Talk-Polywell.org

How long before WB7 is operational and we get results out do you reckon ?

Nanos wrote:How long before WB7 is operational and we get results out do you reckon ?

March to May time frame for results. Longer if there are glitches.

Of course those are just guesses based on rumors. Best I can do.

Thanks, I was also wondering what their budget was, as I don't recal seeing any mention of particular funding amounts being said for this next prototype.

Nanos wrote:Thanks, I was also wondering what their budget was, as I don't recal seeing any mention of particular funding amounts being said for this next prototype.

No idea. I'm told tin is being bent.

Simon

Simon--

Could you explain why your sources are so leery of going on the record?

Not to disturb your cloak and dagger games but can you please translate the interview into MP3? I'm unable to play it on my Linux system.

- Indrek

Indrek--

I couldn't tell if your "cloak and dagger" comment was directed at me or somebody else. In case it was intended for me, I apologize for being excessively terse. I'm more interested in figuring out what the development strategy is than looking for conspiracies.

Is the secrecy associated with the military funding? Are the principals worried about over-promising? Are there trade secret issues? Are they worried about starting a press feeding frenzy? Is there still a worry about the DOE/tokamak crowd trying to kill funding?

Of course, it's also true that I'm just dying to know what's going on for real. I don't give Polywell much more than a 25% chance of being commercialized, but that's about 15% more than a whole bunch of technologies that we hear about all the time and are widely assumed to be "legitimate."

TheRadicalModerate wrote:Simon--

Could you explain why your sources are so leery of going on the record?

Are they worried about starting a press feeding frenzy?

Yes. They don't want a the news media camping out waiting for results.

Indrek I have a free translator that will do three minutes. Do you know of a translator? Be glad to help.

I made a MP3 version here via my ADSL connection (So feel free to copy it someplace with more bandwidth for others!)

http://www.nanos.org.uk/Robert-Bussard-Interview.mp3

Thanks. Maybe MSimon can find a permanent place for it.

- Indrek

Indrek wrote:Thanks. Maybe MSimon can find a permanent place for it.

- Indrek

I'll ask Joe to do some thing with it. Or maybe Tim Ventura will put it up at his site. I'll start with that.

Thanks!

MSimon wrote:I'll ask Joe to do some thing with it. Or maybe Tim Ventura will put it up at his site. I'll start with that.

That's a good plan. If Tim can't host it, I certainly can, though I too have some concerns about the association...

Joe,

1. Tim hasn't gotten back to me yet. I'll give him a few more days.
2. The authority is Dr. B. - American Anti-Grav is only the vehicle.

I don't see how the source discredits the info. Scientific method and all that.

3. The project is funded. It hardly matters what people think.

MSimon wrote:Kurt,

It makes no difference now. If WB-7 shows promise the US Navy is on tap to build the 100 MW demo.

"on tap" and "funded" are two different things entirely. Who knows what will happen two years from now.

Forex, if Hillary gets elected, James Hanson will probably discover that boron production adds .00000000000000002% to America's carbon footprint for the year 2015 and the project will be turned off. The only reasonable solution to global warming, after all, is going back to the stone ages!

All kidding aside, though, if the results are inconclusive, or the conclusion is that there is minimal evidence...just barely enough to suggest that a slightly larger WB-8 might be necessary....the entire thing will probably go back into limbo. Expect us to be right back where we were last year if that happens.

cuddihy wrote:

MSimon wrote:Kurt,

It makes no difference now. If WB-7 shows promise the US Navy is on tap to build the 100 MW demo.

"on tap" and "funded" are two different things entirely. Who knows what will happen two years from now.

Forex, if Hillary gets elected, James Hanson will probably discover that boron production adds .00000000000000002% to America's carbon footprint for the year 2015 and the project will be turned off. The only reasonable solution to global warming, after all, is going back to the stone ages!

All kidding aside, though, if the results are inconclusive, or the conclusion is that there is minimal evidence...just barely enough to suggest that a slightly larger WB-8 might be necessary....the entire thing will probably go back into limbo. Expect us to be right back where we were last year if that happens.

cuddihy,

I'm somewhat more connected on this than most. People email me. I can tell you that even without a WB-7 success that the pressures are intense to get this project fully funded. Right now. I'm not at liberty to say more, except that your fears are unfounded.

Big forces are at work behind the scenes, both political (both parties) and economic.

They will show themselves when it is time to make a move publicly.

If you want to join the project when it gets funded study, study like a fiend. A lot of talent will be required. All kinds. Lawyers. Accountants. Engineers, chemists, physicists, lab technicians etc. Project historians. Photographers. Facilities designers. Even an artist or two.