Re: Bollocks A picture speaks 1000 words:
Unless I write one then I cannot point you to such a paper. I should also state that I am not suggesting that Lawson is discredited... just that its thinking is not deep enough inside the box because the big hammer guys are simultaneously working on the 'three dimensions' to that box, Energy, Density, Time, because they are fixated on Lawson rather than trying to isolate and specifically control any one particular 'variable' in order to leverage a possible advantage...Just building bigger piles of wood in the expectation that things are going to spontaneously combust and drive the steam engine hung off the back of it?
Of course if I were to write such a paper and I will state all I could do is 'postulate' because I do not have the required knowledge to fully argue my case... as in... Blah, Blah, Blah and by the way here is one that is working, unlike your pieces of big hammer shit so go suck on that one. I'd be pilloried, excommunicated and burned at the stake before the status quo got back to building bigger Big Physics hammers.
Still since you appear to be interested and prepared to lend an ear... Assuming I have not misunderstood The Lawson Criterion then which is the important part of Energy, Density, Time that does not nominally involve probability and is therefore utterly, completely and thoroughly wasted by the other two according to some huge combined power loss law as identified by Lawson, and others, in their search for a 'self sustaining' reaction?