Reply To: Brain: dualism of consciousness.

[Brian H]

nemmart wrote: … That stuff will play out — if FF works, it will be adopted somewhere and it will spread over time. The thing that I would worry about the most is making sure that the results are clear and reproducible. Although there will be an incredible temptation, do not hold back on any “secret sauce” in the interest of holding on to the profits. Just patent some important bits, license it out for small sums per unit (5% royaltee maybe?) and hope for the best. Set this technology free. The world really needs it.

What really would kill this dead is if the results aren’t reproducible. It’s critical that alternative fusion approaches do not suffer another Pons and Fleischmann fiasco.

I pretty much agree, except the final comparison. As is pointed out in many places in the FF literature, it involves no new physics, no challenge to fundamentals requiring huge rethinks and major replication. Even the HMFE ion-electron energy gap control stuff is fairly standard, just under-explored and under-exploited. As Tulse pointed out earlier, this is new engineering more than anything else.

IOW, the LENR (Low Energy Nuclear Reactions — the new CF name) idea is not scientifically similar. Don’t get spooked.

FF uses big temps, which is a lot easier for the world to grasp than low ones. :smirk:

Which is why I think the speed of tech innovation and real-world application will be very fast, notwithstanding Eric’s experience with Tex. A&M. “Scientific break-even” is a bridge too far to cover up or block. IMO.