Honestly, I don't think that changes the answer much. If your design were the subject of a peer-reviewed paper in respected journals, that would be much more likely to get it attention in the scientific community than what you've done thus far.
That's the kind of step that starts to make it possible for other people—beyond those you can easily personally contact—to go over your design, understand the theory behind it, and either believe it will work (and thus possibly help move it toward prototype stage), or believe it will not (and likely tell you why, with sources).
I don't claim to know much about nuclear fusion, or the people who work on it, but my impression is that they tend more toward the academic side of things than the industrial. If that's the case, peer-reviewed scientific papers laying out what you've got and why you think it'll work are, IMO, much more likely to get their interest than a random person reaching out to them with a design (even if that design does seem sound) or a patent.
Either way, best of luck. I certainly agree that if you do have a viable alternative design, getting it out there is one of the more important endeavors of the day.
Thank you. I do agree that peer review must be done, but it's almost too simple.
None of the parts of my proposed prototype are very interesting or controversial. I'm not using extreme magnetic fields, or exotic materials or new physics. Nothing about the device requires more than highschool physics and geometry to understand.
With a new arrangement, this novel solution to contain and collide ions falls out.
It's a gedanken that just needs to be built because the basic idea is less involved than some homework I've had.
Here's the main idea in the style of a highschool homework assignment:
Draw a point on a piece of paper. How many unique circles you can draw that pass through that point?
Each of those circles represents the cyclotron trajectory of a single deuterium ion in my device.
There's basically nothing to write about until an experiment is built.
That's the kind of step that starts to make it possible for other people—beyond those you can easily personally contact—to go over your design, understand the theory behind it, and either believe it will work (and thus possibly help move it toward prototype stage), or believe it will not (and likely tell you why, with sources).
I don't claim to know much about nuclear fusion, or the people who work on it, but my impression is that they tend more toward the academic side of things than the industrial. If that's the case, peer-reviewed scientific papers laying out what you've got and why you think it'll work are, IMO, much more likely to get their interest than a random person reaching out to them with a design (even if that design does seem sound) or a patent.
Either way, best of luck. I certainly agree that if you do have a viable alternative design, getting it out there is one of the more important endeavors of the day.