Talk-Polywell.org

IF Robert Hirsch turns out to be the head of the review panel , is that good, bad, or does it simply not matter


----------------------------------------------:?:----------------------------------------------



-

It is mentioned in the comments to the new Adam Boyle article that Hirsch MIGHT be the one heading the review panel..

http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/ ... 01440.aspx

It means that the word of the review panel will be final, and there will be no second guessing. That is, no second guessing from outside companies, VC's, research companies, etc. Graduate students in need of a thesis will of course still consider it a topic for research.
But the above will be true because the review will be complete, it will be self contained regarding the second guessing. That is, the problems and second guesses will be identified and reported and so forth. This is good, because if this research is pursued, this report will justify the funds and identify the level at which it should be pursued. Because of the Hirsch reputation, it will not be second guessed.
And it should be added, maybe even emphasized, that Hirsch is a "Big Gun," and by bring up the big guns, the navy is showing how important they feel this research is. IF the rumor of his involvement is true.

Thank you Aero. Hopefully Hirsch is the head then...

Assume the review does turn out to be nuanced... everybody second-guessing the results will be answered and the dispute settled. That`s a very good thing as opposed to the second-guesser not getting a rebuttal and wasting his time and leading others to argue for something which has no basis(As it seems to be happening lots on the internets today)...

You can always argue over things you don't know. If there are no obvious show stoppers at this point, then the arguments will be over priority of experiments - what is most important to know next. The reason is finite resources.

Part of the problem is that everybody is right. Until net power is seen, it is easy to pick an unknown and say it never will be seen. I don't think it really matters how good the people are on the review panel, there will always be good people arguing they missed something.

I don't think there will ever be an obvious clear path to fusion net power. Plasma is just too darn complicated.

drmike wrote:I don't think there will ever be an obvious clear path to fusion net power. Plasma is just too darn complicated.

So, assuming net fusion power is possible, you think it will be achieved by Victorian style "empirical brute force and massive ignorance" engineering inadvertently stumbling on the solution?

Duane

That's the approach taken so far. To do all the basic physics would be too boring and hard to explain to the people with money. Dumb luck works - eventually somebody gets things to work and after a while somebody else asks why.

Hey, phlogiston worked fine for quite a while.

And few people wanted to believe in "energy" because a woman was the
first to describe it. She ended up publishing under a pseudonym so the idea
would propagate.

What we know of history is ugly. What we don't know is worse. But eventually we figure things out.

We designed steam engines for a long time before we got thermodynamics.

zbarlici wrote:It is mentioned in the comments to the new Adam Boyle article that Hirsch MIGHT be the one heading the review panel..

http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/ ... 01440.aspx

This comment was a gem.

One has to wonder if by conducting these fusion experiments, as with nuclear weapons testing, we aren't causing perturbations in the space-time fabric that will adversely affect extradimensional life forms. We simply don't have enough data on what our experimentation with the quantum world is doing in parallel universes. We could provoke a collapse of the space-time continuum or a war with extradimensional beings or beings from a parallel universe. This fusion research is quite troubling, indeed.
Albrecht Schweinhund, Hamburg, Germany

My gut instinct is that it's a parody. A German well educated enough to write perfect English. But that's the problem with the purest forms of voodoo. Seperating the parody from the authentic is almost impossible.

MSimon wrote:We designed steam engines for a long time before we got thermodynamics.

And of course, once you have a working prototype you can refine the theory to fit it and improve it.

OneWayTraffic wrote:

zbarlici wrote:It is mentioned in the comments to the new Adam Boyle article that Hirsch MIGHT be the one heading the review panel..

http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/ ... 01440.aspx

This comment was a gem.

One has to wonder if by conducting these fusion experiments, as with nuclear weapons testing, we aren't causing perturbations in the space-time fabric that will adversely affect extradimensional life forms. We simply don't have enough data on what our experimentation with the quantum world is doing in parallel universes. We could provoke a collapse of the space-time continuum or a war with extradimensional beings or beings from a parallel universe. This fusion research is quite troubling, indeed.
Albrecht Schweinhund, Hamburg, Germany

My gut instinct is that it's a parody. A German well educated enough to write perfect English. But that's the problem with the purest forms of voodoo. Seperating the parody from the authentic is almost impossible.

I know quite a few Germans who speak perfect English. But "Schweinhund" seems an unlikely surname.

I know quite a few Germans who speak perfect English. But "Schweinhund" seems an unlikely surname.

What I meant was that if he's that well educated he's not likely to believe in such hooey.

And yes the name is a bit of a clue.

One has to wonder if by conducting these fusion experiments, as with nuclear weapons testing, we aren't causing perturbations in the space-time fabric that will adversely affect extradimensional life forms.

Those extradimensional life forms! Stealing my cookies in the dark of night! Ringing my door-bell, then running away! Hiding my keys!

Crank up the voltage, I say!