Talk-Polywell.org

As Principal Grinch here, even I would say it says very little.

If one were to really want to stretch out the infinitely thin, then perhaps you might posit that the experiment has gone beyond 'theory' and it is now an experiment dominated by experimental observations. Theorising can only do so much, and if you get to the point where it is behaving in a way [or not!!] where theory no longer helps comprehension, then it is like the good ol' days of science - get some bl**dy results first before powerpointing new inventions out of thin air!!!!

Maybe Park is blowing Ni dust into the core of the machine. Would it load with protons?

At any rate, it' *is* a wierd machine, lots of ports, and they're most likely getting information never before seen. We're one dimensional, thinking "scaling", whereas they're getting "nuanced" results.

I'm no longer interested in "Scaling", because if it scaled as expected (hoped), then I'm pretty sure you wouldn't be able to peel Nebel off the thing.

all this rumour making me a bit edgy.

is there any way we can definitively ascertain:

a) whether Polywell project is canned (or still carrying on in its usual silent manner)
b) whether Rick Nebel is still on the project (or not).

Anyone tried to contact him lately to find out?

If he is now a consultant, vs. a federal employee, that gives him much more latitude to negotiate commercial teaming arrangements.

Well, I guess you will all have to revise your opinions of why and how Rick Nebel is no longer associated with EMC2.

The 1Q/2011 recovery.gov report states:

"As of 1Q/2011, the WB-8 device operates as designed and it is generating positive results. EMC2 is planning to conduct comprehensive experiments on WB-8 in the next 9-12 months based on the current contract funding schedule."

I make of this that they ARE behind schedule, and have NOT received all funding from the Recovery Act, and that we WILL see another report.

I also am failing to supress an uncontrolled expression of glee.

"Positive results". That sounds...positive. Not being a scientist, though, I'm not entirely sure what that means. Does it mean, "results are meeting, nearly meeting, or exceeding our expectations", or does it just mean, "we're learning new things" (which, granted, is much better than nothing)?

I would have interpreted "based on the current contract funding schedule" to mean that they're still on schedule, and will be going forward with WB-8.1 from October this year to October 2012, but I grant that the wording doesn't specifically say that. Does it mean that they'll be dipping into the WB-8.1 funds in order to continue experimentation with WB-8?

More Recovery.gov reports are always welcome, but it looks like it may be a while yet before the public hears anything specific.

EDIT: I just noticed the "Final Project Report Submitted" status is still "No".

I take it as it is written:
WB8 is operating as design, and producing positive results.

That means it is at a minimum meeting expectations as established in the design criteria and performance modeling. So my read is that given they should now have enough data to compare against some level of THEIR models for scaling, it is at least meeting those models.

My read: So far so good, and scaling is being proven.

This is really good news.

That would be very good news, at least for a deuterium-fueled WB-D. Not-so-good news for ITER. I wonder how clear evidence of success on the deuterium front would affect the schedule for WB-8.1. I get the feeling EMC2 might want to put it on the back burner in the rush to get out a working WB-D with deuterium fuel. Which would be entirely understandable.

But I'm still curious to hear Chris's (and others') take on this.

Yea! I see I am not the first to see this, but not the last! I will interpret this in an opposite way to Chris (my favorite Grinch:) ), that WB8 is a success! They still have money in the project for more testing and will continue to test.

"As of 1Q/2011, the WB-8 device operates as designed and it is generating positive results. EMC2 is planning to conduct comprehensive experiments on WB-8 in the next 9-12 months based on the current contract funding schedule."

Cheers!

Where is the link to that quote?
Anyway, if it is indeed so, then I will revise my earlier assessment from "I am pretty sure that it failed" back to "I may be dammed if I know"

Oh, the link! How thoughtless of us. For all you know we could be discussing the voices we're hearing in our heads. Here it is: link

Ok, that is interesting, though does not rally say much. Still, at least we know they are still in the game.

I think it says a lot. Specifically, WB8 is doing what we thought it would do.
IAW with the contract objectives, that is significant.
The only part that is unclear remains the timeline. 9-12 months testing. that means they are thinking to run it until December to March-ish. Fine by me. That tends to fit with what I have been saying about being behind and its potential ramifications on the timeline.

I will step out on a limb here and say I feel vindicated to some degree.

It never does say much. It merely provides fuel for endless speculation on these forums. Still, it's nice to see some progress beyond "project under construction" or "first plasma".

While Chris is still asleep (presumably), I'll steal his thunder and note that we still haven't seen any numbers. Not that I'm optimistic about seeing numbers, at least for some months. I also don't think EMC2 is about to break their silence now, just because they've reached an old and somewhat arbitrary deadline. Ah, well.

Fuel for speculation: assuming EMC2 decides to go ahead and build a 100MW Polywell device in the not-too-distant future, is their current facility in San Diego sufficient for that, or would they have to relocate again? Was WB-D the reason they relocated in the first place? Also, if WB-7 to WB-8 goes well, does that necessarily indicate that WB-8 to WB-D would also go well? (That may be better as a question for the Theory forum.) I assume, but it might bear repeating, that WB-8 is not expected to be a net power device.

I'm about ready to feel optimistic, but this is fusion, after all.

ladajo wrote:Well, I guess you will all have to revise your opinions of why and how Rick Nebel is no longer associated with EMC2.

The 1Q/2011 recovery.gov report states:

"As of 1Q/2011, the WB-8 device operates as designed and it is generating positive results. EMC2 is planning to conduct comprehensive experiments on WB-8 in the next 9-12 months based on the current contract funding schedule."

I make of this that they ARE behind schedule, and have NOT received all funding from the Recovery Act, and that we WILL see another report.

I also am failing to supress an uncontrolled expression of glee. :D

I can let the cat out of the bag now. Procurement difficulties rather than experiment gone bad.