I'll tell you something that impressed me the other day when my French niece was here - I was telling her about my locally run AI Ollama engine and she wanted a try on it. She addressed it in french and it responded in perfect French. This may be an obvious thing, but I'd never thought it would do that.

 

Quite surprising in a cut down LLM running on a mediocre PC. I have never yet discussed a technical, scientific, philosophical or historical topic with it that it could not handle really well. It is like having a top notch polymath professor on hand to bounce ideas off. You can't do that with most of the people I know. And - don't forget, this is with free to use locally run models that you download, install and run on your own hardware - and inexpensive hardware at that. The PC cost under £400.

 

I especially like having an argument with it.

 

Some of the LLM models I have downloaded are better than others. I tend towards using Gemma3n:e4b, or Gemma3:12b which is a wee bit slower having three times teh data parameters. The most recent one I got is gpt-oss:20b which has 20 billion parameters and is pretty massive for my hardware. It takes a while to respond. It isn't going to be my 'goto' model, partly because it is slow on this hardware, and partly because it seems to love making tables which I hate when I just want an answer. Maybe I can train it not to...

Edited August 26, 2025Aug 26 by Tony1951

Maybe I can train it not to...

Just tell it that you hate tables. If you use the free online accounts, you don't need to repeat this or set it in code. Online AIs will remember all you told them. Much easier but you give a bit of yourself to the machine.

 

 

Some of the LLM models I have downloaded are better than others. I tend towards using Gemma3n:e4b, or Gemma3:12b which is a wee bit slower having three times teh data parameters. The most recent one I got is gpt-oss:20b which has 20 billion parameters and is pretty massive for my hardware. It takes a while to respond. It isn't going to be my 'goto' model, partly because it is slow on this hardware, and partly because it seems to love making tables which I hate when I just want an answer. Maybe I can train it not to...

 

Well, I had a go at training it not to make tables, which it does all the time. This model is from Openai and is a derivative of Chat-gpt.

 

I first tried to include a command in the system prompt of the interface I use to interact with the Ollama model. On my chomebook I run a chrome web browser with an extension called Page Assist UI which creates a chat-gpt like interface to communicate with the AI model. This UI offers the chance to tailor the system prompt, so in theory I can give an instruction like:

 

'The assistant must not use tables. Answer only in plain text or bullet points.'

 

It doesn't work though. The Assistant takes no notice of the instruction. I need to investigate why not.

 

However, the instruction does work if you include that sentence in each and every instruction prompt you give the model. So if my prompt is something like the following:

 

"The assistant must not use tables. Answer only in plain text or bullet points. What are the probabilities of life developing in the ocean of Enceladus underneath the water ice surface?'

 

The model will produce a text and bullet point answer without the pesky tables that this particular model seems so fond of.

 

None of my other models do this. The gpt-oss:20b model makes tables which don't have word wrap and the lines are long, which means it is pretty hard to read them since they contain much more information than can be seen in the tables text box. You have to scroll sideways to read them. They are worse than useless - at least on my machine. If there was word wrap enabled in the box, it would be ok, but as it is, I have not been using that model. It is a shame because like Chat Gpt (its parent) it is powerful. A new release might fix it, if there was a way to convey dissatisfaction with this aspect.

Were the models trained on chess or in any way designed to play chess?

 

The models used were unless I am mistaken, Large Language Models.

 

I have never thought of using an LLM to play chess, so I asked my Ollama AI running google's gemma3n:e4b model locally on my own mini pc, if it could play chess. It responded:

 

As a large language model, I can't "play" chess in the way a human or a dedicated chess program can. I don't have a physical body to manipulate pieces on a board.

However, I can absolutely understand and analyze chess! Here's what I can do:

• Understand chess notation: I can read and interpret moves written in algebraic notation (e.g., "e4", "Nf3", "O-O").
  
• Evaluate positions: I can analyze a chess position and assess its strengths and weaknesses. I can identify key factors like material balance, pawn structure, king safety, and piece activity.
  
• Suggest moves: Based on my understanding of chess principles and the position, I can suggest possible moves. I can even provide explanations for why a move might be good.
  
• Analyze games: You can give me a sequence of moves from a game, and I can analyze it, pointing out critical moments, mistakes, and good play.
  
• Answer chess questions: I can answer your questions about chess rules, strategy, openings, endgames, and famous games.
  
• Generate chess puzzles: I can create chess puzzles for you to solve.
  
• Play against you (text-based): We can play a simplified version of chess through text. You tell me your moves in algebraic notation, and I'll respond with my moves. This is a basic text-based implementation, not a full-fledged chess engine.
  

To get started, you can:

1. Give me a chess position in algebraic notation. For example: rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1 (this is the starting position).
   
2. Ask me a question about chess. For example: "What is the best opening for white against the Sicilian Defense?"
   
3. Tell me you want to play a game. I'll start the game and we can take turns making moves.
   

Keep in mind: I'm not a perfect chess engine like Stockfish or Leela Chess Zero. My analysis is based on my training data, and I might not always find the optimal move. But I can be a helpful tool for learning and understanding chess.

So, what would you like to do? Do you want to:

• Show me a position?
  
• Ask a question?
  
• Start a game?
  

 

I highlighted the important point of its answer in red

AI can create a chess game in code for you to play on your PC if you ask it. The results are pretty OK. In that video I linked to, all the AI overthought their moves. They made a silly move throwing the game when they forgot what they planned to move before and are literally a couple of moves before check mate. It shows that AIs are coming close to hitting the wall at the moment, need new paradigms.

Just tell it that you hate tables. If you use the free online accounts, you don't need to repeat this or set it in code. Online AIs will remember all you told them. Much easier but you give a bit of yourself to the machine.

 

We crossed there Tony in sending our posts. Just to be clear, this is a local model running at home.

 

The system prompt from the Page Assist UI is ignored for some reason.

 

Individual prompts need to have the instruction about output format.

 

That works, but its a real pain having to include it every time.

 

I can't imagine why someone included the fanatical desire to make tables with long text inputs in boxes of restricted size. Maybe the programmers expected everyone to be running massive screens with gigantic resolution, rather than doing it across the home network with a laptop, or even worse - a phone.

AI can create a chess game in code for you to play on your PC if you ask it. The results are pretty OK. In that video I linked to, all the AI overthought their moves. They made a silly move throwing the game when they forgot what they planned to move before and are literally a couple of moves before check mate. It shows that AIs are coming close to hitting the wall at the moment, need new paradigms.

 

Are they hitting the wall really?

 

I doubt that. I think you are talking about a very particular usage case - chess playing, on transformer models which were evolved for verbal interaction and are not specifically suited to the particular task. This is not AGI where the AI replicates ALL human cognitive ability. The models in use have capabilities specific to language, so they can talk about chess; they can discuss how to play chess, but if usages are contrived with strange algebraic notation to allow them to play, they don't play like a grand master, and make novice mistakes. Or if you ask a language model to write the code for a computer game that plays chess, it's current level of coding ability might not be up to the standards of Stockfish. How good was the prompt that was used to make the game?

 

The quality of ANY kind of response depends on the training and also the quality of the prompt.

 

AI planners wanted to use AI to write and debug code - they made it do that by showing it massive amounts of code and discussions about code. AI got good, or better at coding.

 

If there is a market for the feature, and there are particular deficiencies in performance, the AI companies just need to tweak the training.

 

That said - we are only 7 years out from the invention of the transformer architecture by Vaswani et.al. Seven years since the seminal idea on how to make an AI architecture which could make models understand human language and respond in a human like way. We are right at the beginning.

 

How long did it take to evolve human intelligence from ape-like intelligence? About 6 million years.

 

I think the rate of progress is astounding and don't forget the progress has been based on one particular type of model architecture.

 

There will be a crowd of downy chinned, geeky youths right now evolving completely new architectures which will make Chat-gpt type models look like some computer game from 1980. AGI will come pretty soon, I think - especially now that the investment in developing it is so big.

 

As an aside, at six this morning when I turned on the radio, I heard of some UNITE trade union dinosaurs wittering on about how AI needed to be constrained to prevent it taking people's jobs..... Fat chance of that. If unions seek to frustrate the use of AI in workplaces, the businesses being restricted will fold in the face of the non union crippled competition.

Edited August 27, 2025Aug 27 by Tony1951

Paradigm is pair of concept and its solution. AI started with 'learn from humans' then 'learn from curated data' then 'learn math', then 'learn physics'. There is a long list of specific skill area that it needs to learn in depth, like music, paintings, architecture etc. However, the situation with ai development is illustrated in that AI chess tournament, they were given pretty much unlimited compute resources, their limitation was not to have access to chess databases. It has to guess the strength of each position again and again, in real time. A chess program would build a database if it hasn't got access to one. The same situation occurs in training brand new robots to see though their sensors.

Paradigm is pair of concept and its solution. AI started with 'learn from humans' then 'learn from curated data' then 'learn math', then 'learn physics'. There is a long list of specific skill area that it needs to learn in depth, like music, paintings, architecture etc. However, the situation with ai development is illustrated in that AI chess tournament, they were given pretty much unlimited compute resources, their limitation was not to have access to chess databases. It has to guess the strength of each position again and again, in real time. A chess program would build a database if it hasn't got access to one. The same situation occurs in training brand new robots to see though their sensors.

 

I put this matter to Chat-GPT5

 

Scroll back up to see my prompt and the answer:

 

https://chatgpt.com/share/68aebb95-02f0-8001-9996-aee653c30a98

The new current paradigm is 'memory'. When it's solved, possibly in gpt6, it will play chess well.

The new current paradigm is 'memory'. When it's solved, possibly in gpt6, it will play chess well.

I think we will see marvellous developments in our lifetimes. Really smart people are working on these things.

 

I watched a talk the other day at Google by Matt Ridley. He's a VERY smart individual, science writer and commentator. The talk wasn't all that recent, but the questions from the audience were very perceptive I thought. Best of all though was Ridley himself and his very insightful mind.

 

I like Ridley a lot, partly because he is a Northumbrian (kidding) but mostly because he asks the questions that make the Chatterarti start clucking. He ends up right about things. I am unaware of any thing he said that hasn't turned out to be true.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUAIIQFoufs:3

 

From about minute 22 is particularly good.

Edited August 27, 2025Aug 27 by Tony1951

Scotland short of water even when it's persisting down..

And we saw that vid of the new Wef boss saying water is a privilege not a right..

So is the next Manufactured crisis going to be Water?

Another Matt Ridley interview.

 

A serious thinker, not bound up with fashionable paradigms.

 

When he talked about the story of the first powered flight, it seems to me that he kept mainly to small inventions. It's difficult to imagine something like the story of the Wright brothers happen again in our time. You can't even invent a new kitchen knife now without a team of people and millions of pounds supporting you. I follow physics a lot because I have always loved the subject. That was my favourite subject at high school. For the last 100 years, progress is made on the back of ever increasing budget and power of the experiments like the LHC. They are now talking about building a bigger one.

When he talked about covid, his view was that was the result of a lab leak and he believes that is preventable in the future. I disagree. Too many labs are capable of creating variants of those viruses. Who will know that next time it won't be planted?

Edited August 27, 2025Aug 27 by Woosh

When he talked about the story of the first powered flight, it seems to me that he kept mainly to small inventions. It's difficult to imagine something like the story of the Wright brothers happen again in our time. You can't even invent a new kitchen knife now without a team of people and millions of pounds supporting you. I follow physics a lot because I have always loved the subject. That was my favourite subject at high school. For the last 100 years, progress is made on the back of ever increasing budget and power of the experiments like the LHC. They are now talking about building a bigger one.

When he talked about covid, his view was that was the result of a lab leak and he believes that is preventable in the future. I disagree. Too many labs are capable of creating variants of those viruses. Who will know that next time it won't be planted?

 

Do you want to talk about the lab leak theory?

 

I have the book he wrote with Dr Alina Chan. It is a masterpiece of reasoning.

 

If you want to open a dialogue on that, I am ready - though I might not answer today.

 

As for invention - yes big budgets may well be required to get something to market - especially given the safety testing that is now mandatory through regulation. Imagine if Wilbur and Orville were working on the first powered flight nowadays..... Nothing would be allowed without spending millions on testing.

Do you want to talk about the lab leak theory?

I posted a lot in the early days of covid. I read a lot of studies about SARSCOV2 at the time. After reading that the virus was modified to have a binding domain and cleavage site to attach to furin, specific to human lungs, not bats, it was clear to me that whoever modified that virus got the inspiration from those that infected a lot of people like the Spanish flu, hiv, ebola and anthrax which also bind to furin.

I posted a lot in the early days of covid. I read a lot of studies about SARSCOV2 at the time. After reading that the virus was modified to have a binding domain and cleavage site to attach to furin, specific to human lungs, not bats, it was clear to me that whoever modified that virus got the inspiration from those that infected a lot of people like the Spanish flu, hiv, ebola and anthrax which also bind to furin.

 

Sars-Cov-2 was not a zoonotic transfer like the first Sars, or Mers, or Ebola, or H5N1.

 

There is a very clear process of adaption to the new virus host when a virus jumps from one species to a new one. The early cases may be deadly, but they don't jump between the members of the new species very easily. The people who caught Mers from camels and sars from bats, were very ill, some died, but the disease was very hard to catch human to human. All of the human victims had intimate and regular contact with the infected host species. The people who have been infected with the new H5N1 bird flu, have caught it in the main from infected cows, but they have all been workers who were dealing with large quantities of body fluids from the cows and without PPE. Slaughterhouse workers, drenched in infected cow blood, milking parlour workers who have been urinated on by cows while attaching milking equipment. They got big doses of virus in their eyes often. No one has caught it from another human. The thing about Sars-Cov-2 - commonly known as Covid-19 is that as soon as it emerged it was viciously infectious. It was nothing like as likely to ill you as Sars or Mers, but it went through our population like a whirlwind. You only had to be in a room with someone who had it, and you were infected. This is TOTALLY out of line with any new zoonosis. It had been messed with.

 

Another clue that the virus came from a lab and had been engineered, was that even until now, there have been no animal populations identified with the virus that emerged in 2019. It did not exist in the wild in the form we all caught. The Chinese authorities have been hunting for it and have taken many tens of thousands of samples from animals - especially those which are reservoirs for this particular family of corona viruses - bats and civets. There are none. The nearest genetic variant in the wild is found in caves in Hunan, but not THE virus we caught - only antecedents.

 

There is no trace of that virus among farmed populations, wild life traders or animal transporters until late autumn 2019 and they all come back to Wuhan a massive city containing two virology labs. It exists nowhere until it exploded out of that city. There are none of the bats that host corona viruses in that region, and no bats were sold in the wildlife market.

 

What we do have there is the Wuhan Institute of Virology, led by Professor Shi Jingli.

 

Shi Jingli is an eminent vial geneticist. Her work at the WIV has since at least 2016 focused on the study and genetic manipulation of bat corona viruses. The manipulation is/was aimed at the discovery of dangerous viruses which might make the leap from animals to humans. They do this work through a process of what is called Gain of Function - which means manipulating viruses which do not infect humans so that they can infect human tissue. The purpose is pandemic protection - the reasoning being that if they can identify likely potential zoonotic viruses, we can prepare vaccines or treatments or take precautions. It was never meant to be malign.

 

This is done by genetically modifying mice so that they have some of the same proteins as humans - specifically lung proteins, and infecting the mice with versions of the target virus. By selecting the versions of the virus which show most effect at infecting the mice and selectively propagating these down a lot of generations, the virus gradually changes into a more infective one. This is called Serial Passage. This is what was being done at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

 

How do we know this?

 

It is on record. In 2016 Shi Jingli applied for a research grant to do exactly what I have just described. She applied to the Eco Health Alliance of America, a funding body run by Dr Peter Daszak. That in turn was superintended and funded by an organisation run by Dr Anthony Fauci who had a major role in advising Trump during the pandemic. The research grant application is on record. We know exactly what they were hoping to get funding for in around 2016 /2017. The grant was finally refused, but the WIV was not short of other funding partners. The Chinese state also funded them.

 

The WIV used to have an openly available database of the genomes of viruses it held. The nearest genome to Sars-Cov-2 that was known before 2019 was held there. Its code name is RaTG13. This is the nearest antecedent virus to Sars-Cov-2 that we know of and it was held at the HIV and they published its genome on their database.

 

In the late autumn of 2019 the WIV virus database which had been available for access by virologists world wide, suddenly disappeared. You can make your own mind up about why that happened. Then we began to hear that a novel form of pneumonia had broken out in Wuhan. Then we heard it had killed people, but that it was not passing human to human. Then we heard by leaks that it WAS passing human to human and that it had a marked impact on older people or fat people, or those with other problems. Then we heard that it was in our own country - wherever we lived all around the world. Then Chinese government spokesmen said the disease had come into China on foreign sea food. I think they said it came from New Zealand. Recently, the Chinese government said that the virus came from a lab, but it was a foreign lab. Not theirs, not the one in Wuhan that was applying for grants to make bat corona viruses infective to humans. Not the one with thousands of bat viruses in store. Not the one that had the nearest genomic relative to Sars-Cov-2.

 

I will leave the facts to speak for themselves.

 

This was written by me today 28th August from memory, but you can check the details online or better still, but the book Viral by molecular Biologist, Dr Alina Chan and Matt Ridley. This is a photograph of my copy. It is a great, accessible read and written in an open and science led fashion.

 

 

Yujia Alina Chan is a Canadian molecular biologist specializing in gene therapy and cell engineering at the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, where she is a postdoctoral fellow. During the COVID-19 pandemic, she became known for supporting the hypothesis that the SARS-CoV-2 virus escaped from a lab, contrary to the prevailing consensus at the time regarding the origins of the virus.[1][2][3][4]

Edited August 28, 2025Aug 28 by Tony1951

Good question. Would you like not to heat your house when the average temperature in mid summer is a balmy 8 degree Celsius and in winter is well below zero?

 

Ed zero sounds a pretty cool nickname. We are limited by the energy density of our batteries. That will eventually improve over the next few decades.

 

Physics limits the energy density of batteries. It is a matter of how closely attached the outer shell electrons are to the atoms of electrode materials - cathode and anode and how readily the ions can move. We can improve them through clever techniques but not by orders of magnitude.

 

The idea that they will be transformed to store ten or a hundred times as much energy is science fiction.

 

https://chatgpt.com/share/68affe82-6668-8001-96c9-4031773a58ba

Edited August 28, 2025Aug 28 by Tony1951

Sars-Cov-2 was not a zoonotic transfer like the first Sars, or Mers, or Ebola, or H5N1.

 

There is a very clear process of adaption to the new virus host when a virus jumps from one species to a new one. The early cases may be deadly, but they don't jump between the members of the new species very easily. The people who caught Mers from camels and sars from bats, were very ill, some died, but the disease was very hard to catch human to human. All of the human victims had intimate and regular contact with the infected host species. The people who have been infected with the new H5N1 bird flu, have caught it in the main from infected cows, but they have all been workers who were dealing with large quantities of body fluids from the cows and without PPE. Slaughterhouse workers, drenched in infected cow blood, milking parlour workers who have been urinated on by cows while attaching milking equipment. They got big doses of virus in their eyes often. No one has caught it from another human. The thing about Sars-Cov-2 - commonly known as Covid-19 is that as soon as it emerged it was viciously infectious. It was nothing like as likely to ill you as Sars or Mers, but it went through our population like a whirlwind. You only had to be in a room with someone who had it, and you were infected. This is TOTALLY out of line with any new zoonosis. It had been messed with.

 

Another clue that the virus came from a lab and had been engineered, was that even until now, there have been no animal populations identified with the virus that emerged in 2019. It did not exist in the wild in the form we all caught. The Chinese authorities have been hunting for it and have taken many tens of thousands of samples from animals - especially those which are reservoirs for this particular family of corona viruses - bats and civets. There are none. The nearest genetic variant in the wild is found in caves in Hunan, but not THE virus we caught - only antecedents.

 

There is no trace of that virus among farmed populations, wild life traders or animal transporters until late autumn 2019 and they all come back to Wuhan a massive city containing two virology labs. It exists nowhere until it exploded out of that city. There are none of the bats that host corona viruses in that region, and no bats were sold in the wildlife market.

 

What we do have there is the Wuhan Institute of Virology, led by Professor Shi Jingli.

 

Shi Jingli is an eminent vial geneticist. Her work at the WIV has since at least 2016 focused on the study and genetic manipulation of bat corona viruses. The manipulation is/was aimed at the discovery of dangerous viruses which might make the leap from animals to humans. They do this work through a process of what is called Gain of Function - which means manipulating viruses which do not infect humans so that they can infect human tissue. The purpose is pandemic protection - the reasoning being that if they can identify likely potential zoonotic viruses, we can prepare vaccines or treatments or take precautions. It was never meant to be malign.

 

This is done by genetically modifying mice so that they have some of the same proteins as humans - specifically lung proteins, and infecting the mice with versions of the target virus. By selecting the versions of the virus which show most effect at infecting the mice and selectively propagating these down a lot of generations, the virus gradually changes into a more infective one. This is called Serial Passage. This is what was being done at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

 

How do we know this?

 

It is on record. In 2016 Shi Jingli applied for a research grant to do exactly what I have just described. She applied to the Eco Health Alliance of America, a funding body run by Dr Peter Daszak. That in turn was superintended and funded by an organisation run by Dr Anthony Fauci who had a major role in advising Trump during the pandemic. The research grant application is on record. We know exactly what they were hoping to get funding for in around 2016 /2017. The grant was finally refused, but the WIV was not short of other funding partners. The Chinese state also funded them.

 

The WIV used to have an openly available database of the genomes of viruses it held. The nearest genome to Sars-Cov-2 that was known before 2019 was held there. Its code name is RaTG13. This is the nearest antecedent virus to Sars-Cov-2 that we know of and it was held at the HIV and they published its genome on their database.

 

In the late autumn of 2019 the WIV virus database which had been available for access by virologists world wide, suddenly disappeared. You can make your own mind up about why that happened. Then we began to hear that a novel form of pneumonia had broken out in Wuhan. Then we heard it had killed people, but that it was not passing human to human. Then we heard by leaks that it WAS passing human to human and that it had a marked impact on older people or fat people, or those with other problems. Then we heard that it was in our own country - wherever we lived all around the world. Then Chinese government spokesmen said the disease had come into China on foreign sea food. I think they said it came from New Zealand. Recently, the Chinese government said that the virus came from a lab, but it was a foreign lab. Not theirs, not the one in Wuhan that was applying for grants to make bat corona viruses infective to humans. Not the one with thousands of bat viruses in store. Not the one that had the nearest genomic relative to Sars-Cov-2.

 

I will leave the facts to speak for themselves.

 

This was written by me today 28th August from memory, but you can check the details online or better still, but the book Viral by molecular Biologist, Dr Alina Chan and Matt Ridley. This is a photograph of my copy. It is a great, accessible read and written in an open and science led fashion.

 

[ATTACH=full]64151[/ATTACH]

 

Yujia Alina Chan is a Canadian molecular biologist specializing in gene therapy and cell engineering at the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, where she is a postdoctoral fellow. During the COVID-19 pandemic, she became known for supporting the hypothesis that the SARS-CoV-2 virus escaped from a lab, contrary to the prevailing consensus at the time regarding the origins of the virus.[1][2][3][4]

I think that you downplay the long history of the WIV working with the USA. They got funding from the USA for years doing projects that wouldn't be allowed in the USA. Are you saying that the USA did not receive samples of their viruses? If they did, which I think is likely, then who would have interest in using it?

Physics limits the energy density of batteries. It is a matter of how closely attached the outer shell electrons are to the atoms of electrode materials - cathode and anode and how readily the ions can move. We can improve them through clever techniques but not by orders of magnitude.

 

The idea that they will be transformed to store ten or a hundred times as much energy is science fiction.

 

https://chatgpt.com/share/68affe82-6668-8001-96c9-4031773a58ba

I have extended your chatGPT thread. On the horizon, the current limitations are more to do with health protection measures than energy density. ChatGPT estimates that a tsmr would require 100 tonnes of shielding. I think that problem will be solved by the time that TSMRs become a mass product.

I also guided chatGPT to design a possible aircraft for 100 passengers that do not need refuelling (thorium).

Edited August 28, 2025Aug 28 by Woosh

Let's start by clarifying a few key constraints so the design is meaningful:

 

1. **Reactor type:** You mentioned a TSMR (Thorium Small Modular Reactor). That implies high-power density, but also requires shielding, cooling, and safety containment.

2. **Passenger cabin detachment:** The cabin will separate for landing, meaning it must be structurally independent and have its own landing gear and flight-control systems.

3. **Distance between reactor and cabin:** To minimize shielding mass, the reactor should be as far behind the cabin as aerodynamically feasible, while still transmitting thrust efficiently.

4. **Propulsion layout:** Reactor produces heat → drives turbine/electric generator → powers rear-mounted pusher propulsor (either ducted fan or propeller).

 

With that in mind, here’s a conceptual design:

 

---

 

## Aircraft Concept: TSMR-Powered Detachable Cabin

 

### 1. **Fuselage & Cabin**

 

* **Passenger cabin:** Conventional pressurized fuselage, 2–4 m diameter, seating 50–100 passengers depending on scale.

* **Landing system:** Retractable gear built into cabin, allowing independent landing after detachment.

* **Cockpit & control:** Fly-by-wire interface; control surfaces include elevators, rudder, and ailerons. Cabin is aerodynamically clean with standard wings.

 

### 2. **Reactor Pod**

 

* **TSMR placement:** Mounted on a pylon at the rear fuselage or behind the tail, with the thrust line aligned with cabin center-of-mass to minimize torque.

* **Shielding:** Limited to forward-facing protection (toward cabin) using dense composite + tungsten or lead panels; rear and lateral shielding can be minimal. Distance (\~10–15 m) from cabin allows significant reduction in shielding mass.

* **Reactor containment & cooling:** Encased in robust pressure vessel with passive safety systems. Air-cooled or liquid-cooled loop feeding the power turbine.

 

### 3. **Propulsion**

 

* **Pusher configuration:** Rear-mounted propeller or ducted fan driven by the turbine or generator. Could be electric motor powered via high-voltage bus from the TSMR.

* **Thrust transmission:** Either direct mechanical drive shaft (simpler, heavier) or electric drive (more flexible, easier to decouple cabin).

 

### 4. **Connection Between Reactor Pod and Cabin**

 

* **Primary role:** Support thrust and minor electrical/actuation lines.

* **Decoupling:** Cabin separates via a robust mechanical release system; propulsion pod continues as a standalone unit.

* **Aerodynamics:** Fairing covers the gap during flight to reduce drag; detachable lines retract automatically.

 

### 5. **Flight & Safety Considerations**

 

* **TSMR safety:** Emergency shutdown system, containment integrity, radiation monitoring.

* **Separation:** Cabin must be able to glide or use small auxiliary engines for landing if propulsion pod fails.

* **Emergency shielding:** Cabin has local minimal shielding in case of minor radiation leak during flight.

 

### 6. **Aerodynamics**

 

* **Rear pod fairing:** Streamlined to reduce drag from long tail.

* **Wing placement:** Mid-fuselage to rear-wing configuration to balance pusher thrust.

* **Control surfaces:** Conventional elevators and rudders; possible canard surfaces on cabin for extra pitch authority after detachment.

 

---

 

This configuration maximizes **distance from passengers to reactor**, keeps shielding mass manageable, and allows the **cabin to detach safely**.

 

I can draw a **schematic layout showing the cabin, TSMR pod, pusher propulsor, and separation points** to make this clearer. Do you want me to generate that diagram?

 

I will have to switch to my account to push ChatGPT further but I am sure you can see where I am going with this. The TSMR is just a primary battery,

USD 30,700 for this EV which drives itself from factory to the dock, then onto the ship!

Austria accepts s h a r I a law, what?!

Germany going down fast apparently..

Now Switzerland, of all countries, is falling ?

Koch's Postulates

Try educating yourselves people.

Even John agreed, until he was got at?

"The bug is real, we can't prove it, we can't test for it, you won't know you have it, but just keep giving us billions, and one day we will, pinky promise".

We're still waiting.. :-/

Oh, and by the way..

US has withdrawn All mRNA medikashuns!

USD 30,700 for this EV which drives itself from factory to the dock, then onto the ship!

"The XPENG G6 starts at €42,000 for the Standard Range model and goes up to €49,440 for the Long Range model, including grants and incentives. The Performance model is expected to be available later in 2025. https://duckduckgo.com/?"q=how+much+is+an+xpeng+in+ireland&ia=web&assist=true

 

Does that include VRT at 50%, VAT at 23%, and import duty at 10%???

Low roof means little storage inside, sUtilityv incompatible with coupe shape.

Half interior taken up with a centre console, is that the battery?

So if it delivers itself, there is No Delivery Charge?

By air presumably!

The Xpeng P7 is a big car.

Dimensions for the New Xpeng P7 (2025 Model)

Length: 5,017 mm

Width: 1,970 mm

Height: 1,427 mm

Wheelbase: 3,008 mm

 

Number of Seats: 5-seat configuration for drivers and passengers.

Front Seats: Feature heating and ventilation for added comfort.

Luxury Materials: Available with premium Nappa leather or a leatherette finish.

Design: A stylish, low-drag design complements the comfortable interior.

https://ev-database.org/car/1823/XPENG-P7-Wing-Edition#google_vignette