So will it work or not?

[rj40]

OK. So will this work or not? I kept thinking we would know "within a few months to a year." Well, that hasn't turned out to be the case. Perhaps in ... 50 years? Navy involvment gave me hope, but now, as a friend has mentioned, it is starting to look more like this:

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

The Army funded this one and, of course, it is bunk.

Oh well.

[TDPerk]

"I kept thinking we would know "within a few months to a year." Well, that hasn't turned out to be the case."

I don't know why you were thinking that, because the timeline mentioned by anyone in the know at the earliest says we'll know more starting around next April if I remember, and the next point of interest in the timeline is around October/November of next year.

[Josh Cryer]

Our species isn't lucky enough for this to work, I'm afraid.

I hope it does.

[IntLibber]

OK. So will this work or not? I kept thinking we would know "within a few months to a year." Well, that hasn't turned out to be the case. Perhaps in ... 50 years? Navy involvment gave me hope, but now, as a friend has mentioned, it is starting to look more like this:

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

The Army funded this one and, of course, it is bunk.

Oh well.

Actually Dr. Nebel said 18 months to two years, so we've got a bit left to go. Since the Navy embargoes the research, we likely wont see a lot of results other than another contract solititation for a lot more money if it works.

And of course remote viewing is bunk, wtf made you think otherwise? Thats not science, its superstition.

[rj40]

"I kept thinking we would know "within a few months to a year." Well, that hasn't turned out to be the case."

I don't know why you were thinking that, because the timeline mentioned by anyone in the know at the earliest says we'll know more starting around next April if I remember, and the next point of interest in the timeline is around October/November of next year.

Some misinterpretations on my end. The EMC2 website mentions:

Fusion R&D Phase 1 - Validate and review WB-6 results:
1.5 - 2 years / $3-5M
Fusion R&D Phase 2 - Design, build and test full scale 100 MW Fusion System:
5 years / $200M
Successful Phase 2 marks the end of fossil fuels


I thought there would be confirmation that they were starting Phase 2 by mid-2008. I recall quotes by others on this board back in 2007 that 2008 would have the big news. No, I cannot find it now.

Yeah, April 2010 and then Oct/Nov 2011. I have that marked down...this time.

[rj40]

OK. So will this work or not? I kept thinking we would know "within a few months to a year." Well, that hasn't turned out to be the case. Perhaps in ... 50 years? Navy involvment gave me hope, but now, as a friend has mentioned, it is starting to look more like this:

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

The Army funded this one and, of course, it is bunk.

Oh well.

Actually Dr. Nebel said 18 months to two years, so we've got a bit left to go. Since the Navy embargoes the research, we likely wont see a lot of results other than another contract solititation for a lot more money if it works.

And of course remote viewing is bunk, wtf made you think otherwise? Thats not science, its superstition.

Yeah, 18 months to two years. Starting when? September 2009? We’ll see. So, if it works, you expect to see a lot more money solicited? How much and when?

I never thought remote viewing was anything but bunk. Nothing made me think otherwise (a bit before my time). WTbF made you think I thought that? The point is I think one of the reasons remote viewing made it so far was the “shine of an official US Army” contract. And now here in present day, the “shine of an official US Navy” contract has had some impact on me. But I see now that the shine doesn’t amount to much. Even the Navy can be fooled (of course!) - not on purpose mind you; I don’t think Nebel and crew are trying to rip anyone off.

MSIMON, as well as some others, are entertaining. So I think I’ll stick around the board for a bit longer. But am not expecting much. Hope I’m wrong. Reeeeaaaaallllly want to be wrong on this. You have no idea how much I want to be wrong.

[djolds1]

The EMC2 website mentions:

Fusion R&D Phase 1 - Validate and review WB-6 results:
1.5 - 2 years / $3-5M
Fusion R&D Phase 2 - Design, build and test full scale 100 MW Fusion System:
5 years / $200M
Successful Phase 2 marks the end of fossil fuels


I thought there would be confirmation that they were starting Phase 2 by mid-2008. I recall quotes by others on this board back in 2007 that 2008 would have the big news. No, I cannot find it now.

Yeah, April 2010 and then Oct/Nov 2011. I have that marked down...this time.

A bit cynical and unfair. Dr. Bussard's death no doubt threw a spanner into that timeline for awhile, and Dr. Nebel does seem to have taken a more conservative approach than that proclaimed above, crossing all Ts and dotting all Is instead of tearing ahead Manhattan Project style.

Still, I will admit I am impatient for some hard data as well.

[MSimon]

Our species isn't lucky enough for this to work, I'm afraid. :(

I hope it does.

There is something useful along these lines you can do if you train yourself.

You can know what other people are feeling. Because feeling gives off chemicals. You can smell them (as is recognize - it is not like sniffing lilacs). And it can be rather nuanced if you are paying attention.

[IntLibber]

Our species isn't lucky enough for this to work, I'm afraid.

I hope it does.

There is something useful along these lines you can do if you train yourself.

You can know what other people are feeling. Because feeling gives off chemicals. You can smell them (as is recognize - it is not like sniffing lilacs). And it can be rather nuanced if you are paying attention.

Oh stop toying with him.

Josh, Nebel and his team are actual, real, physicists and engineers from the best universities and national labs. They wouldn't have gone this long unless they saw something worthwhile. Nebel had a nice stable and well paid position at a national lab that he's left/on sabbatical from to pursue this, so he's got no financial incentive to be be deceiving anyone including himself.

Conversely that Army project was pursued by ignoramuses with soft science degrees and too much superstition, with support from like minded politicians. Remember that was the Reagan era when Nancy Reagan consulted an astrologer on the timing of all of her husbands major decisions/announcements/actions. Comparing the two projects is a serious disservice to the people on Nebel's team.

[CaptainBeowulf]

Also, if I remember the tone of his previous comments correctly, Nebel has been saying all along "we'll know in x number of months if it's worth continuing the research".

His team's work on WB-7 apparently convinced them, and the Navy, that it was worth continuing the research. That led to the new contracts released in the fall. From that point, I would guess it's another 18 months to know if continuing from WB-8/8.1/8.2 or whatever is worth it. If no show-stoppers are found, I would like it if the next step was the 100 MW machine. However, given the history of fusion research I suspect that even if show-stoppers are not found, difficulties will be found, and the next step will end up being a WB-9 costing in the range of $15 to $40 million. You have to do the research step-by-step.

Personally, I am happy if no show-stoppers are found each time the machine gets more complex and more powerful. It means that a viable alternative research path to ITER remains open. Same with FRCs - I hope they have more research success and remain a viable route as well. Heck, I hope the ITER guys learn enough with their upcoming test runs to find a viable research pathway towards more efficient tokamaks.

Multiple parallel development pathways which can ultimately lead to commercial competition between different fusion technologies strike me as having a better chance for success than the eggs-all-in-one-basket approach. After all, the Manhattan project, which people quote a lot, produced two different approaches: uranium bomb and plutonium bomb. Why shouldn't we end up with both tokamaks and polywells, or FRCs, or something we haven't envisaged yet?

[TallDave]

If no show-stoppers are found, I would like it if the next step was the 100 MW machine.

A design for the 100MW reactor is to be delivered as part of the current contract. They're calling it WB-9 atm.

From that point, I would guess it's another 18 months to know if continuing from WB-8/8.1/8.2 or whatever is worth it.

Results are due in April.

The main question is how losses scale with B and R, and whether they can further improve confinement. WB-8 should tell us a lot.

[KitemanSA]

Results are due in April.

Personally, I still think that means April 2011 and the 2010 was a typo. I will be ECSTATIC to be proven wrong on this!