Talk-Polywell.org

So far we've had over 750 views and 12-14 guesses. That's not really enough guesses to work with. If we had 700 guesses we could develop a Delphi best guess estimate of the real date of information release. We might need more data about the background of the individual guessers, though. Guesses from individuals working government R&D contracts might be more heavily weighted than guesses from high school students simply because of the stuff they don't know they know, compared to those who don't have a chance to know. On the other hand, maybe not. It might be something in the aether. Of course if we had a guess from Dr. Nebel we could give all other guesses a 0 weight and close our pool.

Dr. Nebel, When should we be expecting to know something? Can you give us a date? A time frame?

My answer was based on what date would be considered the most unlikely out of all of them, coupled with someone perhaps having a sense of humour and seeing such a date might have the best chance of a certain kind of impact, it might also be a date that beauracrats would frown upon as least suitable, thus it could well THE date

There is also the theory that if you mention something, its more likely to happen because you thought of it in the first place..

Nanos wrote:There is also the theory that if you mention something, its more likely to happen because you thought of it in the first place..

Do you mean as, "IN THE BEGINNING THERE WAS THE WORD, AND..." before the word there was the thought?

I know exactly when:

When it's ready.

What do we know?

1. The decision is political - mostly
2. Dr Nebel's contract is up mid Sept
3. Election 4 Nov
4. Congress in session to discuss oil drilling next week i.e. 15 Sept

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/bus ... 90868.html

The whole energy debate may be headed toward a high-stakes showdown at month's end, when lawmakers will have to vote on a resolution to continue funding the federal government during the next fiscal year, which begins Oct. 1.

Republicans are threatening to oppose that resolution — and possibly shut down the federal government — unless Democrats agree to drop a congressional moratorium that bars oil and gas producers from drilling in most of the federal waters offshore. Bush lifted a similar presidential ban back in July.

My best guesses - Next week.
After - 5 Nov
After next Congress is sworn in

IOW - I have no clue.

December 21, 2012

It's way to long to wait,
but something better happen on that date.

So.....most POOLs I've been in usually have some kind of prize. Is there anyone out there who would volunteer to make a paper weight size model of WB-7 and donate it as a prize ?

My date is Oct 4

Is "open source" and the Navy compatible ? I suspect the lack of information from the peer review (the silence is deafining) may be due to the Navy 'requesting' quiet.

Any comments ?

Jan 15,2009
Mid January is when a lot of federal contracts were announced at a company I once worked for.
Of course I'm throwing darts in the dark.

If Dr Nebel's contract is up in mid September then another guess is later in September 2008, with the exact date depending on how much unpaid overtime he and his team is willing to put in.

WB6 results were not even analyzed and the neutrons were not even seen until weeks after the contract was over.
After that I think it must have taken several months to write up and get reviewed.
Think about how long it would take you just to write up the report on a project of this scope and importance.

Let's see...
The contract was over in mid August. Say they stretched it a couple more weeks, that would be Aug 31, 2008.
Then a month to write and edit and internally review the report.
Assuming the peer reviewers are all working in parallel and that nobody bushwhacks it or procrastinates it:
Then 2 weeks (at least) for the peer reviewers to read it.
Remember these are busy people with their own projects, contracts, deadlines, budgets, students, tests etc.
2 more weeks for them to digest it.
2 more weeks for them to write their response.
2 weeks for EMC2 to respond to minor and medium sized challenges.
2 additional weeks to respond to the inevitable thorny problems. (This might be optimistic. Think of the answers that Art Carlson would demand.)
add one week to each step for the slowest peer reviewer.
Then 8 more weeks to repeat this cycle.
1 week to edit the final report.
This makes April 30th the earliest it might come out.
But wait there is more.
The Navy still owns it and they are not going to let go of it without some thought.
So, 1 week to get it through the system onto the desks of the decision makers.
2 weeks for them to sit in their in box due to their other brush-fires.
1 week to read it.
1 week to digest it.
1 week to decide whether to release it.
1 week for the authorization to work its way back down through the system.
Call it July 4, 2009

So we may still have quite a wait before us.
I would be very happy to be proved wrong on this.
My bosses used to hate it when I did this kind of analysis.
But, too often it was right on the money. (For projects and corporate environments that I had calibrated, unlike this one.)

Aero wrote:

Nanos wrote:There is also the theory that if you mention something, its more likely to happen because you thought of it in the first place..

Do you mean as, "IN THE BEGINNING THERE WAS THE WORD, AND..." before the word there was the thought?

Too cool.... Yes, first the thought then the word (John 1:1) that proceeds creations.

It is true that once spoken (enough), it enters man's mind and then the magic happens... Like the star trek communicator sure looks a lot like my cell phone (I think my cell phone does more) .

Polywell may not be it, but it is coming, be assured. Complex adaptive systems at this point are a little in front of our mathematical abilities, so

"absolute prediction of the future lies in the sole jurisdiction of the AWE MIGHTY"

Funny, I get paid to do predictions of the future, but the down side is that I just have to be right 50 +.00000001 to earn a living!

Let's not be "fooled by randomness"

The suspense is killing me!

Saludos

Will

Tom,

Re: Predicting Project time lines.

I have seen it too. I say it will take X with Y resources. Mgmt says too long and too many resources.

So they scrimp. It then winds up 2X and 3Y because of a shortage of front end effort. It is known as the Brooks Effect from "The Mythical Man Month"

===

Timing for Max political effect on the Congress? This Friday.

Well anyways, release date of information.

Assuming the process is already underway, peer review will, and I think I may have the wrong impression, have some form of conference, for the IEC group to address any challenges, due to the whole exchange of letters to be rather slow and ineffective, if you see how horrible debates are on internet forums, you would understand where I'm coming from. I mean dont get me wrong, letter exchanges have the advantage of allowing everyone enough time to come up with a reply, however, one thing I dont like is the fact that it also allows you to avoid questions.

A period about 4 months with about 12conferences should be enough. So lets say feb of 2009.

If I understand how this is working, this review was not of a simple paper. The reviewers went onsite and used the hardware. It seemed that they were there for more than one afternoon. I do not see any reason for there to be a long delay in the release of the initial paper. The regular back and forth in publishing a paper is really missing here. The reviewers saw the machine and, presumably, saw the results of the runs. We are not waiting to hear about new funding. Just the results of the wb7. Possibly close to raw data. The only reason for a very long delay would be that the final report is classified. The only reasons that I can see for the current delay are inertia or results that are so promising that they need to make a truly formal media release. When the Navy is involed with the media, they try real hard not to look like fools.

Late February/Early March 2009

What do you think the odds are the Navy will put another multi-year embargo on the results and activities?

Heck, what are the odds of Charlie Rose (talk show host in the US) having both Paris Hilton and Harlan Ellison on at the same time? You know, to discuss American foreign policy. Now those are odds worth discussing.

Another SWAG estimate:
WB-6 testing ended about Dec 1, 2005
Neutron counts were discovered mid December 2005.
Valencia paper received for publication (mid?) Aug 2006 and published (mid?) October 2006. (ref p. 14)
That was an 8 to 10 month lag and that was with Dr. Bussard himself pushing to get it out at the earliest possible venue.

If the analogy holds, that puts it at April 30, 2009 for release for publication and June 30, 2009 for publication.
I'm sticking with July 4, 2009 for publicity reasons.
Although we might get some hints and rumors somewhat sooner than the official publication.

I propose that we assume it worked well enough,
and that we continue theory and design work in the meantime.
That will be a more fun and a more productive wait than beating each other over the heads with political rubber chickens.
I guess that can be fun too but I'm getting tired of holding my tongue and gritting my teeth,