From: Mike Lorrey (mlorrey@datamann.com)
Date: Wed Mar 06 2002 - 13:32:48 MST
"Dickey, Michael F" wrote:
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Lorrey [mailto:mlorrey@datamann.com]
>
> "I think that there are likely at least several technological ways to
> achieve over unity sustainable fusion reactions. The government is ONLY
> interested in discovering those methods which require large billion dollar
> budgets, spent by highly trained individuals, at big government owned
> facilities, and under the control of government bureaucracies. "
>
> Now that I understand your view better, I pretty much agree with the
> observations you make, though I think I would disagree with the intent
> behind the actions. I dont think the government is *only* interested in
> developing expensive fusion products, as they could spend a lot more on it.
The government as a whole may not be, but the bureaucracies who would
gain the most power, specifically the DOE, from such would love to spend
more. They are only held in check by the demands, rivalries, and needs
of the rest of the government for the limited tax funds available.
> I think the general scientific consensus is bigger hotter and more
> expensive, its the scientists driving the direction of the research as much
> as the government is. And I certainly do think there are several other ways
> one may acheive a fusion reaction.
It is a sure bet that doing it bigger, hotter, and more expensive is
more likely to achieve some sort of result at some time in the future,
in the mean time guaranteeing the job security of everyone involved.
I'll note that Heisenberg failed to develop the bomb only because he
specifically convinced his government that it was too demanding of
scarce resources, though his project was kept on a small budget
throughout the war to no avail. If we were not so determined to win, how
much do you think the Manhattan Project would have languished in a
similar budgetary wasteland, though maintained at some level on the off
chance that those crazy physicists were actually right? It would likely
have been the 50's or 60's before they'd have detonated their first
device, and immediately been banned from further development for
environmental reasons.
>
> "Figuring out a way for the human race to free itself from the current
> geopolitical system is directly in opposition to the self interest of
> any government agency. Discovering a way that joe and judy sixpack can take
> care of their energy needs without uncle sugar butting in and
> controlling, taxing, or siphoning it in some way threatens the stability of
> the current statist system."
>
> Definately have some points there, but that assumes that all government
> agents have this same objective, if that were true then government
> interference / regulation / control would have already skyrocketd to
> socialistic statist ones.
Government is neither monolithic nor speaking in one voice. Departmental
rivalries and conflict abound on any issue or project. Some agencies
would balk at the prospect of the DOE gaining additional power and
actively work against the achievement. As with the recent pentagon leak
about the DoD plans for 'disinformation', leaks frequently occur because
individuals within the govt use the press to mold policy they are unable
to affect otherwise.
>
> >
> > However, the field of research has been only limited to plasma hot fusion,
> > various other methods are not government funded,
>
> "This says it all right there. The point is, that any efforts which are
> government funded are ultimately under the control of the government. Any
> projects which are not government funded which do prove successful will be
> downplayed and discredited by the government."
>
> I wouldnt say they would be downplayed by the government, unless pressured
> by special interest groups. I would think the government would want to free
> that money up to use it for ... say worthless anti drug use ads.
Depends on perceptions about how much is enough. You don't wanna beat a
dead horse so much that it becomes unrecognisable as an equine specimin.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:12:48 MST