Focus Fusion news story

[chrismb]

BTW haven't seen you around for a while.

I am not here. This is the passing voice of a, now casual, observer.

This voice says that this is not about free speech, this is about the intrusion onto free speech by someone who has never actually made any material contribution of speech, merely negates the speech of others.

This voice is a warning that so will it ever continue. Even if WB data does appear one day, it seems unlikely a sensible scrutinisation of it can occur here at the moment.

QRT.

[Joseph Chikva]

Intensity can be measure with internal energy. Can be measure with temperature. Can be measure with temperature and pressure. Depending on case.

Uh. You left one out. It can be measured in electron volts. Thus an accelerator heats without thermalization. Mr. smarter than every one else.

Accelerator does not heat as temperature is measure of chaotic and not coherent motion. But every beam has temperature. As a rule much lower than coherent energy.
Good luck MSimon.

[MSimon]

We in former SU call this not thermalization but cooling with mixing

It is heating with mixing. No wonder SU failed.

[MSimon]

Accelerator does not heat as temperature is measure of chaotic and not coherent motion.

OK. I see your problem. You don't understand anything. My condolences. Have you tried asking the Wizard for a brain? Dorthy can help.

[Joseph Chikva]

Accelerator does not heat as temperature is measure of chaotic and not coherent motion.

OK. I see your problem. You don't understand anything. My condolences. Have you tried asking the Wizard for a brain? Dorthy can help.

MSimon I said you once upon a time that electron-volt can be used also as measure of mass. But you call high energy beam "hot" and not "heavy". Why?
I have not problems with brain. Thank you for possibility to share here some my ideas.
You are wrong now.
Best regards

[Joseph Chikva]

We in former SU call this not thermalization but cooling with mixing

It is heating with mixing. No wonder SU failed.

By the way many SU scientists work in USA. Including plasma physicists. Do you want some names?
You are right - one spice ther heats, while another cools. Pardon for not clear explanation. Is now all clear for you?

[MSimon]

You are wrong now.
Best regards

Incorrect. I have been wrong forever. 'Til the end of time.

Temperature is measured in eV. Don't matter if the distribution is Boltzman or monoenergetic.

[ladajo]

When was the Valencia paper written??? In the 90s???

And? After WB6, 7 or 8? Or before?
On base of what such optimism?
Opinion of "board of experts"? Who they are? Navy task forces experts? May be or not that once they being mistaken would not like to recognize that mistake and approved limited financing enough only on salary of 3 men?
I know only one reputable board of experts" in USA. This is department of fusion science of DOE.
Do you really believe that financing of several millions enough for solving of world challenge? When one Holywood's filme may be financed at several hunderds millions? Football/soccer teams buy players at tens millions, differnt Beinces/Rihanas.

Oh Joseph. <hangs slowly shaking head>

Sigh.

They got top recognized folks from plasma and nuclear physics. Folks probably the like of Robert Hirsch, George Miley, etc. ONR is very well connected via the network of FFRDC's. They can get anyone they would like, and on this one more than likely have been. And, as another minor note, for your educational purposes, Bussard and Hirsch used to run DOE Fusion together. Not that that has any obvious bearing on this topic for you. (I am strongly restraining myself from typing "you &#$$% idiot" here).
As far as the timing of the Valencia IAC 2006 Paper, I guess you will just need to read the title and the paper for yourself and figure it out, since you obviously have not yet. (I am again strongly restraining myself from typing "you *^&^%# idiot" here as well).
In regard to funding, if it was up to my, I would forceable deconstruct and abolosih the entire corrupt "professional" sporting and entertainment industries as they exist, bleeding the life out of the multitudes of lemmings that feed them with hard won life blood, and not giving a rat's ass about the food source. But that is another topic. I would most certainly at this point, have taken the leap with Bussard, if I controlled the money at that point, to "Go Big" and sort it once and for all. That said, I well understand that funding drama that goes on in DOD. And I can tell you, that any project with "illion" at the end, gets silly stupid attention, regardless of it starting with 1 or 1,000. They normally get LOTS of attention, after, "it didn't work", and "what were you guys thinking?", followed soon with the merry sound of letting "bodies hit the floor", and maybe a few heads thumping on the floor independantly as well.
You have not lcue just how sensitive silly US Government and especially DOD can get over perceived errors in judgement. Even when they may not be.
As an example, I will start another thread in "general" on a recent event, that has many ripples of internal fun, not visible to the public.

Read the references Joseph.

Stop looking like a *&&^$@@! Idiot.

I am about the last person here willing to engage you. I am about to give up and toss you into the bin of "things that used to amuse me, but then got annoying enough to ignore forever" bucket. That would be a shame.

[Joseph Chikva]

Temperature is measured in eV. Don't matter if the distribution is Boltzman or monoenergetic.

Mass also can be expressed in eV. Without irony - "wrong forever"

[Robthebob]

When I have a choice: to believe or not believe, I prefer to believe to my logic which exactly is very simple and may be primitive.

Not bad for following an established path.

Useless when blazing a trail in previously unexplored territory.

This isnt true even for Joe. The truth about scientific exploration is to admit ignorance when facing unknown. The publicly released statements and information are all we have to go with. In truth, all of us should admit ignorance to whether polywell will work or not, that's fine. None of us know. We do know a couple things though, we know high beta has been achieved, on the progress report website, they said they're doing it for WB8, when they were verifying the data for WB6 with WB7, they did it back then.

Even various concepts that are pretty indisputable, like about heating, not even the more voodoo magic stuff we say that makes polywell work like annealing, even to go as far as to think that building a bigger electron gun means shooting more energetic electrons to the system to "heat" it up by collision interaction, which is completely against the very goal of the machine, things that arent disputable (they are not doing that, cus that would be frick stupid and against the very concept of the machine).

When I, who went to a decent university with a physics department that has a big plasma physics group, had a teacher who's on DOE boards and an adviser who's one of the only stellerator scientists in the United States, both of them fusion plasma physicists, say that the problem with toks is something else, he tries to school me with the Lawson criterion, like i didnt take a whole class on plasma physics. Look I get it, in the polywell forums, there may not be a ton of people who knows a lot or cares about toks, I so happen to know a thing or two about it.

Seriously tho, it's most definitely possible (although hard) to inject energy to (heat) 1 population of particles within a plasma. Cyclotron Resonance heating (depending on if you want to heat just the electron or just the ion) heats just the electron or just the ion. Now whether the electrons and ions interact with each other after the energy is injected into that 1 population depends on the machine. We claim, we say, the goal of polywell is to make sure the two types of popuation, the fuel and the electron, stay the hell away from touching each other. We dont say if it works or not in real life, we offer various explanations that suggests it can work, but if the fuel and the electrons have huge interactions with each other, the machine doesnt work. We know that, we have known that.

His point of view is pretty much, prove me wrong or I'm right. It's also like he's refusing to learn, how is that ever good?

[Joseph Chikva]

When was the Valencia paper written??? In the 90s???

And? After WB6, 7 or 8? Or before?
On base of what such optimism?
Opinion of "board of experts"? Who they are? Navy task forces experts? May be or not that once they being mistaken would not like to recognize that mistake and approved limited financing enough only on salary of 3 men?
I know only one reputable board of experts" in USA. This is department of fusion science of DOE.
Do you really believe that financing of several millions enough for solving of world challenge? When one Holywood's filme may be financed at several hunderds millions? Football/soccer teams buy players at tens millions, differnt Beinces/Rihanas.

Oh Joseph. <hangs slowly shaking head>

Sigh.

They got top recognized folks from plasma and nuclear physics. Folks probably the like of Robert Hirsch, George Miley, etc. ONR is very well connected via the network of FFRDC's. They can get anyone they would like, and on this one more than likely have been. And, as another minor note, for your educational purposes, Bussard and Hirsch used to run DOE Fusion together. Not that that has any obvious bearing on this topic for you. (I am strongly restraining myself from typing "you &#$$% idiot" here).
As far as the timing of the Valencia IAC 2006 Paper, I guess you will just need to read the title and the paper for yourself and figure it out, since you obviously have not yet. (I am again strongly restraining myself from typing "you *^&^%# idiot" here as well).
In regard to funding, if it was up to my, I would forceable deconstruct and abolosih the entire corrupt "professional" sporting and entertainment industries as they exist, bleeding the life out of the multitudes of lemmings that feed them with hard won life blood, and not giving a rat's ass about the food source. But that is another topic. I would most certainly at this point, have taken the leap with Bussard, if I controlled the money at that point, to "Go Big" and sort it once and for all. That said, I well understand that funding drama that goes on in DOD. And I can tell you, that any project with "illion" at the end, gets silly stupid attention, regardless of it starting with 1 or 1,000. They normally get LOTS of attention, after, "it didn't work", and "what were you guys thinking?", followed soon with the merry sound of letting "bodies hit the floor", and maybe a few heads thumping on the floor independantly as well.
You have not lcue just how sensitive silly US Government and especially DOD can get over perceived errors in judgement. Even when they may not be.
As an example, I will start another thread in "general" on a recent event, that has many ripples of internal fun, not visible to the public.

Read the references Joseph.

Stop looking like a *&&^$@@! Idiot.

I am about the last person here willing to engage you. I am about to give up and toss you into the bin of "things that used to amuse me, but then got annoying enough to ignore forever" bucket. That would be a shame.

Do not worry ladajo.
At least nobody says you "you &#$$% idiot" as an answer on your criticism of TOKAMAK.
At least I understand Polywell better than you understand TOKAMAK.

[ladajo]

I am glad you are so sure. It must make things very easy for you.

[Robthebob]

lolololololololol chrismb arguing with joe, I think I can die happy now.

[tomclarke]

None of us know what are the nuanced results on which the first scientific panel approved funding, nor what are the newer results on which the second panel approved even more funding.

So it seems daft in the extreme for anyone to argue that Polywell will obviously not work given our relative uncertainty and the known at least conditionally positive view of people who have:
(a) more information
(b) more expertise
than us.

I tend to be skeptical, and I'm all for seeing both sides of the issue. But Joe here is seeing a side that does not exist.

Perhaps this is because Polywell's viability does depend on whether it can maintain a non-thermalised plasma, with different equivalent temperatures for electrons an ions, as well as non-equilibrium velocity profiles of both species. In which case any confusion about the difference between heating and thermalisation could prove a stumbling block.

[MSimon]

Temperature is measured in eV. Don't matter if the distribution is Boltzman or monoenergetic.

Mass also can be expressed in eV. Without irony - "wrong forever" :)

I see you have discovered the secret of the universe mass = energy.

I did like your "also" can I consider that progress?