Rick Nebel comment

Point out news stories, on the net or in mainstream media, related to polywell fusion.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

mad_derek
Posts: 46
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 4:08 am
Location: UK (mostly)

Postby mad_derek » Thu Mar 25, 2010 7:24 pm

chrismb wrote:
mad_derek wrote:
TallDave wrote:You kids play nice now.


Yep, I was thinking along the same lines ... a lot of threads seem to be going that way at the moment!

What can you expect if the, supposed, "adults" refuse to participate in an adult capacity.

It is a joke to pretend that all possible information about these tests is commercially confidential. Plasma density/size, neutron counts, drive voltage - these are the only things we really want to hear about and they AREN'T commercially confidential-type pieces of information.


OK - my comment was supposed to cool things down. Should have known better from my experience when the kids were younger.

You are correct, all possible information cannot be commercially sensitive. Unfortunately any positive information IS commercially sensitive ...
Insanity Rules!

Robthebob
Posts: 382
Joined: Mon Jun 23, 2008 11:12 pm
Location: Auburn, Alabama

Postby Robthebob » Thu Mar 25, 2010 7:41 pm

MSimon wrote:
Robthebob wrote:what do you guys think is the most probably amount of time for WB8 to once and for all confirm or deny if polywell works or not?

I'm just planning for grad school, need to know these things.


My best guess is 12 to 18 months.


Well good, that's about when i graduate from college, it would be nice if we got to know a little bit sooner.


chrismb wrote:
Robthebob wrote:what do you guys think is the most probably amount of time for WB8 to once and for all confirm or deny if polywell works or not?

200,000 years.

It'll never be proven 'cos it won't work. "The cult of Polywell" will exist until we leave the planet. After that, "we" will then have total faith in whatever provided that energy source for propulsion, and finally the CoP will be discredited as a religion.


Sigh, get out of here, Chrismb. I'm still going into fusion after college, and I will figure out what I should go after if polywell doesnt work. It's not like I'm some complete believer. I mean there's always going to be people who believe something whole-heartedly regardless of what that something is. Just stop, I dont know why you're here picking fights and thinking we're all some idol worshipers or something. I mean having science based debates and opinions, that's great, but why are you so disapproving of our interest (especially when none of us have experimental data)?

The reason why they went ahead with the experiment is because, stated by Dr. Bussard, the amount of money to build cores and run experiments is cheaper than modeling. So they went ahead with that, great, wonderful. I mean it seems like none of us have the tech and expertise background in polywell to say that it will work or it will not work. There may only be 3 people in the world that have that background, 1 passed away, 2 is working at emc2. Award money and records can probably allow us to infer what's going on without the data. But seriously tho, how the crap are you so confident that it won't work? Cus the most knowledgable proponents of polywell will not say that it will definitely work, that's just so amazing.

Seriously, bring it down a notch. We're all reasonable people, if it doesnt work, we may want to see the data and talk to Dr. N ourselves, but other than that, if it doesnt work, it doesnt work. Sure, we would be disappointed, but we'll move on with our lives. I mean how did we have a 10+ page long thread about if it's mega watts or milli watts, and yes, it's mega watts, freaking get out of here.
Throwing my life away for this whole Fusion mess.

chrismb
Posts: 3161
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 6:00 pm

Postby chrismb » Thu Mar 25, 2010 7:51 pm

Robthebob wrote:
chrismb wrote:
Robthebob wrote:what do you guys think is the most probably amount of time for WB8 to once and for all confirm or deny if polywell works or not?
200,000 years.
Sigh, get out of here, Chrismb.

You ask what I think. You get what I think. If you don't want to know, don't ask. Or say "...except chrismb...". I won't get offended, I'll just be amused.

mad_derek
Posts: 46
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 4:08 am
Location: UK (mostly)

Postby mad_derek » Thu Mar 25, 2010 8:08 pm

chrismb wrote:
Robthebob wrote:
chrismb wrote:
Robthebob wrote:what do you guys think is the most probably amount of time for WB8 to once and for all confirm or deny if polywell works or not?
200,000 years.
Sigh, get out of here, Chrismb.

You ask what I think. You get what I think. If you don't want to know, don't ask. Or say "...except chrismb...". I won't get offended, I'll just be amused.

Again Chris is correct ... you don't get anywhere by shoving the opposition out of windows. Except, perhaps, a lot of people scared of windows ... It probably won't work - but it just might. Chris is, after all, the guy who said no plasma experiment had performed as expected.
Insanity Rules!

Robthebob
Posts: 382
Joined: Mon Jun 23, 2008 11:12 pm
Location: Auburn, Alabama

Postby Robthebob » Thu Mar 25, 2010 8:56 pm

I didnt ask chrismb what he thought the time line would be. He doesnt know Dr. N well enough to give a good estimate. I was asking people like msimon or Tom Ligon. It's pretty much common sense that a question is usually addressed to people that can answer it, not people that cant answer it.

I dont really ever ask chrismb anything. If I wanted scientific opposition, I would go talk to Art. We've had, as I said before, 10+ page threads about whether they meant megawatts or milliwatts, do you think I would ever ask chrismb anything at all, ever?

IMHO, chrismb isnt really an opposition. Dismissing such posters is extremely easy.

Right now, we know that there were some nice progress, the step to completely verify or deny polywell is in progress, and I just want to know how long it may take for this current step to finish.

I dont want to know that chrismb thinks we're just a bunch of idol worshipers, because we're not.
Throwing my life away for this whole Fusion mess.

mad_derek
Posts: 46
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 4:08 am
Location: UK (mostly)

Postby mad_derek » Thu Mar 25, 2010 9:06 pm

Robthebob wrote:I didnt ask chrismb what he thought the time line would be. He doesnt know Dr. N well enough to give a good estimate. I was asking people like msimon or Tom Ligon. It's pretty much common sense that a question is usually addressed to people that can answer it, not people that cant answer it.

I dont really ever ask chrismb anything. If I wanted scientific opposition, I would go talk to Art. We've had, as I said before, 10+ page threads about whether they meant megawatts or milliwatts, do you think I would ever ask chrismb anything at all, ever?

IMHO, chrismb isnt really an opposition. Dismissing such posters is extremely easy.

Right now, we know that there were some nice progress, the step to completely verify or deny polywell is in progress, and I just want to know how long it may take for this current step to finish.

I dont want to know that chrismb thinks we're just a bunch of idol worshipers, because we're not.


I don't think I deserve that. If it wasn't aimed at me I apologise. Chris is a severe sceptic (at the least). All that I was trying to point out was that flaming people who disagreed with a particular view was, at best, counterproductive and, at worst, stupid...
Insanity Rules!

Betruger
Posts: 2250
Joined: Tue May 06, 2008 11:54 am

Postby Betruger » Thu Mar 25, 2010 10:02 pm

chrismb wrote:I wasn't trying to be a skeptic. I've gone from skepticism to trying to play the role of patronising cynic

Attitude check
since nebel's blanket refusal to allow any information to be released.

What do you know? Do you know what Dr Nebel knows? Your rhetoric is not only distasteful but doesn't even have any factual basis. Just resent that someone's not doing what you want them to do.
Perhaps I am not being sufficiently patronising, or cynical, for you to notice. Should I try harder?
By all means keep proving how disproportionately you can exagerate your arguments and delivery when they didn't get any traction when you best made them - concisely and politely.
Oh, yeah! Real neck-sticking-out! If we hear nothing after 2 years then half of the guys here will simply say "Ah! We've heard nothing after 2 years, which means Nebel must be on to something!", and he knows it.
Again with the mind reading. His credibility will take a hit. Why a guy as smart as you has this Tourette's behavior is a curious thing.
...or is that a promise for real, honest to goodness "no B.S." release of evidential proof sufficient to demonstrate functionality within 2 years [of that statement], or otherwise the project stops?
No. Way. He says something and means it. As if!

chrismb
Posts: 3161
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 6:00 pm

Postby chrismb » Thu Mar 25, 2010 10:47 pm

Betruger wrote:
since nebel's blanket refusal to allow any information to be released.

What do you know? Do you know what Dr Nebel knows? Your rhetoric is not only distasteful but doesn't even have any factual basis.
'Fraid I am the one dealing with the facts, and you appear to be scrabbling around in your own faith.

ALL FoI requested material has been prevented from release by EMC2 on commercial ground. That IS a blanket refusal.

That's what I know. I know that. This is called a fact. [That is to say, through trusting what ladajo has stated, and I do trust that as it is internally consistent and plausible - which is a degree of probilty EMC2 has now demonstrably failed to match].

Some difficultes here on this site figuring out the differences between facts, fictions, and also between proovable things without proof, and unproovable things with opinions.

I'll leave you to stew for a while on this. Maybe wait 'til the 2 years is up. What'll we hear... my bet.... nuffin' much....

MSimon
Posts: 14289
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Thu Mar 25, 2010 11:41 pm

If so, it seems that the point he's making is that WB-7 did NOT validate everything that needed to be validated.


Maybe yes. Maybe no. Suppose it validated the questions asked but also suggested other questions?
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
http://protonboron.com/
THE OPEN POLYWELL FUSION CONSORTIUM

Betruger
Posts: 2250
Joined: Tue May 06, 2008 11:54 am

Postby Betruger » Thu Mar 25, 2010 11:43 pm

chrismb wrote:[...]
I'm agnostic. No one outside of EMC2 and e.g. the peer review panel knows anything. If I were to bet, I'd say it's 50/50. Maybe. IOW I have no opinion, just a very vague gut feeling. I don't seriously read tea leaves. I'll believe Polywell works when people pay bills to be powered by it. I'll speculate all day long about giant polywell powered flying Navy ships. I'll entertain both Dr Art Carlson's and the "pro polywell" take at the same time because at this point it's all in limbo.

The fact is that Nebel's "no BS, no excuses" was strictly referring to WB research, specifically letting us know if there's show stoppers. The fact is that you took that out of context. The fact is you're tilting at windmills with your "polywell believer" crusade. Until you have proof that EMC2 is misleading its audience, your whole rant is just the thing you're ranting about. Baseless pretention. And condescending at that.

Oh yeah, and I would prefer that the FOIA request (appeal) succeed. Because I want to know. But I won't pretend that I think it's unfortunately not the right way to go about it, or that Dr Nebel or whoever else it is is wrong to do whatever they want within legality. Maybe Dr Nebel did it because he can see some compromise between releasing info to the public eventually (and what's one year deferral in this case? It's not a matter of life and death) and helping someone secure a healthy position in the prospective industry. Point is: you don't know.
Last edited by Betruger on Thu Mar 25, 2010 11:52 pm, edited 2 times in total.

MSimon
Posts: 14289
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Thu Mar 25, 2010 11:43 pm

'Fraid I am the one dealing with the facts, and you appear to be scrabbling around in your own faith.


Public facts do not include all facts. In fact (heh) they are a rather small subset of all facts.

Of course I'm just Vennting.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
http://protonboron.com/
THE OPEN POLYWELL FUSION CONSORTIUM

Betruger
Posts: 2250
Joined: Tue May 06, 2008 11:54 am

Postby Betruger » Thu Mar 25, 2010 11:44 pm

MSimon wrote:Public facts do not include all facts.
I should've said just that. Clear and simple.

chrismb
Posts: 3161
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 6:00 pm

Postby chrismb » Thu Mar 25, 2010 11:52 pm

the fact I was referring to was That EMC2 stated their restriction came from the Navy. Fact: this was false. Fact: EMC2 has stated it is not interested in holding commercial rights. Outcome: EMC2 lacks probity on what it say.

Sorry to be hard on this (Rick) but it is what has been said.

dnavas
Posts: 76
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2007 3:59 am

Postby dnavas » Thu Mar 25, 2010 11:57 pm

MSimon wrote:Maybe yes. Maybe no. Suppose it validated the questions asked but also suggested other questions?


I don’t want to leave people with the impression that everything on the WB-7 is identical to the WB-6.


Something on WB-7 did not work the same as on WB-6. Whether that difference was on the to-be-validated list or not is a matter for more pedantic folk than myself to argue :) The quote does not seem to suggest that behavior was noted which required further testing, but rather, previous behavior differed, and this difference required followup.

-Dave

Betruger
Posts: 2250
Joined: Tue May 06, 2008 11:54 am

Postby Betruger » Fri Mar 26, 2010 12:01 am

He said the Navy was holding them back. That was then. The FOIA request now came and EMC2 now say they want opacity. Navy might've been telling them to keep a lid on it, but FOIA overruled it. EMC2 now considers things in the perspective that FOIA request puts it, and changes their mind (simplest of all possible explanations). No lies required. That's Fact #1.

Fact: EMC2 has stated it is not interested in holding commercial rights.
Where'd they say this?


Return to “News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 8 guests