Polywell FOIA

[chrismb]

An open forum would only help if the press and vested interests didn't turn it into a zoo.

Yeah. Just like Focus Fusion, Tri-Alpha and General Fusion. I mean, blimey, the press has almost caused their total inability to operate due to the blinding pressure and interest on them!! CLearly, EMC2 has taken a good long look at other fusion ventures and though, 'gee, in every case the press has just caused so much grief that the pressure was totally unbearable and their scrutiny produced really BAD results'. Their evidence base for this conclusion is simply overwhelming!

[KitemanSA]

Can you please give a definition of 'bozo' and how the characteristics of this argument relate to it?

Bozo, as in "Bozo the Clown". You keep trotting out your un-funny (nasty) comedy routine to see if someone laughs. Well, bozo, it ain't funny. It is boring and verging on annoying.

Dr, N. and co. have good reasons to remain quiet, reasons that have nothing to do with the dishonesty you and the other bozo keep implying, reasons you've been told about before. Yet here you are again implying all sorts of nefarious motives.

Bozo, you ain't funny. Please stop.

[KitemanSA]

An open forum would only help if the press and vested interests didn't turn it into a zoo.

Yeah. Just like Focus Fusion, Tri-Alpha and General Fusion. I mean, blimey, the press has almost caused their total inability to operate due to the blinding pressure and interest on them!! CLearly, EMC2 has taken a good long look at other fusion ventures and though, 'gee, in every case the press has just caused so much grief that the pressure was totally unbearable and their scrutiny produced really BAD results'. Their evidence base for this conclusion is simply overwhelming!

Hey bozo. What are the fundamental differences between those three companies and EMC2? If you can figure that out and are honest with yourself, you will understand the reason for the news moritorium. And it has nothing to do with the nefarious motives you keep promoting.

Gee I wish we had real info to gnaw on rather than the clown's rantings!

I also wish we would decide to do some of our own work on the technology rather than waiting for the Navy to release EMC2 from the moritorium.

=====================

Does anyone have a fusor set-up that would hold a polywell about the size (though not the magnetic power) of WB6? I am envisioning about the same major radius but fewer windings, maybe cryo-cooled.

Anyone have one or know someone who does?

[chrismb]

Hey bozo.

Ah! That sweet ring of your ad hominem attacks that I have not heard for sooo long... not since the page before last!..

[chrismb]

Dr, N. and co. have good reasons to remain quiet, reasons that have nothing to do with the dishonesty you and the other bozo keep implying, reasons you've been told about before. Yet here you are again implying all sorts of nefarious motives. Bozo, you ain't funny. Please stop.

A) I am Bozo. If there is to be a Bozo, then I am the Bozo, and no other. The other bozo must be a fake.

B) This sounds like you, therefore, know that the reasons you state are the reasons they are quiet. There I was thinking that you were only speculating. How ignorant of me. Please, do illuminate us. When did Nebel get in touch with you to explain these were the reasons for his silence?

C) I have NEVER implied dishonesty. I have implied a lack of integrity due to the use of tax payers money for the exclusive profitable motives of the person receiving said tax payers money.

Go ask some tax payers this question; "Hey, are you happy that your money is being used to fund research that someone else is going to make profit for themselves out of?".... Let me know how you get on. You seem to constantly evade this point. I have never implied dishonest, I have stated that this is immoral. As far as I understand it, the Founding Fathers of the US were of the same opinion. Address this point, if you think you are up to it.

[TallDave]

Note that the "Theory" and "Design" sections of Talk-Polywell have ground to an unceremonious halt since the freeze on info.

I suppose you could (will) argue that they weren't possibly providing anything that could ever be useful to the success of a Polywell

Meh, there's been plenty of discussion of PW theory and designs. Not as much or as fruitful as we might have with more access to data, but enough to flesh out the theory a bit.

But the forums can't provide empirical data on the loss scaling with B, etc. That's what PW really needs right now, and that requires $$. The source of those $$ is notoriously fickle, others are competing wtih PW for those $$, those others dominate the field, and they are happy to publicly explain why PW won't work whenever the subject is raised (as they did in the Famulus article).

The Focus Fusion model is shameless overpromising hucksterism. Does anyone really think they're going to achieve net power in the next four months? Who believes they'll even get detectable p-B11 fusion in 2010? Their timeline is a bad joke.

http://focusfusion.org/index.php/site/a ... _timeline/

Notice the FRC boys at Tri-Alpha haven't exactly been scheduling a lot of PR events.

[TallDave]

Go ask some tax payers this question; "Hey, are you happy that your money is being used to fund research that someone else is going to make profit for themselves out of?".... Let me know how you get on. You seem to constantly evade this point. I have never implied dishonest, I have stated that this is immoral

A very silly argument. Much of the basic research underlying IT advances has been funded by taxpayers, as is also the case for much of the medical innovation of the last half-century. The understanding has always been that private companies will commercialize that knowledge, often under exclusive agreements.

[Giorgio]

The Focus Fusion model is shameless overpromising hucksterism. Does anyone really think they're going to achieve net power in the next four months? Who believes they'll even get detectable p-B11 fusion in 2010? Their timeline is a bad joke.

I guess we will know while they proceed.

For sure if they made those affirmations it means that they are confident at the best of their knowledge that they can reach it and if they find something unexpected that will push back the timeline I believe they will say so and explain in details. That might be argument of interesting discussions also for our Theory section.


Edited to fix typos.

[CaptainBeowulf]

I also wish we would decide to do some of our own work on the technology rather than waiting for the Navy to release EMC2 from the moritorium.

I applaud Famulus' effort, but really that's about as much as can be expected from amateur-level funding.

Anyone have $8-12 million to build our own versions of WB-7 and WB-8?

Yeah, I know MSimon talked about raising money and about MRI magnets, surplus NASA vacuum chambers and stuff. But the thing is, even if we got the money together and did our own project, we probably wouldn't get it set up before Nebel's two years are up. So, the most efficient course of action right now is to wait and see what they come up with.

If they say nothing when the time they allotted themselves is up, then I expect some people will likely pound them with FOIAs.

If all the FOIAs are blocked, then I could see reason in people doing the experiment themselves... of course, interest may wane because many people may conclude that it's a dead end. However, if EMC2 gets more funding but keeps saying nothing, then it could make sense for people to get together to try it out.

[chrismb]

A very silly argument. Much of the basic research underlying IT advances has been funded by taxpayers

..Nice to see you making a silly argument back, then, because if all of this 'worked like a top' and all the other 'non-specific statements' are real, then the basic research is done and now it's an engineering problem.

Or put it another way, how can EMC2 claim proprietary reasons for 'basic research'?

I do not object to tax payers funding basic research, but it is basic research from which everyone prospers and can take advantage. In the examples you gave, presumably you are saying that only one company was able to profit from these tax-funded research activities and that competition was supressed? Can you please give some examples of where tax-funded 'basic research' was done for a sole-company's benefit and the results NOT circulated??? Which IT company was it that benefitted, then, because that is what you have just inferred, that there is only one IT company that benefitted?

[ladajo]

The next step should not be another small scale test article. If EMC2 gets more funding its probably going to be for DEMO. IMO the only other intermediate steps they may look at are engineering type issues: vacuum system management, Magrid controls, fuel injection controls sensing and feedback designs, etc. It seems that the balance of fuel verses waste gas is going to be important for sustained operation, balanced against the Magrid currents and electron injection (at least according to the Aussies).

As I rattle around ways ahead in my mind, the only other real feasible small test article device justification might be a WB9 with higher again B-Field and built for extended runs vice pulse ops. This would give a chance to explore the system dynamics (at sub net power), but with substantially less cost than a full up plant. I know Bussard and Nebel both made arguments to just go for the whole enchilada, but I have to wonder if the system control regime and dynamics are understood well enough for a full scale net power device yet. Hard tellin, not knowin.

I guess April/March are going to be exciting or not. Not much in between I reckon. As I recall the last time we tabled chances of success for Polywell it was pretty low by most commentors. I wonder where the aggregate stands now? Up, down, or the same?

[Betruger]

A very silly argument. Much of the basic research underlying IT advances has been funded by taxpayers

..Nice to see you making a silly argument back, then, because if all of this 'worked like a top' and all the other 'non-specific statements' are real, then the basic research is done and now it's an engineering problem.

Scaling and transport aren't proven yet. You know that.

Or put it another way, how can EMC2 claim proprietary reasons for 'basic research'?

edit- You mean there's no way for a discrete solution that makes something that was till then "only plausible", practical; while being more than basic physics which you can't patent? And again this could just be a device to keep things quiet. Again I'm agnostic, but passing yourself off as "that old eccentric" is one of the oldest tricks in the book.

I do not object to tax payers funding basic research, but it is basic research from which everyone prospers and can take advantage.

Working fusion doesn't benefit them, how? If there was foul play you can lead the effort to make EMC2 pay their dues, and there shouldn't be a lack of supporters.

[chrismb]

Can you please give some examples of where tax-funded 'basic research' was done for a sole-company's benefit and the results NOT circulated?

[Betruger]

I can't think of any and I don't think there's more than some exceptions to that rule.

Regardless, you can't justify an FOIA right now as opposed to in a year or two. The results might be circulated later.

[KitemanSA]

B) This sounds like you, therefore, know that the reasons you state are the reasons they are quiet. There I was thinking that you were only speculating. How ignorant of me. Please, do illuminate us. When did Nebel get in touch with you to explain these were the reasons for his silence?

I do know, but I am not allowed to talk about it! . Maybe if you contacted them directly and agreed to keep your mouth shut, they would talk to you too. Though by your activities here, I would tend to question the wisdom of that.

C) I have NEVER implied dishonesty. I have implied a lack of integrity due to the use of tax payers money for the exclusive profitable motives of the person receiving said tax payers money.

Gee, can you say "splitting hairs"?

Go ask some tax payers this question; "Hey, are you happy that your money is being used to fund research that someone else is going to make profit for themselves out of?".... Let me know how you get on. You seem to constantly evade this point. I have never implied dishonest, I have stated that this is immoral. As far as I understand it, the Founding Fathers of the US were of the same opinion. Address this point, if you think you are up to it.

Ok, I will, but not with your loaded question as it doesn't reflect the reality of the situation. I will word the question more like "Do you object to the military funding research on proprietary technologies for its own purposes that will allow the company owning the technology and doing the research to market the results to the public and thereby make a profit on?"
The Military REGULARLY and legally pays companies to develop their technologies into products that are useful to the Navy while recognizing that said technology is the property of the company and they are free to make as much money off it in the private sector as they can. There is a large program specifically for that purpose. It is called the SBIR (Small Business Innovative Research) program. Is everyone in that program "immoral"? If you think so, my response is "PREPOSTEROUS!" Your objection winnows down to a spoiled child saying "I want it, I want it, I want it, waaaaaa you're mean!" Well, grow up dude. Your wants are not the guiding force in the universe.