[Rezwan]

jamesr wrote: You could try and download this version: movie maker 2.6 for vista

OK. Downloaded 2.6 (is that a previous version? Isn’t 6 more recent?) but it says I can’t open it because I don’t have proper audio hardware installed. That’s all they tell me. No link to where I can order any of said audio hardware, or what exactly it consists of.

[Rezwan]

Ah. Finally took the time to read one of your longer posts in this thread. Sorry. Just skimming here.

Specifically why is it so disturbing to you if 100% of all people don’t happen to agree on this one issue?

I don’t think it’s disturbing. I agree consensus is not relevant.

Also think most exchanges in this forum show a robust lack of agreement across many issues.

Also, I think many folks on this forum understand the philosophical issue of the complexity of pinning down truth and the possibility of fluctuations and convolutions of knowledge.

But I regret posting to this thread. Not a big fan of philosophical distinctionizing.

I’m interested in this fusion project because, at the end of the day, “truth” or “theory” notwithstanding, either we’re going to have a measurable source of energy, or we aren’t. If it’s not measurable, if it’s only theoretical, it won’t do me any good.

And the only way I’ll know I “happened to be” right is if there is a measurable result.

So, people who, and posts that are “measurement oriented” are a bit more appealing to me at this time. Seem to be sharpening the right tools.

Just where I’m at.

[Rezwan]

Phil’s Dad wrote: (My apologies for not moving this to another thread as I don’t know how.) :down:

Dash seems to think the Earth would be too warm if it were heated radioactively in he past.

It is worth remembering that the Sun was a lot cooler 2Bn years ago.
Maybe the two balanced each other to some extent.

Be nice to each other :-S

You can’t move to another thread, only moderators can. But you seem to have some natural moderation qualities.

[Rezwan]

dash wrote: One must still take these “proofs” on faith. Don’t you see? They are just theories.
….You seem to take it on faith that the majority is right. Fine, that’s your privilege. I’ll stick with my beliefs, and I don’t mind being wrong. In this case it doesn’t matter if I’m wrong.

“I’ll stick with my beliefs” – Are you saying that it’s “My belief/faith vs. your belief/faith?” Never mind. Tedious question, tedious topic.

Have you heard the story of how some guy determined the length of the emperor’s nose? He just asked a whole bunch of people how long they thought the emperor’s nose is. Then he averaged the result. And that’s what the length of the emperor’s nose is.

Well, yeah. It’s a typical “wisdom of crowds” phenomenon. I’ve been flipping through the book “Wisdom of crowds” – which starts off with an anecdote (not proof! So much of the book is anecdotal! Who can believe it? I should be ashamed for even quoting it.) of a crowd of people of varying expertise (general public, plus cow experts) guessing the weight of a cow. The averaged guess proved to be the best one. The writer stresses that it’s important that the people in the crowd are each going with their own belief/knowledge/bias, though, and not just voting what they think the other people will be voting. He makes a distinction between intelligent imitation and herd imitation.

Suggests that independent thought – often manifesting as delusional mavericking is possibly a necessary inefficiency in our evolution toward collective wisdom.

But in any case, there is rarely an excuse for ad hominem attacks.

Granted, the “wisdom of crowds” thesis is irrelevant to meta-skeptics who see randomness everywhere, and reject “truth”. Which sounds like what you “happen to” be doing:

But in other cases, if I happen to buck the majority and I happen to be right, there can be huge rewards — for me.

How big was that reward here? This is a shared forum. The reward I got from your posts was the response from the other guys of clarifying their positions, better documenting them. That was useful.

Your own posts weren’t as clear – I just couldn’t focus anymore.

It might be a useful exercise to go back over one’s (own) posts once in a while and simply delete ad hominem phrases or unhelpful adjectives. You don’t lose any content. Just attitude. I’m not pointing to anyone specifically here. I myself regret the ad hominem attacks that I have made from time to time.

Check out the handy “edit” button below your own posts! It’s fun!

[Rezwan]

jamesr wrote: I’m fully aware of what DPF & ITER are. As Brian said, I was trying to suggest that although some may regard the large scale & expensive tokamak projects as ‘the enemy’, there is a lot of valuable research going on in that field to do with materials properties and the interactions of plasmas with solid interfacing components.

Some of this may be applicable to the plasma/solid boundaries in a DPF. We need to take advantage of all the modelling and experimental results they get.

I should disclose my interest – I have just finished a Masters in nuclear physics, and will be starting a PhD in a few weeks modelling edge turbulence and instabilities in tokamaks and stellarators. Initially using data from the Mega Amp Spherical Tokamak (MAST) at Culham, UK and the Large Helical Device (LHD) in Japan.

Although my research may be from the mainstream side (I needed funding), I hope to be able to apply it different scenarios like focus fusion.

James

Hello! Just split the “earth’s core” debate off of this post. It seems to me like the rest of this is still about electrodes. Although I can take the quote above and start another thread on “My “enemy” is no longer my enemy when I’m taking advantage of their modeling and experimental results” – or “Blasting the boundaries of different experimental approaches: Learning from our esteemed colleagues and the Tokamak”…

Congratulations on your Masters, James!

[Rezwan]

Phil’s Dad wrote: Sorry – not spel cheked.

Some basic tips on forums: While you can’t edit other people’s posts, you should be able to edit your own, even after you’ve posted.

The button is right there on your own posts, on the same line with “quote”. Also, I think you can delete your own posts. Handy, if you want to hide the evidence. Although what you write’s been cached somewhere, and if someone’s quoted you, there’s no deleting it anymore.

OK. Now to go back and figure out where to cut this post and start the new thread.

[Rezwan]

Not sure how far to go with user generated content. Some insights re: viral marketing http://tr.im/yfKU from the LA Times.

Permission, alas, ruins it. Virality — that must-see, must-share quality that marketers so desperately want to capture — requires some transgression, Seger says, some stunt.

“Every Web job I’ve ever had,” Seger says, “they’ve said, ‘OK, let’s manufacture a viral video.’ You can’t do it because so many elements of luck and charm go into making something that doesn’t feel like you’re selling something.”

Marketers who would capitalize on user-generated content must also be prepared to let the inmates run the asylum.

[Rezwan]

Henning wrote: I think we don’t want anyone proving the existence of any gods

Well, I don’t know. An actual proof, on our humble website…that would be auspicious.

By the way, the Solspace modules cost a few dollars. There a other content management solutions like Drupal, but I don’t know about it ease of usage. Or the one you’re using anyway.

Yeah, solspace is set up for use by the CMS we’re using now. I’m sure Drupal is useful. Also, I’ve heard of Joomla, and there may be others. But along with that stuff, we’d need someone who knows how to use it. As it is, I kind of understand the expression engine stuff so it’s something I can do without freaking out. I’m not a web developer by training. Just by necessity of making this site happen. I’ve found EE to be very supportive to someone with limited computer training like myself. The thought of switching to another…platform?…is daunting.

I’m not sure if the drupal modules are designed to work with EE. So…the cost of the solspace add ons doesn’t seem too bad in light of the time of figuring out all that other stuff. I’m slow enough as it is!

I guess we’re satisficing here, not optimizing.

[Rezwan]

That’s where the “digg” functionality will come in. Fellow members will flag the posts as inappropriate, and they will fall to a back page or something. Meanwhile the better posts (and posters) will rise to the top.

We wouldn’t have these things on the front page to begin with. Start them off on a proving ground and promote/demote. It’ll be all democratic.

Just been reading “Wisdom of Crowds” and it seems to be a good approach.

[Rezwan]

This is very doable. Especially with some footage of the assembled device itself. It’s just talking heads and some intercut images. Now to work on the pitch itself. And maybe get some of those mics you talk about. We have an old DV camera – consumer end, about 7 years old, but some of those other pitches didn’t look much better quality than that. And DV tape is all they require. If we make sure the lighting and sound is good. Maybe grainy isn’t an issue. And it won’t be grainy!

Thanks for your procrastination!

[Rezwan]

Things are moving along for LPP, and Focus Fusion is right there to report on it. But we are hampered by lack of good equipment.

We’re asking our users for recommendations on a good camera to be documenting all this with. Both still camera and video/motion camera.

Better yet, any donations? We are a 501c3, after all. You can be the official video camera and/or still Camera for Focus Fusion’s ongoing documentation.

Another possibility – if you are in the New Jersey/tri-state area and have some above and beyond documentation equipment (camera, lights, mics, booms, what have you) and want to come down to capture key events – we may be able to arrange that. Outsourcing.

[Rezwan]

And another tweet about a camera:

Breakable@focusfusion I would choose http://tinyurl.com/n5cngw for a rugged inexpensive stills camera.

How about a movie camera? Is it better to get that separate?

[Rezwan]

Thanks! Will look into it.

[Rezwan]

Hi Folks,

I contacted the Committee on Science and Technology (CS&T;) – the organization that was tasked with managing the ARPA-E grants. I was following up on why we didn’t get the opportunity to apply for a grant. Aside from the great number of applicants, I wanted to see if they had any particular issues with aneutronic fusion. It does appear that they hold Aneutronic fusion in low regard. In even lower regard is the PolyWell. Adam Rosenberg, on the professional staff of the CS&T;and former DOE Office of Science Program Manager had this to say about it:

2) A spherically symmetric magnetic field is impossible under the laws of physics as we know them, and so Bussard’s PolyWell is essentially based on hokum.

As I am not familiar with spherical symmetric magnetic field requirements – I’ll put this here for to you to discuss.

[Rezwan]

OK, OK! I’m just not completely comfortable with what I can and can’t tweet about and worried that I’ll make some blunders. And now, not tweeting is a blunder 🙂

Will try to get something up there now. We’ll be having a meeting about that tonight…but still these meetings are not always conclusive.

[Author]

Posts