Rick Has A Word or two for sceptics.

[ladajo]

For the record, I think we can point to the former Britich Empire for most of the issues we are dealing with today.

Iraq - who dumped gazillions of wealth into the hands of a bunch of nomadic goat and camel herders and gave little thought to what would happen afterward?

Iran - Hmm, nope, no english history there,

Afghanistan, another place with no english after effects. Nope, none at all.

Pakistan and India - Whose bright idea was that? Couldn't have been England.

Chop and Split of the Ottoman Empire? Who led the charge? Good thing the Greeks were around, someone might have noticed it wasn't really their idea.

The importation of a bunch of Europeans to a land they had never seen in the Sinai? I bet the locals were pissed. Oh, they still are...

And for fun let's talk about Africa, hmmm, no, no impact there.

I do not think that any British have ground to stand on when pointing colonial adventurist fingers at the US. England has a long long history of mucking up affairs in other parts of the world. I think the US would be hard pressed to match, EVER.

I feel free to have my opinion as half my family is Empire, and I myself was born and raised waving at the Queen and Mum when they would take the time to visit and go for a drive at the local Oval.

[Shubedobedubopbopbedo]

At the comments to my American Thinker article:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/06/ ... nergy.html

We have a sceptic (several posts by sceptic check them out):

Posted by: WR Jonas
Jun 19, 01:18 PM

I have spoken out here about my skepticism based on a provable dynamic and truth . There will always be ample reasons to spend other peoples money. To give this research or any other some noble purpose or cause does not necessarily make the aims correct or worthwhile .
If we were still shooting rockets at the moon and coming up empty or failed we would have stopped it a long time ago. This canard of ,try until we run of money, is the basis for continuing a proven failure. Because it is Navy project doesn't give it any greater chance of success.
So , how about we put the fusion research industry on a time, results or dollar limit to see if it is ever going to produce anything . Any takers?

Posted by: rnebel
Jun 23, 04:11 PM

Mr. Jonas:

I'll take you up on that.

Whoa... I'm convinced. Here I was expecting a couple words from Rick, and was deluged with a generous EIGHT words. Second-hand words too! Just like the bible. And then... eight pages of blather! Blessed are we who believe in polywell. The end is nigh... paradise is within our grasp!

[D Tibbets]

At the comments to my American Thinker article:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/06/ ... nergy.html

We have a sceptic (several posts by sceptic check them out):

Posted by: WR Jonas
Jun 19, 01:18 PM

I have spoken out here about my skepticism based on a provable dynamic and truth . There will always be ample reasons to spend other peoples money. To give this research or any other some noble purpose or cause does not necessarily make the aims correct or worthwhile .
If we were still shooting rockets at the moon and coming up empty or failed we would have stopped it a long time ago. This canard of ,try until we run of money, is the basis for continuing a proven failure. Because it is Navy project doesn't give it any greater chance of success.
So , how about we put the fusion research industry on a time, results or dollar limit to see if it is ever going to produce anything . Any takers?

Posted by: rnebel
Jun 23, 04:11 PM

Mr. Jonas:

I'll take you up on that.

Whoa... I'm convinced. Here I was expecting a couple words from Rick, and was deluged with a generous EIGHT words. Second-hand words too! Just like the bible. And then... eight pages of blather! Blessed are we who believe in polywell. The end is nigh... paradise is within our grasp!

R. Nebel has given out tidbits (titbits) of information at times. Only rarely has he initiated discussions. The brief response was appropiate for people following this, though he could have restated the actual time line stipulated in the contracts.
Besides, he has to get results within two years. We all know the world is ending on Dec. 12, 2012!

Dan Tibbets

[Aero]

Dan,
Don't be in such a rush. The end is December 21, 2012. You get 9 more days.

[Betruger]

At the comments to my American Thinker article:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/06/ ... nergy.html

We have a sceptic (several posts by sceptic check them out):

Posted by: WR Jonas
Jun 19, 01:18 PM

I have spoken out here about my skepticism based on a provable dynamic and truth . There will always be ample reasons to spend other peoples money. To give this research or any other some noble purpose or cause does not necessarily make the aims correct or worthwhile .
If we were still shooting rockets at the moon and coming up empty or failed we would have stopped it a long time ago. This canard of ,try until we run of money, is the basis for continuing a proven failure. Because it is Navy project doesn't give it any greater chance of success.
So , how about we put the fusion research industry on a time, results or dollar limit to see if it is ever going to produce anything . Any takers?

Posted by: rnebel
Jun 23, 04:11 PM

Mr. Jonas:

I'll take you up on that.

Whoa... I'm convinced. Here I was expecting a couple words from Rick, and was deluged with a generous EIGHT words. Second-hand words too! Just like the bible. And then... eight pages of blather! Blessed are we who believe in polywell. The end is nigh... paradise is within our grasp!

I'm pretty sure physicists and engineers are savvy to what a "troll" is.

[Helius]

Remember, the reason we're all here is to find a path to cheap energy. There's plenty of paths to expensive energy. We don't care about them, for a good reason.

Personally, I find the politics of science to be extremely interesting. That there is an enormous amount of money involved in the provisioning of energy really raises the stakes for many of the players involved, and makes the dynamic of the science and research so amazingly interesting. I really wonder how much the "renewable" energy Industry (exclusively low power densities) is really encouraged by the fossil fuel industry (high power densities) as a barrier to competition; And I really want to see a wild card come out of nowhere to see how the politics play out.

The current Fossil industries have nuclear power pretty much stymied, and the only thing that may come in at higher power densities than old redox reactions have to be out of nowhere and capture the imagination of the public. Go Polywell! Go Drs Park & Nebel !

[MSimon]

Remember, the reason we're all here is to find a path to cheap energy. There's plenty of paths to expensive energy. We don't care about them, for a good reason.

Personally, I find the politics of science to be extremely interesting. That there is an enormous amount of money involved in the provisioning of energy really raises the stakes for many of the players involved, and makes the dynamic of the science and research so amazingly interesting. I really wonder how much the "renewable" energy Industry (exclusively low power densities) is really encouraged by the fossil fuel industry (high power densities) as a barrier to competition; And I really want to see a wild card come out of nowhere to see how the politics play out.

The current Fossil industries have nuclear power pretty much stymied, and the only thing that may come in at higher power densities than old redox reactions have to be out of nowhere and capture the imagination of the public. Go Polywell! Go Drs Park & Nebel !

You might enjoy this short piece on Thomas Edison and the current wars.

http://powerandcontrol.blogspot.com/2007/12/roots.html

Industry has been using government to hamper the competition like forever.

I wouldn't be surprised if sub was a player (or even paid troll) in one of the energy industries currently in existence.

Beware of companies backing the Global Warming scam. The ones who will profit are for it and the ones who will take a hit are against it.

====

Re the British Empire. It was the Best of the Empires. Hong Kong, Australia, Canada, USA, India. All success stories.

Hong Kong is absorbing China. Very good trick.

The Ottoman Empire wasn't going to hold. Ever.

====

Jews have been living in Israel continuously for 3,500 years. When they started buying land from the owners in 1880 they paid top dollar for land considered worthless. Read Mark Twain's travel log of the area.

Once the Jews started improving it Arabs (mainly from Syria) started moving in too. King Faisal thought their movement into the area was a good thing for development.

During WW2 the Mufti of Jerusalem (he would be a Palestinian today) sided with the Austrian Corporal. Mein Kampf is still an Arabic best seller.

Well any way The Corporal sped things up because no other countries (including the USA) were willing to take mass Jewish immigration.

The Brits made promises to the Jews and then sided with the Arabs. Probably figuring that only with a miracle could the Jews withstand four Arab Armies. (one led by a Brit). The Jews got their miracle.

Well any way there was bad blood all around.

The end of the Turkish Empire came with Allenby's attack on Beersheba.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Beersheba

Also this might be of interest:

Start-up Nation: The Story of Israel's Economic Miracle

and this one:

The Israel Test

But all in all I'd say the Brits did a fair job overall. Even Africa was a success story (in the Brit Colonies) until the fall of the Empire and Communists got the upper hand. South Africa is teetering and Rhodesia is a gonner. For now.

The Americans having a different culture (not big on Colonialism) have done even better. And we have invented the perfect tool for liquefying Arab/Islamic culture. High speed and portable communications. And porn on the internet to go with it.

Islam Inc. is not a good long term bet.

[chrismb]

Industry has been using government to hamper the competition like forever.

Like the Boulton and Watt story where they used government to extend their patent for years and years claiming it would damage their development of it, but in fact it was self-evident they were hampering its development.

Re the British Empire. It was the Best of the Empires. Hong Kong, Australia, Canada, USA, India. All success stories.

Your loyalty to your true historic Sovereign () is touching, but perhaps misplaced. Up 'til the early 1900's I'd agree with you completely. The rot set in after that and the British establishment became variously detestable in parts. The self-serving arrogance of the British establishment at the time have clearly contributed to the problems now facing Persia, Palestine, East India, East Africa, Greater Southern Africa, Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Ceylon, Waziristan, Kashmir, &c., &c., and even closer to home like N Ireland. There was clearly a good-will generated by being part of the Victorian British Empire; membership was a thing to be desired. Then it was resented. The conversion of good-will to resentment need not have been managed so badly, so quickly. Those places that reached effective independence prior to 1914 have been sound bed-rocks of the Commonwealth. Those that gained independence after are the world's political hot-spots.

[Shubedobedubopbopbedo]

I wouldn't be surprised if sub was a player (or even paid troll) in one of the energy industries currently in existence.

Sure. Troll. Whatever.

I traded a few emails with Dr. Bussard a couple months before he died. He attempted to convince me that the issues raised by Rider had been addressed in the early nineties - but he was too tired to re-visit them.

Yeah. Sure.

I think he was on heavy meds and wasn't thinking clearly. Even an engineer could see the flaws in his design. You people are riding on Bussard's status only. You have absolutely no other reason to believe Polywell will ever achieve anything significant.

[Betruger]

That's why it's funded.

[chrismb]

Even an engineer could see the flaws in his design.

Plenty of victorian engineers could see the obvious flaws in the idea of a flying machine. Even the American military tried to make one and failed. Clearly the idea that a couple of bicycle makers could come up with one is daft.

...The scientific establishment never seems to learn history lessons.

[Shubedobedubopbopbedo]

There were no flaws in the idea of a flying machine. People had been flying for centuries before the Wright Brothers, using hot air balloons and gliders. The success of aircraft has no bearing on whether fusion reactors will work. They are completely different technologies. Completely different physics. They are not even remotely analogous. Even the attempt at using aircraft as an analogy shows your ignorance.

Right now, ITER is being funded the most, has the most support of the scientific community. Based on any number of arguments that you, yourselves, have made, I should believe that ITER is most likely to succeed.

Based on my own inquiries, I don't believe any of them will succeed. Feasibility hasn't been demonstrated.

[chrismb]

Indeed, Sir George Cayley not only made a glider, but wrote books on air navigation 100 years before. But still, engineers doubted it could be done. Just like some doubt fusion can be man-made, even though it has already!!

[MSimon]

Industry has been using government to hamper the competition like forever.

Like the Boulton and Watt story where they used government to extend their patent for years and years claiming it would damage their development of it, but in fact it was self-evident they were hampering its development.

Re the British Empire. It was the Best of the Empires. Hong Kong, Australia, Canada, USA, India. All success stories.

Your loyalty to your true historic Sovereign (:wink:) is touching, but perhaps misplaced. Up 'til the early 1900's I'd agree with you completely. The rot set in after that and the British establishment became variously detestable in parts. The self-serving arrogance of the British establishment at the time have clearly contributed to the problems now facing Persia, Palestine, East India, East Africa, Greater Southern Africa, Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Ceylon, Waziristan, Kashmir, &c., &c., and even closer to home like N Ireland. There was clearly a good-will generated by being part of the Victorian British Empire; membership was a thing to be desired. Then it was resented. The conversion of good-will to resentment need not have been managed so badly, so quickly. Those places that reached effective independence prior to 1914 have been sound bed-rocks of the Commonwealth. Those that gained independence after are the world's political hot-spots.

Thanks. Not being a subject of the Crown I'm not as up on modern colonial history as I should be.

Still. The Brit Empire did better than any other and those places where contact was sufficient to leave an English speaking remnant have a leg up in the modern world if they would use it.

Of course the fact that English is the worlds lingua franca (heh) was accidental, not design. And you know who hates it most? The French.

A lovely language to be sure (studied it in high school). But not much in vogue.

====

Well any way. Don't be so hard on yourselves. From over here your effect on history seems on the whole quite positive.

I do agree that stupidity seems to have crept in. My evidence is the horrible generalship in WW1. The only one with any brains, Winnie, was run out because of poor execution of his excellent plan (Gallipoli).

He did redeem all that in WW2 with excellence in stratagem. I especially like

Bodyguard of Lies

When it comes to WW2 stratagem.

Those boys were brilliant. And how about the Enigma work? First rate. Evidently it was too late. Pity. I think 10 or 20 more years of enlightened colonialism would have served the world well. Esp. like Hong Kong's Last Brit Governor The Rt. Hon. Christopher Francis Patten - that guy was perfectly placed to ruin the Chinese Communists. And lucky for us events had made the Chinese Communists pragmatists) But America was having none of it and we pressured our cousins for an end to Colonialism before it was entirely wise. But you also have to consider that world sentiment was against it.

Ah. Well. We are tasked with cleaning up the wreckage and might as well get on with it. And it may in fact require some more wrecking to take out sections of the construction that are improperly placed. A delicate operation and all we have (for the most part) is a blunt instrument.

We are getting some better at it though. No need to bomb cities when all you want to destroy is a house and the people in it. There are new munitions being developed that won't even take out the house. Just the target and his five closest friends.

[StevePoling]

Of course the fact that English is the worlds lingua franca (heh) was accidental, not design. And you know who hates it most? The French.

A lovely language to be sure (studied it in high school). But not much in vogue.

My daughter, the Nuclear Engineer, will never forgive me for encouraging her to study Spanish instead of French in High School.