Lawaranceville E-Newsletter

ladajo · Post by **ladajo** » Thu Jan 13, 2011 1:43 pm

The clock continues to tick, and not a peep from EMC2. I still think if they play this wrong, they will get undermined and forgotten.

Giorgio · Post by **Giorgio** » Thu Jan 13, 2011 2:39 pm

I completely agree.
Unless they are really obtaining incredible results they are playing this in the wrong way.

Kudos to LPP guys. Each report is bringing more attention to their work.

kurt9 · Post by **kurt9** » Thu Jan 13, 2011 5:25 pm

Its encouraging that a variety of approaches are being pursued. LLP, EMC2, Tri-Alpha, and General Fusion. Maybe none of them will work. Maybe all of them will work and the marketplace will consist of competitive technologies. I still think that Tri-Alpha has the best chance of working, if aneutronic fusion is possible.

Brian H · Post by **Brian H** » Thu Jan 13, 2011 8:08 pm

kurt9 wrote:Its encouraging that a variety of approaches are being pursued. LLP, EMC2, Tri-Alpha, and General Fusion. Maybe none of them will work. Maybe all of them will work and the marketplace will consist of competitive technologies. I still think that Tri-Alpha has the best chance of working, if aneutronic fusion is possible.

LPP, pliz!
Do you have any new info re TriAlpha? Are you still trying to apply for a job with them?

Ivy Matt · Post by **Ivy Matt** » Fri Jan 14, 2011 12:46 am

ladajo wrote:The clock continues to tick, and not a peep from EMC2. I still think if they play this wrong, they will get undermined and forgotten.

Results matter first. Then publicity. Right now LPP's results are "pB11 fusion looks promising". It's something, but they'll have to wait until about March to start breaking new ground. We don't know what results EMC2 has and when they're going to release them, but they have a little bit of breathing room...assuming their testing went well.

Of course, Murphy's law may strike again for both companies, but I'm hoping not.

Brian H · Post by **Brian H** » Fri Jan 14, 2011 12:56 am

Ivy Matt wrote: Results matter first. Then publicity. Right now LPP's results are "pB11 fusion looks promising". It's something, but they'll have to wait until about March to start breaking new ground. We don't know what results EMC2 has and when they're going to release them, but they have a little bit of breathing room...assuming their testing went well.

Of course, Murphy's law may strike again for both companies, but I'm hoping not.

This will be about the 3rd 3-month detour for hardware upgrade/development/fixes in the last year or so for LPP! I can well imagine EMC2 having even more drastic issues, since it is trying for sustained steady-state operation. The Devil's Details are making themselves known and felt.

ladajo · Post by **ladajo** » Fri Jan 14, 2011 2:23 am

What are you talking about re EMC2? They are most certainly not going for "sustained steady state".
WB8 is a .8T pulsed six coil scale validation test article.
WB8.1 will be a (if approved) pB&J validation test article.

Odds are LPP will get to try pB&J first. EMC2 is a year out at best.

Professor Science · Post by **Professor Science** » Fri Jan 14, 2011 4:28 am

From what i gather the "steady state" feature of EMC2's approach is that while on our time scales, the miliseconds of operation is definitely a pulse, but for a nucleus flying at thousands of electron volts of kinetic energy, miliseconds is a very long time. The multiple time scales of plasmas is important to consider.

kurt9 · Post by **kurt9** » Fri Jan 14, 2011 4:54 am

Brian H wrote:
kurt9 wrote:Its encouraging that a variety of approaches are being pursued. LLP, EMC2, Tri-Alpha, and General Fusion. Maybe none of them will work. Maybe all of them will work and the marketplace will consist of competitive technologies. I still think that Tri-Alpha has the best chance of working, if aneutronic fusion is possible.
LPP, pliz!
Do you have any new info re TriAlpha? Are you still trying to apply for a job with them?

I applied, but they told me they had already hired a control system guy (PLC-based controls). They were still looking for someone to do LabView programming (presumably for data logging applications in experimental runs). This all tells me they are definitely "bending metal", as they would not hire these people unless they are building a test chamber and system.

Other than that, I don't know anything else about their current activities.

icarus · Post by **icarus** » Fri Jan 14, 2011 11:24 am

ladajo suggests:

... still think if they play this wrong, they will get undermined and forgotten.

Hmmmm, hasn't that already happened somewhat?

The biggest risk of going to ground so publicly is that they lost any possible wider interest in the project meager as it was and now problems/obstacles quickly become insurmountable in the self-enforced isolation from the wider scientific community of knowledge.

Bottom line, if they hit a hitch, they're on their own and noone else could know .... or even care less.

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Fri Jan 14, 2011 12:19 pm

icarus wrote:ladajo suggests:

... still think if they play this wrong, they will get undermined and forgotten.
Hmmmm, hasn't that already happened somewhat?

The biggest risk of going to ground so publicly is that they lost any possible wider interest in the project meager as it was and now problems/obstacles quickly become insurmountable in the self-enforced isolation from the wider scientific community of knowledge.

Bottom line, if they hit a hitch, they're on their own and noone else could know .... or even care less.

What does it matter FOR NOW? As long as they can go forward with Navy money they don't need further public support.

icarus · Post by **icarus** » Fri Jan 14, 2011 8:11 pm

What does it matter FOR NOW? As long as they can go forward with Navy money they don't need further public support.

Assuming they are "going forward" .... but hey who cares anymore, really, the world moves on. They could struggle with some basic problems for years and we would never know? For most practical purposes, a secret project is a dead project UNLESS it is successful and relevant when it becomes public, and even then ... big risk, the so what basket looms large imo.

hanelyp · Post by **hanelyp** » Sat Jan 15, 2011 3:01 am

ladajo wrote:The clock continues to tick, and not a peep from EMC2. I still think if they play this wrong, they will get undermined and forgotten.

Last I heard EMC2 is under a legal constraint that they need approval to make a public statement about their work for hire. Even if they get such approval, they do well to double check their facts before speaking to avoid embarrassing themselves.

Brian H · Post by **Brian H** » Sat Jan 15, 2011 6:28 am

Just accepted, in the peer-reviewed Journal of Fusion Energy. The article, titled "Theory and experimental program for p-B11 Fusion with the Dense Plasma Focus," was authored by LPP lead scientist Eric J. Lerner and LPP senior scientists Dr. S. Krupakar Murali and Dr. Abdelmoula Haboub.

ladajo · Post by **ladajo** » Sat Jan 15, 2011 1:46 pm

hanelyp wrote:
ladajo wrote:The clock continues to tick, and not a peep from EMC2. I still think if they play this wrong, they will get undermined and forgotten.
Last I heard EMC2 is under a legal constraint that they need approval to make a public statement about their work for hire. Even if they get such approval, they do well to double check their facts before speaking to avoid embarrassing themselves.

Actually, according to the navy, when given the opportunity to release info, EMC2 opted out citing proprietary. Which has since become the denial of release them by all parties. Not a gag order.
The source of their choice is the main debate. But it was EMC2's choice to make.

Talk-Polywell.org

Lawaranceville E-Newsletter

Peer-Rev'e Paper from LPP