Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: quadibloc <quadibloc@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: Re: The Nuclear Salt Water Reactor
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2025 03:03:25 +0000
Organization: novaBBS
Message-ID: <387f124bcffa0562316839a64ec45af7@www.novabbs.com>
References: <b5fd5f9772bf38508576d1f76a027a79@www.novabbs.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="117011"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="GSAUMsvIs05PgSAevbIzdWiOy1BcuThtiv166p5NnMk";
User-Agent: Rocksolid Light
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$tgnW7vS017tNS7whK4xzwuhWhCUPJDbex0HB9/l1MzDZTQbqjpUgu
X-Rslight-Posting-User: 7260c650ae4d5ba82d3b6b1eab0ac1b8653ff052
Bytes: 1422
Lines: 10

On further thought, it seemed as if fuel in the form of powder would be
easier to launch at the high speeds needed to avoid fizzling.
But then I realized why a salt solution was chosen - so that the
reaction
could be continuous, not providing pulsed thrust that would have to be
smoothed out by giant springs and suchlike. But it still seems to me
that
the merging liquid flows would behave like a bomb, and be in danger of a
fizzle instead of an explosion that could provide thrust.

John Savard