basis for growth inpopulation potential. The slides are designed for teaching;notes and recommended sequences of presentation are included. Each set is $50 postpaid ($40 for FEF members).

You Can't Trust...
Continued from page 62
Perera sees little role for electricity
and specifically nuclear electricity inspurring industrial growth, although
recent scientific studies show electricity to be the most efficient "locomotive" for industrialization. "The uncertainties which are apparent when taking a worldwide view of nuclear power
are increased several fold with respect
to developing states," she writes.
"Electricity consumption is bound toincrease but it will not be the mainpriority for development. . . . It is by
no means certain, moreover, that nuclear power is the best choice to produce this electricity in developing
states. . . . "In sum, Perera and her editors at the
Financial Times not only would discourage nuclear power in the develo p i n g sector, but also would throw out
the enormous o p p o r t u n i t y for the economically depressed advanced industrial nations to export the most advanced nuclear technology to the developing world. Do the developing
sector nations themselves want to go
nuclear? The answer from India, Egypt,
Nigeria, Korea, and other countries isa loud "yes." Does the Financial Times
want the advanced sector nations toexport this development? The answer
is a loud " n o . "Is this book perhaps compiled to givethe environmentalists some new targets in those developing countries that
understand that technological advance is the only way out of the abyssof misery and starvation?
—William Engdahl$50 postpaid ($40 for FEF members)
Order now trom

The Fusion Energy Foundation
Send check or money order to FEF Slide Show,Box 1438, Radio City Station, N.Y., N.Y. 10101
Or phone (212) 247-8439.
Visa, MasterCard, and Diners accepted.

64

FUSION

July-August 1984

Books

Imagine a world
without

In This Issue
THE 'GREAT PROJECTS' METHODThe Kra Canal, this issue's cover story, is one of several "Great Projects" proposed to transform the economiesof the Indian and Pacific Ocean basins. This method of using large infrastructure projects as magnets toindustrialize an entire region is a sure way out of the w o r l d depression: The economy will be revitalized as
w e gear up U.S. industry to export advanced technology. And the developing sector will establish the infrastructure necessary to industrialize and provide for its growing population.
Most exciting, as FEF research director Uwe Parpart Henke reports, is that the Kra Canal project, discussed
for some 200 years, is finally on the verge of becoming a reality.
THE HYPOTHESIS OF THE HIGHER HYPOTHESISHow does one determine valid scientific conceptions? This is the question Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr., answers
in his provocative article " W h y I Must Attack Albert Einstein." The ultimate measure of an economy is thecapability of its population to su-stain and improve its own existence: man's mastery over nature. It is throughadvances in science and technology that man progresses, LaRouche says, and he lays out some ground-rules
for making such breakthroughs. The method he presents, the hypothesis of the higher hypothesis, is basedon restoring the fundamental principles of continental science—principles that Einstein did not accept.
THINKING BIG: THE FRENCH NUCLEAR PROGRAM
While the U.S. nuclear program is shrinking away, nuclear power has produced more than one-half of France's
electricity generation since July 1983. France is now number 1 among the world's nations in terms of the shareof its electricity provided by nuclear energy, and has
Courtesy of Electncite rje France
a unique fast breeder program. Laurent Rosenfeld,
editor-in-chief of the French-language Fusion, tells
the story and provides American readers with plentyof ammunition in the fight to keep America out of a
New Dark Age.
SOVIET LASER FUSION: FULL SPEED AHEAD
This exclusive review of the Soviet Union's thermonuclear laser fusion program by Academy of Science member Dr. Nikolai G. Basov demonstrates thedepth of their inertial confinement program. "Thereis no doubt as to achieving breakeven in thermonuclear reactions using the laser approach," Basovwrites.
The military implications of this fusion researchcannot be overlooked. Basov's certainty of making
a scientific breakthrough in laser fusion contrasts
sharply with Soviet assertions that similar technological breakthroughs are impossible in the area of
directed energy beam defense.
Steven Bardwe I

The Gravelines nuclear plants, 4 of the 28 plants now under construction in France, By the end of the decade, France will have 56
gigawatts electric of nuclear power.

Proposed site for the Kra Canal.
(Left) Target chamber of a laser fusion experimentin Basov's laboratory in the Lebedev Institute.

J