Talk-Polywell.org

The June 2012 issue of Scientific American has an article on ITER. (Sorry, only a preview available. Iter.org linked to a PDF of the entire article earlier, but they changed the link.) Despite the fact that iter.org linked to the article itself, it's a rather pessimistic look at the future of fusion power, as represented by ITER. Not too surprisingly, there is no mention of any fusion alternative, not even NIF.

Ivy Matt wrote:The June 2012 issue of Scientific American has an article on ITER. (Sorry, only a preview available. Iter.org linked to a PDF of the entire article earlier, but they changed the link.) Despite the fact that iter.org linked to the article itself, it's a rather pessimistic look at the future of fusion power, as represented by ITER. Not too surprisingly, there is no mention of any fusion alternative, not even NIF.

They changed to link but didn't remove it from their site.

First tried Google's cached version of iter.org, but it was "too new", but Bing had older cached, which still had the link to the article

http://www.iter.org/doc/www/content/com ... %20(2).pdf

Sorry, I don't read "UnScientific Anti-American" anymore.

Me either. It has become a comic book, compared to its past glory.

DeltaV wrote:Me either. It has become a comic book, compared to its past glory.

Yup.

Had a subscription starting early in HS, for 10 yrs after engr college. I remember the CO2 warming theory when it first made the mag along with continental drift. I guess not everything pans out. Then it became something else.... No real loss, we have the net....

Side note:
I once ran across some microfilm copies of SciAm from its early days in the 1800s. Nothing like the current rag, or the gold standard of the 60s/70s. It was all about really practical stuff, such as reducing wear in bearings, efficient steam engine design, crop harvesting machines, metallurgy techniques, etc. A reminder that the job description "scientist" used to imply someone who could also design, fabricate and test real hardware (engineer-machinist-mechanic), not just theorize. Even the big-wigs like Kelvin (Thomson) would be hands-on, tinkering in their lab-shops to produce some amazing stuff.

DeltaV wrote:Side note:
I once ran across some microfilm copies of SciAm from its early days in the 1800s. Nothing like the current rag, or the gold standard of the 60s/70s. It was all about really practical stuff, such as reducing wear in bearings, efficient steam engine design, crop harvesting machines, metallurgy techniques, etc. A reminder that the job description "scientist" used to imply someone who could also design, fabricate and test real hardware (engineer-machinist-mechanic), not just theorize. Even the big-wigs like Kelvin (Thomson) would be hands-on, tinkering in their lab-shops to produce some amazing stuff.

People like ... Dr. B?

Definitely.

I should add that in the late 1800s to early 1900s, the "scientific" stuff in SciAm was mostly found in the "recent news" blurbs, while most of the articles read like an engineering journal of today.