Major Electronics Magazine Picks Up On Polywell

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

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

MSimon
Posts: 14310
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Sat Sep 26, 2009 9:39 pm

alexjrgreen wrote:
MSimon wrote:I'd like to see them braid some 400,000 psi rope.

Not sure what they'd want nylon rope for, but it's fairly low-tech chemistry.

Industrialised man does a lot of things the Bushmen don't - many of them both unnecessary and unsustainable. A truly civilised society would maintain an ecological balance and still be able to visit the planets.


Humanity is unsustainable. We will go on for as long as we can.

In 1900 it was estimated that New York would be buried in horse crap by 1920 if things kept going the way they were going. Obviously they did not.

Ecological balance is pure fantasy. Because things (on all scales) are always fluctuating. Not to mention new organisms. (bird flu, swine flu)

Ecological balance before or after a large volcanic eruption? Ecological balance before or after a very large meteor strike? Ecological balance before or after the onset of an ice age?

So just exactly which ecological balance is the best? And how do you keep it?
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

TallDave
Posts: 3113
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 7:12 pm
Contact:

Postby TallDave » Sun Sep 27, 2009 1:25 am

You've underestimated both the time it takes for you to drive to WalMart and how quickly a Bushman can braid grass...


You clearly have no idea how hard it is to make good rope. Even as late as the 1800s this was a major investment of time and labor even in Western countries that used simple machines.

Walmart is about two minutes away. I can get thousands of of feet of high-quality rope in the time it takes Bushmen to make about ten feet of poor-quality rope. I am 100s of times more productive in this regard. That's the legacy of centuries of science, engineering, and capitalism.

Bushmen are fun to visit, but I notice few people are emigrating.

Industrialised man does a lot of things the Bushmen don't - many of them both unnecessary and unsustainable. A truly civilised society would maintain an ecological balance and still be able to visit the planets.


Luddite/Rousseau-ian nonsense. North America has more trees today than in 1900. Post-industrial society has a better relationship with the environment than hunter-gatherers did.

You do know everywhere hunter-gatherers went, mass extinctions followed?

PolyGirl
Posts: 87
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2007 7:16 pm
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Postby PolyGirl » Sun Sep 27, 2009 3:47 am

Never judge a book by its cover.

Yes MSimon, you are 'good looking'!! Now where was I. Oh yes back to reading this post.

Regards
Polygirl
The more I know, the less I know.

MSimon
Posts: 14310
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Sun Sep 27, 2009 4:17 am

PolyGirl wrote:Never judge a book by its cover.

Yes MSimon, you are 'good looking'!! Now where was I. Oh yes back to reading this post.

Regards
Polygirl


Wait 'till I tell my first mate. Jealousy always gets her motor running.

Thanks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
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

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

Postby chrismb » Sun Sep 27, 2009 1:54 pm

TallDave wrote:
Industrialised man does a lot of things the Bushmen don't - many of them both unnecessary and unsustainable. A truly civilised society would maintain an ecological balance and still be able to visit the planets.


Luddite/Rousseau-ian nonsense. North America has more trees today than in 1900. Post-industrial society has a better relationship with the environment than hunter-gatherers did.

I am in agreement with this, and that humanity is fundamentally unsustainable. Though, it depends on what you mean.

How many species have died out since 'earth began'? Humans are one of many billions of species that are unsustainable. No-one has ever accused the dinosaurs of being environmentally unstable, but the world's eco-systems still crumbled and the seas became so de-oxygenated that life might've conceivably died out. Was it their fault? Doesn't matter!! It's gonna happen anyway!

The whole idea about consuming less is bizarre - for what end purpose? So there can be more humans, over the longest period of time (with no recognition of the quality and glory of their lives)? Unless one holds an essential philosophy of existence, then one is doomed forever to never come up with a coherent argument for acting in a certain way.

So let's say someone makes their life more efficient and consumes a half of the stuff he does today, for 'the sake of his children'. So that means there can now be twice as many generations to follow - and then they die out!??

Isn't it more important *what* is done while you're here than how long you can sustain your species on the planet? You're gonna die out anyways! The trenchant greenies won't ever get their [what I perceive as] feeble brains around that one. There was never a case to go to the moon, and if you were ever to worry about why you would want to do that, seeing as it may've reduced your time on this planet from 1 million generations to 900,000 generations for the sake of that act, then I say it's a damned good thing you did something as glorious as go to the moon during your little sojourn on this lump of rock.

The much much deeper point about this economic crisis is that those who felt they were kings of the world just plodded along with the status quo expecting a 'good thing' to last forever. It's the same for man's very existence, itself. You're gonna die out, guys!! What are you gonna do while you're here? I say, you need to do glorious, fantastic and inconceivable things, beyond imagination. And you are doing just that. People used to do this with 'glorious war' but then you progressed in science and technology and now you do things and go places, and at such speeds, that it would be just pure fantasy to anyone just a hundred years ago, let alone a thousand, or 10,000.

Without 'excessive' consumption and 'excessive' engineering, if you twiddle around with recycling rubbish cardboard cartons and reckon that that is progress, then how the ferkin'mubsmerlarky are you gonna get off this hunk o' rock and secure some future pro-creation across the galaxy. Because that IS the only way the human species can ever get past X million more generations.

This is NOT an argument about being inefficient, I seek efficiency. But I do not seek to drive around in an inefficient electric one-seater bubble-car rather than a full-sized fuel-efficient diesel one because I NEED a full sized car for my life, and I'm not going to change my life just to extend mankind's potential existence by a few thousand miserable generations as humans start dying out.

We cannot descend into arguing against fantastical creations like ITER. Money-wise, it's chicken s*it compared with building the next aircraft carrier or next super-banking tower block that adds no value-adding benefit at all to mankind, only that it preserves the status quo. It is status quo that fails mankind, through its lack of vision and commitment to what appears fantastical. Reject status quo; in the long run it will kill mankind in the most assured, and most complete, way possible.

Seek out all opportunities for change, argue for change and cause change. Don't be-cry anyone or anything which is new and different, money is no object, it will mean nothing in the future, but your glory will. Be sure that your whole purpose of existence is to reach out into the Universe and to mark it with your creativeness and intellect for the rest of its time in an indelible and immutable form, so future civilisations will be able to come to look upon the glory that you sought. This is about the purpose of life itself, make no mistake. Support "the mission" of controlled fusion power, in whatever form that effort may take, do not begrudge any project aimed at that purpose.

Don't let the politico-economists force you to live like battery-chickens in the same-old most efficient houses, driving to the same-old 'good-for-the-economy' jobs in you 'most efficient cars ever' (which would therefore theoretically mean we all drive the same one, as one single design will ultimately prove to be the best, and same with the house) eating standardised food that has the least impact (as that'd all be the same aswell, seeing as wheat/barley is the most efficient, I guess you'll all be eating gruel all the time).

It's already happening. It's your duty as thinking humans to resist and to demand change. You now have the means to do that without blood-shed, through information and technology (possibly for the first time ever!). DON'T COCK IT UP, GUYS!!! WORK IT. MAKE IT HAPPEN! You're on a trajectory back into the middle ages at the moment - maybe that trajectory won't even stop there but take you back to 'hunter-gatherers'.

If you want the last generation on earth to be hunter-gatherers (however bloody 'eco-frinedly', intelligent and marvellous they are at hunting-gathering!!), then just go wander off into the jungle now and start practicing. If you want the last generation on earth to leave safely via spaceship-taxi, then support ITER, support Polywell, support all the damned technologies, and don't delay.
Last edited by chrismb on Sun Sep 27, 2009 9:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

alexjrgreen
Posts: 805
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2008 4:03 pm
Location: UK

Postby alexjrgreen » Sun Sep 27, 2009 2:24 pm

MSimon wrote:Ecological balance is pure fantasy. Because things (on all scales) are always fluctuating. Not to mention new organisms. (bird flu, swine flu)

Ecological balance before or after a large volcanic eruption? Ecological balance before or after a very large meteor strike? Ecological balance before or after the onset of an ice age?

So just exactly which ecological balance is the best? And how do you keep it?

You keep it the same way you ride a bike...

There's a law in ecology that says a given area of ground at a given latitude can support a given mass of living beings.

Because we can generate power this doesn't apply to human beings any more, but it does apply to all the other species on the planet. We have the choice to expand in a way that kills off all the other species, or to expand in a way that leaves their ecology intact.
Ars artis est celare artem.

alexjrgreen
Posts: 805
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2008 4:03 pm
Location: UK

Postby alexjrgreen » Sun Sep 27, 2009 2:33 pm

TallDave wrote:
You've underestimated both the time it takes for you to drive to WalMart and how quickly a Bushman can braid grass...


You clearly have no idea how hard it is to make good rope. Even as late as the 1800s this was a major investment of time and labor even in Western countries that used simple machines.

Walmart is about two minutes away. I can get thousands of of feet of high-quality rope in the time it takes Bushmen to make about ten feet of poor-quality rope. I am 100s of times more productive in this regard. That's the legacy of centuries of science, engineering, and capitalism.

What use do you have for thousands of feet of high-quality rope?

And surely the pyramids were built without the benefit of capitalism...
Ars artis est celare artem.

MSimon
Posts: 14310
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Sun Sep 27, 2009 2:37 pm

alexjrgreen wrote:
TallDave wrote:
You've underestimated both the time it takes for you to drive to WalMart and how quickly a Bushman can braid grass...


You clearly have no idea how hard it is to make good rope. Even as late as the 1800s this was a major investment of time and labor even in Western countries that used simple machines.

Walmart is about two minutes away. I can get thousands of of feet of high-quality rope in the time it takes Bushmen to make about ten feet of poor-quality rope. I am 100s of times more productive in this regard. That's the legacy of centuries of science, engineering, and capitalism.

What use do you have for thousands of feet of high-quality rope?

And surely the pyramids were built without the benefit of capitalism...


Some one had to put up the capital. And you know capitalism still builds monuments. You might want to have a look at a hillside in South Dakota.

Not everything in capitalism is based on profit making. Some of the profit goes to cultural artifacts.
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

MSimon
Posts: 14310
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Sun Sep 27, 2009 2:43 pm

alexjrgreen wrote:
MSimon wrote:Ecological balance is pure fantasy. Because things (on all scales) are always fluctuating. Not to mention new organisms. (bird flu, swine flu)

Ecological balance before or after a large volcanic eruption? Ecological balance before or after a very large meteor strike? Ecological balance before or after the onset of an ice age?

So just exactly which ecological balance is the best? And how do you keep it?

You keep it the same way you ride a bike...

There's a law in ecology that says a given area of ground at a given latitude can support a given mass of living beings.

Because we can generate power this doesn't apply to human beings any more, but it does apply to all the other species on the planet. We have the choice to expand in a way that kills off all the other species, or to expand in a way that leaves their ecology intact.


If you don't poison the ground the way those socialists in the USSR did (on a scale that dwarfs any thing of that nature done in the USA) the ground will still support what it always has. Maybe not in the same mix. So what?

If you want to leave the ecology intact the best way is private ownership. Otherwise you get the tragedy of the commons. And private ownership is way more effective in protecting nature than laws and police. We have proved that in Africa. Where game is owned it is sustainably harvested. When game is held in common it gets wiped out.
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

MSimon
Posts: 14310
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Sun Sep 27, 2009 3:06 pm

The Endangered Species Act in the USA provides perverse incentives.

If an endangered species is found on a property it lowers the property values. Thus property owners are encouraged to find, kill, and bury species before the government locates them.

Why was the law made that way? Because the government did not want to pay to support such species.
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

alexjrgreen
Posts: 805
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2008 4:03 pm
Location: UK

Postby alexjrgreen » Sun Sep 27, 2009 4:00 pm

TallDave wrote:Bushmen are fun to visit, but I notice few people are emigrating.

Industrialised man does a lot of things the Bushmen don't - many of them both unnecessary and unsustainable. A truly civilised society would maintain an ecological balance and still be able to visit the planets.


Luddite/Rousseau-ian nonsense. North America has more trees today than in 1900. Post-industrial society has a better relationship with the environment than hunter-gatherers did.

You do know everywhere hunter-gatherers went, mass extinctions followed?

You have proof of that?

Even in North America, where there certainly were mass extinctions of mega-fauna, it was ten thousand years after the hunter gatherers first arrived from Siberia. Environmental pressure from climate change was the main culprit, closely followed by the industrial production of Clovis points.

Mass extinctions in Australia also had more to do with climate change than hunting.

In Southern Africa, where the Bushmen were the dominant culture until black africans moved south a thousand years ago, no mass extinction occurred. In fact, until the arrival of Europeans with guns, Southern Africa was far better stocked than any private game reserve.
Ars artis est celare artem.

Tom Ligon
Posts: 1809
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 1:23 am
Location: Northern Virginia
Contact:

Postby Tom Ligon » Sun Sep 27, 2009 9:15 pm

Recent evidence suggest the extinction of most large mammals in North America a few hundred years after the Clovis culture came on the scene was the fault of the Clovis culture focusing on skillful flaking of flint tools rather than developing space transportation. There is growing and fairly clear evidence of a large object exploding over the remains of the Laurentide Ice Sheet. This sort of short-sighted concentration on immediate wants and needs is by no means over and done with. I will probably attend an asteroid deflection conference next month, to be told once again there is essentially zero funding for the effort. The reason they invite SIGMA is we will participate for free.

http://www.stonepages.com/news/archives/002387.html

They're off the hook for causing a mass extinction. If we can get Polywells running and move into space in a meaningful way, preventing future impacts will be a side benefit. I suppose someone will complain we are interfering with nature, but if we do prevent a large impact, we'll make up in one day for all the damage we have done.

In Virginia, we have more forest now than in the 19th century (farmland then was grossly depleted, and has been allowed to go back to forest since about the mid 20th century (I've watched it happen in my lifetime). The deer population in Virginia in the 1970's was estimated at 3X the level it was in 1600, and is considerably higher now. That's not a good thing, by the way.

alexjrgreen
Posts: 805
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2008 4:03 pm
Location: UK

Postby alexjrgreen » Sun Sep 27, 2009 11:52 pm

Tom Ligon wrote:In Virginia, we have more forest now than in the 19th century (farmland then was grossly depleted, and has been allowed to go back to forest since about the mid 20th century (I've watched it happen in my lifetime). The deer population in Virginia in the 1970's was estimated at 3X the level it was in 1600, and is considerably higher now. That's not a good thing, by the way.

Perhaps they could support a small population of hunter gatherers...

Good luck with the asteroid deflection conference. The impact in 3123BC (Cuneiform clay tablet translated for the first time) resulted in a massive redirection of public resources into megalith building. That's what you call taking asteroid impacts seriously.
Ars artis est celare artem.

choff
Posts: 2337
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 5:02 am
Location: Vancouver, Canada

Postby choff » Mon Sep 28, 2009 4:29 am

I've always wondered why, if the hunter-gatherers started in Africa, expanded into Asia, came to North America from Siberia and then wiped out the large mammals in the western hemisphere, they didn't first wipe out the Elephants and Rhino's in Africa.
CHoff

MirariNefas
Posts: 354
Joined: Thu Oct 09, 2008 3:57 am

Postby MirariNefas » Mon Sep 28, 2009 5:44 am

There's plenty of papers analyzing that subject. My understanding of it is that when you evolve alongside a creature, it evolves with you. That is, successive generations of ever smarter hominids puts evolutionary pressure on the surrounding fauna at a slow rate. This leads to fauna developing which are either harder to kill, or less rewarding to kill for those hominids.

Eventually, the nth generation of evolved superpredator hominid leaves the continent and heads off to strange new lands, where they find big giant stupid dodos which have never had to deal with a hominid before. Easy lunch, and they're wiped out too quickly to evolve in response.


Return to “News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests