From: Jay Willingham (jaywillingham@cfl.rr.com)
Date: Mon Jul 21 2003 - 12:27:07 EDT
I hope physicists at this level are in the main more motivated than your
average NEA member.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Darryl Maddox" <dpmaddox@arn.net>
To: "Jay Willingham" <jaywillingham@cfl.rr.com>
Sent: Monday, July 21, 2003 11:40 AM
Subject: Re: the hydrogen economy
> It all depends on how wisely the money is spent which depends in part on
how
> badly the people doing the work want it finished and how many chances they
> are willing to take. My guess is that they took more on the Manhattan
> project than we would want to know about. On the contrary side of the
> question of "does money = progress" look at American education. More
money
> per pupil = falling test scores for several decades now. Though in Texas
> either my expectations are going down or my incoming geology and physics
> students are a bit better than they were 5 years ago.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jay Willingham" <jaywillingham@cfl.rr.com>
> To: "Iain Strachan" <iain.strachan.asa@ntlworld.com>; "ASA"
<asa@calvin.edu>
> Sent: Sunday, July 20, 2003 4:50 PM
> Subject: Re: the hydrogen economy
>
>
> > I am not so sure.
> >
> > The magnetic field experiments and the laser experiments are the only
ones
> > being worked to any degree, and those are really starved for funding.
> >
> > The Manhattan project comes to mind when someone says more money will
not
> > speed up the various experiments.
> >
> > Jay Willingham
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Iain Strachan" <iain.strachan.asa@ntlworld.com>
> > To: "Jay Willingham" <jaywillingham@cfl.rr.com>; "Glenn Morton"
> > <glennmorton@entouch.net>; "ASA" <asa@calvin.edu>
> > Sent: Sunday, July 20, 2003 11:34 AM
> > Subject: Re: the hydrogen economy
> >
> >
> > > > Money seems to be the main weak factor in that equation.
> > > >
> > > > Jay
> > >
> > > I don't think that money is the real issue here. I recently spoke to
a
> > > physicist who works on JET (the large fusion experiment close to where
I
> > > live) and he gave the timescale as 50 years; 12.5 years to build the
> next
> > > experiment (ITER) and 12.5 years to run it, during which they get the
> > plasma
> > > parameters right for fusion and then a similar timescale for the
> proposed
> > > demonstration fusion reactor (DEMO); 12.5 years to build and 12.5 to
> run.
> > > He was not of the opinion that the timescale could be speeded up by
> > throwing
> > > yet more money at it. These experiments are major undertakings. For
> > > example the magnetic induction coils are so vast that they could not
be
> > > transported for long distances. Therefore before you can build your
> > fusion
> > > reactor you have to build an entire manufacturing plant on site.
> > >
> > > However, we must stop the sliding goalpost and not allow things to
drag
> > on.
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > Iain .G.D. Strachan
> > >
> > > There are 10 types of people in the world ...
> > > those who understand binary and those who don't.
> > >
> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Jay Willingham" <jaywillingham@cfl.rr.com>
> > > To: "Glenn Morton" <glennmorton@entouch.net>; "ASA" <asa@calvin.edu>
> > > Sent: Sunday, July 20, 2003 3:21 PM
> > > Subject: Re: the hydrogen economy
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Glenn Morton" <glennmorton@entouch.net>
> > > > To: "Jay Willingham" <jaywillingham@cfl.rr.com>; "ASA"
> <asa@calvin.edu>
> > > > Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2003 8:58 PM
> > > > Subject: RE: the hydrogen economy
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >-----Original Message-----
> > > > > >From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu
> > [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]On
> > > > > >Behalf Of Jay Willingham
> > > > > >Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2003 5:09 PM
> > > > > >To: Glenn Morton; ASA
> > > > > >Subject: Re: the hydrogen economy
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >Hydrogen strikes me as a junk science/green politician's answer.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >Where are we in the development of fusion as an energy source?
> > > > >
> > > > > Not very far. The only thing constant about fusion energy is that
> it
> > is
> > > > > always 50 years away. We really will need to change that constant.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Jul 21 2003 - 12:28:35 EDT