[Rezwan]

It’s important to emphasize that science is not an ideology, rejects authority and expertise, and is by most measures a subversive activity. This means those who pay for science must want science’s results badly enough to tolerate a process that stands in opposition to all conventional norms of loyalty or tact.

In opposition to tact? There’s no excuse to be rude. Let’s not use the scientific method as an excuse for tactlessness.

Tact is more of a social skill. Etiquette.

In spite of how often one hears the term “scientific law,” there is no such thing.

* Because scientific theories cannot be proven true (see above), they cannot ever become laws.
* The commonly heard expression “scientific law” is an informal way to add emphasis to an idea, but it is technically incorrect.
* A “law” is by definition something permanent and immutable, but because scientific theories can always be disproven by new evidence, the idea of a “scientific law” has no basis in reality.
* As just one example, Newton’s “Law of Gravity” has been replaced by Einstein’s “Law of Gravity” and, because of some theoretical problems, Einstein’s “Law of Gravity” will eventually be replaced by a new “Law of Gravity” that is unknown at present.

In short, there are no scientific laws, only falsifiable theories.

Wonder by whose definition a “law” is something permanent and immutable. There is a range of definitions of law in the dictionary, of which this one applies: “a generalization based on a fact or event perceived to be recurrent”

Generalizations aren’t immutable or permanent.

They are convenient.

[Rezwan]

webtaz99 wrote: I have yet to personally meet even 1 person who could comprehend the difference between DPF and a tokamak. I might as well try to raise money for frumjoogles.

Frumjoogles! I want one!

On a more serious note, this is a job for the “Concept Monitor”, inspired by the “Confidence Monitor“. We design a quiz/info thing that will spread virally, getting people to realize they don’t know the difference between frumjoogles, tokamaks and sundials. It all links back to handy information on our website, and so on. If it’s a fun quiz, it becomes viral and gets people talking to each other and about fusion.

[Rezwan]

Glenn,

Do you have the original files of the artwork? I believe you uploaded directly to cafe press. I am not able to download from them. They inform me they are not an image storage service.

As a result, I only have the small thumbnails on file. I’d like to have the full sized images available. It looks like we ended up with 7 different designs.

Please email them to me at rezwan at focusfusion dot org.

Thanks!

[Rezwan]

Hi Vansig,

I’ve configured it to show avatars, not photos. I thought people would be more inclined to use an avatar than a picture, being that many people are not ready for self disclosure.

I suppose I could set it up to show a picture if there was no avatar pic, but there was a photo.

It’ll take me a while to get to that. For now, just use your picture as your avatar and it will show up.

Actually, clicking on your name and visiting your profile, I see your photo looks more like an avatar. Is that really you?

[Rezwan]

Stages, my friend. First, they’re using Deuterium – precisely to measure the neutrons so they can calculate how much fusion is taking place with different tweakings of the machine. They move to the neutron free stuff later.

Everybody speaks the language of Deuterons (Deuteri? Deuteronomy?), so it’s where you start setting up the experiment.

This reminds me of the time I tried to explain that chickens and humans have very similar bone structure. The chicken “wing” is our hand and fore-arm. The “drumette” is our shoulder to elbow. This was not obvious to my dinner mates, who thought all those drummettes came from tiny chickens. They could not accept that the drumette was a chicken “arm”. I did all kinds of arm gestures trying to mimmick a chicken wing. They would not be convinced.

Finally, they noticed the writing on the package, which said “wing drummettes.”

My brilliant analogies were in vain.

And I’m sure the connection between the chicken arms and fusion measurement in stages is also somewhat confusing.

Oh! A much more useful analogy. Like going to a doctor and getting radioactive dye injected so they can monitor your arteries. Neutrons are useful fusion markers.

[Rezwan]

Aeronaut wrote: One year from now, the NRC would have to hire a lot of people to handle at least 2,500 applications for research reactors. This would begin the experience database required for FAA style type certification, which would be required for an Aneutronic Fusion licensing category.

Glad to see your enthusiasm! Rushing it a bit, don’t you think? They’ve got to get it to work, first – actually, prove the concept first – then another several years for a prototype.

And to get it to work, they’ve got to make sure they have enough funding now, and can get through these current obstacles. Quite a bit of homework and nitty gritty to focus on now before we bring in the licensing lawyers!

2,500 universities shaking down their alumni would reach the world’s movers and shakers, as well as the future Bill Gates and Dave Thomas’s, as ~250,000 physics and engineering students who stand to benefit in terms of documented experience spread the buzz to at least 25 million people.

How easy is it to get 2,500 universities to shake down their alumni? Why wait for future Bill Gates, when you can probably get a pitch in to the present Bill much easier than shaking down 2,500 universities?

I’m getting the sense you’re more comfortable with a future, hypothetical world where everything works smoothly, than the present problematic world.

The base rationale could extend from the need to suspend disbelief, like we all do every time we watch a movie.

Watch out about suspending disbelief. This isn’t a movie. Suspend disbelief and get burned, and you lose goodwill. No need to appeal to wishful thinking. I’d rather have people on board that are up for the hard work, trial and error to get this done. And who will appreciate it for the miracle it is, if it works out really quickly.

Aneutronic fusion, folks. It sounds like you’re underestimating the challenge here.

Due diligence

Yes. Due diligence, which is still pending for phase I proof of concept. Due diligence in getting the research funds raised, getting the machine to fire like a charm, connecting the dots with other researchers for useful feedback, insights and suggestions, connecting the dots on the supply chain, publishing papers and getting peer review, systematically testing every facet of the machine.

It may be useful to take a step back here to think about the present challenges, and let the future take care of itself.

2 years from now…

Inshallah.

[Rezwan]

There’s a published article on the effect of cathode structure on neutron yield performance in our very own denseplasmafocus.org website.

The “squirrel cage cathode” is the type with bars/pins/rods, whatever you’re calling them. (Why “squirrel”?)

The rods are more useful than the cylinder for neutron yield. Eric explained this to me using the words “magnetosonic shockwave”. Something about the plasma sheath moving faster than sound.

I am unable to explain this to anyone else, which leads me to conclude that I didn’t fully understand.

[Rezwan]

Forgot to add link to my writeup of the event: https://focusfusion.org/index.php/site/article/icc_recap_and_bill_gates_ted_talk_review/

[Rezwan]

Cool! We looked into Gates Foundation before, but there was no opening to apply. They are exclusively health and education oriented. Their site is still not set up to reflect energy, but I just sent an email to their info line to see if there is someone I can talk to.

Does anyone know anyone who works at the Gates Foundation? These things are ALWAYS much better if there is a personal contact. We must leverage our 2 degrees of Kevin Bacon.

[Rezwan]

Yes, I think engineering solutions might tend to be a bit of overkill. We’d probably be surprised at how much a bit of gardening would improve the stability of micro-climates. Like redwood forests maintaining a steady temperature throughout the year. We’re so out of touch with the basics. I suppose many of us have killed any houseplant that came our way, so we’re a bit mystified by plants. Think engineering is less complex somehow.

[Rezwan]

Yes, reforestation is also biased towards trees and a bit Eurocentric. Don’t forget the grasslands. http://www.holisticmanagement.org That might be even more useful. Not so much for the CO2. It’s more about reducing erosion, building up the water table and just making the world that much prettier. If CO2 fears is what gets people to take the time to get ground cover going (again, grassland species are superior to trees in many environments), then bless those fears.

After we get fusion up and running, grasslands will be my next environmental pursuit. Restoring the Middle East dustbowls. So much to do.

[Rezwan]

It’s possible. I’m tinkering with using an iphone to webstream. There’s also something called webex for desktop + conference call applications.

[Rezwan]

OK, not sure about the white background. Is there a way to make the background grey? Or is it somehow transparent?

Also, the circle with circles is cool. At the same time, I was hoping for an image that captures the plasmoid more than the electrodes.

You know, this thing.

Also, we need a log for the new http://DensePlasmaFocus.org site – specifically for its forums. Something simple, quick. That’s going live in a few short moments. (It’s bad enough I’m behind on FFS site, now, we have another site).

[Rezwan]

My understanding is that ion propulsion is orders of magnitude better than chemical propulsion, but now that you mention it, I can’t put my hands on the numbers. Here is a post on DPFs and Space Propulsion.

[Rezwan]

Hmm. Phallic?

OK, are there other designs out there?

[Author]

Posts