Eric Lerner's Focus Fusion Lecture

Has science taken a wrong turn? If so, what corrections are needed? Chronicles of scientific misbehavior. The role of heretic-pioneers and forbidden questions in the sciences. Is peer review working? The perverse "consensus of leading scientists." Good public relations versus good science.

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Eric Lerner's Focus Fusion Lecture

Unread postby Steve Smith » Mon May 12, 2008 12:52 pm

As Don Scott wrote: This is an absolute MUST for anyone interested in the EU. Everyone has to view this. We should announce it on the Forum. Will you do that Steve?

I think Eric has done a magnificent job in his work and this lecture is at a completely understandable level. It is a 'tour de force'. (Of course I wish he hadn't used the words 'magnetic field lines', but I know Eric and he knows full well that they do not really exist and are only visualization devices.)

Don
http://members.cox.net/dascott2/ImageList.html

Focus Fusion Video
Steve Smith
Guest
 

Re: Eric Lerner's Focus Fusion Lecture

Unread postby Solar » Mon May 12, 2008 6:05 pm

I can't even begin to say how thoroughly I appreciated that Steve. It was great to see the EU/Plasma Cosmology 'celestial links' that Lerner made in relation to focused fusion not to mention his ongoing efforts towards particle use of it's power producing potential. Complete with cost analysis and comparisons to boot. That is definitely some serious 'quality time' for anyone interested in EU.
"Our laws of force tend to be applied in the Newtonian sense in that for every action there is an equal reaction, and yet, in the real world, where many-body gravitational effects or electrodynamic actions prevail, we do not have every action paired with an equal reaction." — Harold Aspden
User avatar
Solar
 
Posts: 1361
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:05 am

Re: Eric Lerner's Focus Fusion Lecture

Unread postby StefanR » Tue May 13, 2008 6:34 am

Thanks for the tip, Don. :shock: 8-)

Imagine, 2 million dollars. :o

(On the other hand, with the decline of the dollar over the past time, I might be able to pay it with my puny savings in Euros) ;)

Great talk, with very clear explanations, indeed a must see.
The illusion from which we are seeking to extricate ourselves is not that constituted by the realm of space and time, but that which comes from failing to know that realm from the standpoint of a higher vision. -L.H.
User avatar
StefanR
 
Posts: 1371
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:31 pm
Location: Amsterdam

Re: Eric Lerner's Focus Fusion Lecture

Unread postby StevenO » Thu May 15, 2008 1:45 am

Steve Smith wrote:As Don Scott wrote: This is an absolute MUST for anyone interested in the EU. Everyone has to view this. We should announce it on the Forum. Will you do that Steve?

I think Eric has done a magnificent job in his work and this lecture is at a completely understandable level. It is a 'tour de force'. (Of course I wish he hadn't used the words 'magnetic field lines', but I know Eric and he knows full well that they do not really exist and are only visualization devices.)

Don
http://members.cox.net/dascott2/ImageList.html
Focus Fusion Video

Thanks for the link. Really eye-opening video about fascinating technology. He probably cannot get funding since it sounds too good to be true 8-).

Now, what's wrong with the word "magnetic field lines"? Are we going to censor common EM terminology? :shock: At least he did'nt call them "frozen"... ;)

One thing I noticed is that the whole plasmoid behaviour looks kind of similar to what happens at electron/positron pair production or destruction. (2 gamma rays+a little bit of magnetic field+plasmoid creates self-sustaining structure with pinch in the center). Would the structure of the electron itself then actually resemble a plasmoid? Or is that too far fetched... :?
First, God decided he was lonely. Then it got out of hand. Now we have this mess called life...
The past is out of date. Start living your future. Align with your dreams. Now execute.
User avatar
StevenO
 
Posts: 894
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 11:08 pm

Re: Eric Lerner's Focus Fusion Lecture

Unread postby Solar » Sat May 17, 2008 8:11 am

StevenO wrote:
Now, what's wrong with the word "magnetic field lines"? Are we going to censor common EM terminology? :shock: At least he did'nt call them "frozen"... ;)

One thing I noticed is that the whole plasmoid behaviour looks kind of similar to what happens at electron/positron pair production or destruction. (2 gamma rays+a little bit of magnetic field+plasmoid creates self-sustaining structure with pinch in the center). Would the structure of the electron itself then actually resemble a plasmoid? Or is that too far fetched... :?


It's not a question of 'censor[ing] common EM terminology' there SteveO but understanding the phenomena for which that terminology and imagery are but representations. Maxwell said the exact same thing Steve Smith did in using the phrase "visualization devices":

"By drawing a sufficient number of lines of force, we may indicate the direction of the force in every part of the space in which it acts.
Thus if we strew iron filings on paper near a magnet, each filing will be magnetized by induction, and the consecutive filings will unite by their opposite poles, so as to form fibres, and these fibres will indicate the direction of the lines of force. The beautiful illustration of the presence of magnetic force afforded by this experiment, naturally tends to make us think of the lines of force as something real, ...

In the same paper I have found the geometrical significane of the "Electronic State", and have shown how to deduce the the mathematical relation between the electronic state, magnetisim, electric currents, and the electromotive for, using mechanical illustrations to assist the imagination, but not to account for the phenomena. - "On the lines of Force: James C. Maxwell


From subsequesnt work with ferromagnetism Pierre-Ernest Weiss (1865 - 1940):

...was the first who proposed to subdivide ferromagnetic materials into elementary domains (Weiss or magnetic domains). Weiss domains are small areas in a crystal structure of a ferromagnetic material with uniformly oriented magnetic momenta.

By nature the Weiss domains are magnetized to the full saturation. The boundaries between the domains are called Bloch walls.


...and with superconductivity we see that 'structure' such as Abrikosov lattices with vortices, "vortex chains" demonstrating long range orientation forming "domains" and "sub domains" seperated by "domain walls" ("field lines") through which a 180 degree rotation of polarity occurs linking "domains" etc.

There is so much more occuring with the phenomena than the broad visual tool of "magnetic field lines" actually conveys as material substance seems to 'mirror' the phenomena of more subtle 'stuff'.

I don't think it's far fetched at all to consider the structure of the electron to resemble or actually be plasmodial.
"Our laws of force tend to be applied in the Newtonian sense in that for every action there is an equal reaction, and yet, in the real world, where many-body gravitational effects or electrodynamic actions prevail, we do not have every action paired with an equal reaction." — Harold Aspden
User avatar
Solar
 
Posts: 1361
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:05 am

Re: Eric Lerner's Focus Fusion Lecture

Unread postby rduke » Sat May 17, 2008 10:42 pm

I liked it so much I am going to watch it again...

We should make a list of Plasma technologies proven ..or in the near future applicable to the many crisis's we face..resource wise.
User avatar
rduke
 
Posts: 87
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 5:48 pm

Re: Eric Lerner's Focus Fusion Lecture

Unread postby aristotlejones » Sun May 18, 2008 11:47 pm

LPP Reaches $10M Licensing Agreement with CMEF of Sweden

http://photoman.bizland.com/lpp/index.htm

aj

StefanR wrote:Thanks for the tip, Don. :shock: 8-)

Imagine, 2 million dollars. :o

(On the other hand, with the decline of the dollar over the past time, I might be able to pay it with my puny savings in Euros) ;)

Great talk, with very clear explanations, indeed a must see.
aristotlejones
 
Posts: 19
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 12:48 am

Re: Eric Lerner's Focus Fusion Lecture

Unread postby StevenO » Mon May 19, 2008 12:43 am

That sounds great. Looks like they secured their funding and research facility.

Amazing that a 'heretic pioneer' like Eric with some small scale equipment has reached better results than 50 years of plasma research and multibillion $ spent on tokamaks...
First, God decided he was lonely. Then it got out of hand. Now we have this mess called life...
The past is out of date. Start living your future. Align with your dreams. Now execute.
User avatar
StevenO
 
Posts: 894
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 11:08 pm

Re: Eric Lerner's Focus Fusion Lecture

Unread postby pln2bz » Sun May 25, 2008 11:50 am

This is very exciting. Many of my engineering friends are highly skeptical of the Electric Universe because there exists no technology to validate it. If you watch that Lerner video, he's very explicit that his device is a down-scaling of the astrophysical observation of Herbig Haro phenomena in a manner that is clearly compatible with the Electric Universe interpretation. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Lerner is technically a plasma cosmologist rather than an Electric Universe advocate. But, my guess is that there is much common ground there. I'll be using every opportunity to include the title of Lerner's book ("The Big Bang Never Happened") in the same sentence as "$10 million grant".

If Lerner's focus fusion device becomes the world's new way of generating electricity over the next couple of decades, then EU critics will have to accept that two of conventional science's most prominent critics (Nikola Tesla and Eric Lerner) would then be largely responsible for the power that runs our appliances. In my own view, it's hard to over-estimate the importance of this announcement.
pln2bz
 
Posts: 248
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:20 pm

Re: Eric Lerner's Focus Fusion Lecture

Unread postby pln2bz » Sun May 25, 2008 1:16 pm

It will be interesting to see -- if they do get results over the next 3 years, as they predict -- if the US government will subsequently decide to split or shift funding from the Tokamak project. For those who have not read the MIT Cold Fusion Report by Roger Mallove (the book on the same subject was nominated for a Pulitzer), there are strong links between the Tokamak project and government-appointed experts that are responsible for handing out energy research funds.

From http://www.infinite-energy.com/images/p ... report.pdf ...

The cover-up of fraud, sad to say, reaches the highest
levels at MIT and includes the current MIT President,
Charles M. Vest. Remarkably, President Vest has recently
been named by U.S. Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham to
head the Task Force on the Future of Science Programs at the
Department of Energy. The high level task force will “examine
science and technology programs across the department
and consider future priorities for scientific research.” MIT
President Vest also serves on the President’s Committee of
Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) and is vice
chair of the Council on Competitiveness. It is hoped that
fair minded readers of the MIT and Cold Fusion Report will
conclude that MIT’s Charles Vest, who represents what are
now provably unethical vested academic interests, is not a
person whose scientific advice should be sought about
DOE’s science and technology plans.

The top man who, for now, will be leading DOE’s panel of
the “future of science” will get to pass judgment on whether
hot fusion “science” should be funded at all, and if so to
what extent, and at what institutions. One of those places
just happens to be MIT, which receives tens-of-millions of
dollars each year for its tokamak hot fusion research.
pln2bz
 
Posts: 248
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:20 pm

Re: Eric Lerner's Focus Fusion Lecture

Unread postby pln2bz » Mon May 26, 2008 5:05 pm

Slashdot has accepted my submission on this news, and the story appears here ...

http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl ... 26/1924242

There will surely be comments in there that people may be interested in responding to over the next two days, as people read the submission and submit their opinions.

I'm retired from combative forums for the time being, so I leave it to others if they wish to participate.
pln2bz
 
Posts: 248
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:20 pm

Re: Eric Lerner's Focus Fusion Lecture

Unread postby Solar » Mon May 26, 2008 5:20 pm

Congrats on the Slashdot acceptance Pln2bz.

More good news here:
The June issue of Discover magazine, now delivered to subscribers, has a very favorable, if brief, article on focus fusion in their Ideas section. The article will be available online some time in May. This is certainly the broadest coverage we have had in the mass media and will helpfully open up new opportunities.

Link to come. - Focus Fusion Society

8-)
"Our laws of force tend to be applied in the Newtonian sense in that for every action there is an equal reaction, and yet, in the real world, where many-body gravitational effects or electrodynamic actions prevail, we do not have every action paired with an equal reaction." — Harold Aspden
User avatar
Solar
 
Posts: 1361
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:05 am

Re: Eric Lerner's Focus Fusion Lecture

Unread postby MGmirkin » Mon May 26, 2008 7:10 pm

aristotlejones wrote:LPP Reaches $10M Licensing Agreement with CMEF of Sweden

http://photoman.bizland.com/lpp/index.htm


It appears this has now been both Slashdotted and Dugg:

(Slashdot: Eric Lerner's Focus Fusion Device Gets Funded)
http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl ... 26/1924242

(Digg: Eric Lerner's Focus Fusion Generator Research Gets Funded)
http://digg.com/general_sciences/Eric_L ... ets_Funded

This should get interesting! Especially since Slashdot can be a slightly hostile place for things both plasma and electrical... Digg, on the other hand, seems a bit less tech savvy at times and slightly more egalitarian (well, okay, maybe not).

Cheers,
~Michael Gmirkin
"The purpose of science is to investigate the unexplained, not to explain the uninvestigated." ~Dr. Stephen Rorke
"For every PhD there is an equal and opposite PhD." ~Gibson's law
User avatar
MGmirkin
Moderator
 
Posts: 1667
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:00 pm
Location: Beaverton, Oregon, USA

Re: Eric Lerner's Focus Fusion Lecture

Unread postby earls » Mon May 26, 2008 7:27 pm

Heh, Michael, RE: Slashdot

the electric universe "theory" is still purely in the realm of pseudoscience, being touted by various internet quacks. Of course, many of its proponents also believe that the empirical scientific method is some sort of outdated relic of a bygone era


Were you guys aware of this?

Yes, I am very pleased to see Lerner is at least being given the chance to be proven wrong.
earls
 
Posts: 275
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 6:48 am

Re: Eric Lerner's Focus Fusion Lecture

Unread postby MGmirkin » Mon May 26, 2008 11:26 pm

Yeah, there sure are a lot of internet quacks and hacks out there. And most of them spend time on Slashdot bashing things they've never ACTUALLY read about. If they spent half as much time READING the peer reviewed articles and various resources at their disposal, they might end up learning a thing or two.

As it stands they prefer to simply issue blanket statements that are if not blatantly wrong, at least disingenuous in the extreme... I might note that the statement above about empirical science being an outdated relic of the past is ambiguous at best... There are several interpretations and implication possible from such ill-worded tripe:

Of course, many of its proponents also believe that the empirical scientific method is some sort of outdated relic of a bygone era


There are at least two ways to interpret that ambiguous statement:

1) Proponents of the EU model espouse the belief that empirical science is no longer necessary (an "outdated relic") and should be discarded.
2) Proponents of the EU model espouse the belief that empirical science has already fallen into disrepair and requires rescuing.

Proposition 1, I believe, is patently false. I don't believe that anyone in the mainstay of the EU camp has argued for discarding empirical science. Rather, they have stated that science should proceed from actual laboratory work, rather than extensions of fictional, untested/unproven mathematical constructs. Lab work first, mathematical constructs second, then back to the lab to make sure the mathematics hold up.

Propositions 2, I believe sounds closer to reality. Insofar as many scientists appear to have abandoned falsifiability with a desire to replace it with some "relative statistical probability of plausibility." That is a dangerous precedent. Neither "plausibility" nor "probability" is a measure of correctness. In fact, in many fields, there is no measure of correctness (as one cannot know whether the current theory is correct over all domains unless one literally checks every single instance in the universe to make sure there are no contradictions). There is really only "falsifiability." IE, if a contradicting example is discovered, the theory is falsified and a new theory must account for the data discrepancy. That theory will then be dominant until some other disconfirming data is found.

(What Ever Happened To Real Science?)
http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=a57ya4dj

Anyway, I'm not all that big on ambiguous statements that can be interpreted 5 ways from Sunday... If you can't say what you mean, you can't possibly mean what you say. And if you don't mean it, why bother saying it to begin with? ;) How's that for screwball logic? *Tongue planted firmly in cheek...*

Cheers,
~Michael Gmirkin
"The purpose of science is to investigate the unexplained, not to explain the uninvestigated." ~Dr. Stephen Rorke
"For every PhD there is an equal and opposite PhD." ~Gibson's law
User avatar
MGmirkin
Moderator
 
Posts: 1667
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:00 pm
Location: Beaverton, Oregon, USA

Next

Return to The Future of Science

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests