Another one from Alan Boyle

rj40 · Post by **rj40** » Fri Jun 13, 2008 1:00 am

Here is the latest.

http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/ ... 36887.aspx

Tom Ligon · Post by **Tom Ligon** » Fri Jun 13, 2008 1:55 am

Great! I just posted a notice at NASASpaceFlight.com

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Fri Jun 13, 2008 2:03 am

Instapundit linked:

http://pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/arc ... 020402.php

he also linked to the ITER bit I did a few days ago:

http://www.classicalvalues.com/archives ... e_fus.html

tonybarry · Post by **tonybarry** » Fri Jun 13, 2008 2:48 am

Good article by Alan Boyle. Now we wait for the peer review.

I wonder what Nebel meant by "the answers are kind of nuanced" ...

Also the comments say that Robert Hirsch is on the panel ... any way to corroborate this?

Regards,
Tony Barry

TallDave · Post by **TallDave** » Fri Jun 13, 2008 2:51 am

"I've been very pleased, frankly, with the sorts of things we've been getting out of it," Nebel said.

That sounds promising. I'm guessing neutrons are one of the things they've been getting out of it.

I believe Nebel said the contract runs through August. Not sure if the peer review happens before or after that. I would imagine the review board would want to see the machine in action, which might argue for before.

Tom Ligon · Post by **Tom Ligon** » Fri Jun 13, 2008 2:56 am

My understanding was that Hirsch would be on the panel, in fact probably heading it up, but that's year-old information.

I know Dr. Bussard wanted me on it, but I've never gotten an invitation and I really don't have the credentials. One might also argue I'm a tad biased, although I would personally demand solid proof. I'm familiar with some potential false positives.

I know we've got a lurker here from LANL who has a positive view of the project ... very promising. If the peers of Drs. Nebel and Parks are looking eagerly at this project instead of nay-saying, I'd say there will be no problem finding qualified peers.

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Fri Jun 13, 2008 2:57 am

tonybarry wrote:Good article by Alan Boyle. Now we wait for the peer review.

I wonder what Nebel meant by "the answers are kind of nuanced" ...

Also the comments say that Robert Hirsch is on the panel ... any way to corroborate this?

Regards,
Tony Barry

I think the Hirsch thing was a suggestion rather than a statement. At least I read it that way. Although if it could be done it would make sense. What better guy to evaluate it than one of the Farnsworth team? Although it would be good to get some bias in the other direction too.

Simon

choff · Post by **choff** » Fri Jun 13, 2008 6:52 am

Maybe they could get Todd Rider or Richard Hull on the peer review, when the toughest skeptics are convinced then you can pretty much guarantee it works.

JohnP · Post by **JohnP** » Fri Jun 13, 2008 1:21 pm

I'm sure I'm not the only one who gets a thrill just looking at the shot thru the window at the coils, with the glow in the middle.

drmike · Post by **drmike** » Fri Jun 13, 2008 1:37 pm

JohnP wrote:I'm sure I'm not the only one who gets a thrill just looking at the shot thru the window at the coils, with the glow in the middle.

that's a fact

Peer-review is a long process. Note the comment from Nebel about cold-fusion. Wanting it to work and reality are two different things. I don't
think it matters who is on the first review, if it's positive, great, we get more
money and continue; if it's negative, bummer, a few garage entusiasts
continue.

There will not be a press release before the final report and there will be peer reviewed articles. That's a really good thing all around no matter what.

ravingdave · Post by **ravingdave** » Fri Jun 13, 2008 2:46 pm

Qoute from Cosmic Log:

"

At the same time, he can't resist talking about how well WB-7 is operating. "I've been very pleased, frankly, with the sorts of things we've been getting out of it," Nebel said.

"

I am thinking that the words "getting out of it" indicate they are getting something out of it , and the words "very pleased" likewise indicate what that is.

David

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Fri Jun 13, 2008 4:39 pm

I think the fact that Dr. Nebel mentioned here not too long ago about his plans for selling WB-7s is another indication.

Mike Holmes · Post by **Mike Holmes** » Fri Jun 13, 2008 7:18 pm

Tantalizing.

So, for those of you who've been through something aproximating the peer review process that has to occur coming up, how long would you say we can estimate that'll take before we can hear any real report?

Mike

seedload · Post by **seedload** » Fri Jun 13, 2008 8:10 pm

"We're fully operational and we're getting data"
"The machine runs like a top."
"You can just sit there and take data all afternoon."

Fully operational has to mean that they are getting neutrons.
Getting data has to mean that they are counting neutrons.
And it is running like a top!!!

"I've been very pleased, frankly, with the sorts of things we've been getting out of it"

Sorts of things must be neutrons.
He is very pleased with the neutrons he is getting out of it!!

"We're looking at power generation with this machine," Nebel said. "This machine is so inexpensive going into the 100-megawatt range that there's no compelling reason for not just doing it. We're trying to take bigger steps than you would with a conventional fusion machine"

He is not hesitating to talk about the next step. He is not gun shy at all right now. Very must be very pleased indeed!

Wow!

Tom Ligon · Post by **Tom Ligon** » Fri Jun 13, 2008 8:19 pm

Careful, now! Don't get carried away! You are extrapolating.

Extrapolation is a useful technique, but you have to verify it is valid.

I'm very pleased with this news, but do maintain a proper scientific attitude. The positive news we can take to heart is the recent silence is NOT due to the machine burning up or some other problems in the lab.

And the other thing is, silence on results is the correct thing to do when waiting for peer review.

Don't get too overly excited. Smiling contentedly is allowed. Watch this space.

If the news is good, he has prepared us to expect some explaining and analysis will be required to extrapolate to the next step. It may not be overwhelmingly good and can't start building Mars ships the following day. It won't be that we're there already. Hopefully it will be that we're on the right track.