The Surprisingly Strong Case for Colonizing Venus

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Men are from Mars, women from Venus. So you have to like those odds.
 
Considering the enormous cost, I'd rather spend the money protecting the environment and life forms on this planet for now.
 
The article states that the idea is to do one of two things: manhattan project for nuclear fusion or colonize venus.

http://www.wired.com/2014/02/fusion-power-not-yet/

When NIF was first being built, researchers were confident that it would produce fusion reactions fairly quickly. The point when fusion becomes self-sustaining is known as ignition. The fusing hydrogen atoms at the fuel center send out helium nuclei, which knock into other hydrogen atoms, setting off a cascading chain-reaction of expansion fusion that should produce more energy than the entire experiment consumes. While ignition requires extremely high temperatures and pressures, computer simulations in 2009 predicted that NIF would achieve the energies to generate it by 2012. Of course, reality doesn’t work as well as a digital model, and the deadline passed without achieving ignition.

...

If they could make working cold fusion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_fusion), we would have no need for any other kind of energy for anything. A device the size of a AA battery would power an electric car with near infinite range. You'd have something like that to run all the electrical items in your house as well.
 
Denny Crane said:
If they could make working cold fusion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_fusion), we would have no need for any other kind of energy for anything. A device the size of a AA battery would power an electric car with near infinite range. You'd have something like that to run all the electrical items in your house as well.
Click to expand...

And pollution would be cut to near zero!
 
Eastoff said:
And pollution would be cut to near zero!
Click to expand...

Right. There is research going on into cold fusion but the peer reviewed publications refuse to print any submissions about it.

Score one for peer review!
 
Denny Crane said:
Right. There is research going on into cold fusion but the peer reviewed publications refuse to print any submissions about it.

Score one for peer review!
Click to expand...

Probably because it's bullshit research?
 
Eastoff said:
Probably because it's bullshit research?
Click to expand...

Probably because they want to protect their belief the earth is flat.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_fusion#cite_note-small_community-11

2014-07-03%20at%208.35%20AM.png
 
I'm secretly running my home off of cold fusion. I live under constant fear that Big Oil will find out and kill me.
 
Eastoff said:
Look Denny, if you send some links showing cold fusion working, I'd love to read them. I believe you just three posts earlier said "if we can get cold fusion to work" implying it doesn't work.
Click to expand...

I don't think they made it work. There was one report a long time ago (1980s?) that someone had it working and that a second team had repeated it, but nobody else was able to.

The government was supposed to invest a paltry few $billion into research, because the obvious benefits of the technology would be so huge. But the funding never came. As WikiPedia says, the scientific community has damaged the careers of between 100 and 200 researchers.
 
Eastoff said:
The guy said he had a cure for HIV/AIDS. They called him on his bullshit. He came back with a bomb.
Click to expand...

An HIV positive man apparently bombed the department of health on Wednesday afternoon after he did not receive his anti-retroviral medication.

According to a reliable source the man is allegedly an HIV positive and had not received his anti-retroviral medication and was set out on getting revenge for the lack of medication.
 
Denny Crane said:
Probably because they want to protect their belief the earth is flat.
Click to expand...

I remember when the Pons and Fleischmann paper came out. Everyone in science was excited about it. Lots and lots of labs dropped whatever they were doing and started working on cold fusion. An awful lot of people were disappointed when it turned out not to be true. It's not a conspiracy Denny. It was just a not very carefully done experiment that couldn't be replicated.

barfo
 
When I was in school there was a girl named Venus. At the beginning of the term we played the name game to introduce ourselves, everyone say your name and something that rhymes with it. When we got to Venus everyone sat silent for a minute then we all started cracking up, complete disorder for the rest of the period.

She was worth colonizing by the way.
 
barfo said:
I remember when the Pons and Fleischmann paper came out. Everyone in science was excited about it. Lots and lots of labs dropped whatever they were doing and started working on cold fusion. An awful lot of people were disappointed when it turned out not to be true. It's not a conspiracy Denny. It was just a not very carefully done experiment that couldn't be replicated.

barfo
Click to expand...

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

By late 1989, most scientists considered cold fusion claims dead,[6][7] and cold fusion subsequently gained a reputation as pathological science.[8][9] In 1989, a review panel organized by the United States Department of Energy (DOE) found that the evidence for the discovery of a new nuclear process was not persuasive enough to start a special program, but was "sympathetic toward modest support" for experiments "within the present funding system." A second DOE review, convened in 2004 to look at new research, reached conclusions similar to the first.[10] Support within the then-present funding system did not occur.

A small community of researchers continues to investigate cold fusion,[6][11] now often preferring the designation low-energy nuclear reactions (LENR).[12][13] Since cold fusion articles are rarely published in peer-reviewed scientific journals, the results do not receive as much scrutiny as more mainstream topics.[14]

...

Cold fusion research continues today in a few specific venues, but the wider scientific community has generally marginalized the research being done and researchers have had difficulty publishing in mainstream journals.[6][7][11] The remaining researchers often term their field Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR) or Chemically Assisted Nuclear Reactions (CANR),[71] also Lattice Assisted Nuclear Reactions (LANR), Condensed Matter Nuclear Science (CMNS) and Lattice Enabled Nuclear Reactions; one of the reasons being to avoid the negative connotations associated with "cold fusion".[72][73] The new names avoid making bold implications, like implying that fusion is actually occurring.[74] Proponents see the new terms as a more accurate description of the theories they put forward.[75]

The researchers who continue acknowledge that the flaws in the original announcement are the main cause of the subject's marginalization, and they complain of a chronic lack of funding[76] and no possibilities of getting their work published in the highest impact journals.[77] University researchers are often unwilling to investigate cold fusion because they would be ridiculed by their colleagues and their professional careers would be at risk.[78] In 1994, David Goodstein, a professor of physics at Caltech, advocated for increased attention from mainstream researchers and described cold fusion as:

a pariah field, cast out by the scientific establishment. Between cold fusion and respectable science there is virtually no communication at all. Cold fusion papers are almost never published in refereed scientific journals, with the result that those works don't receive the normal critical scrutiny that science requires. On the other hand, because the Cold-Fusioners see themselves as a community under siege, there is little internal criticism. Experiments and theories tend to be accepted at face value, for fear of providing even more fuel for external critics, if anyone outside the group was bothering to listen. In these circumstances, crackpots flourish, making matters worse for those who believe that there is serious science going on here.[30]
 
The bolded part implies a sort of conspiracy or collusion, barfo.

If it happens in this part of science, what makes you think it doesn't occur elsewhere?
 
Denny Crane said:
The bolded part implies a sort of conspiracy or collusion, barfo.

If it happens in this part of science, what makes you think it doesn't occur elsewhere?
Click to expand...

Did a scientist steal your first girlfriend or bully you in grade school? You really seem to not like them.
 
SlyPokerDog said:
Did a scientist steal your first girlfriend or bully you in grade school? You really seem to not like them.
Click to expand...

They're politicians as much as scientists anymore. They're way out of their bounds.
 
Denny Crane said:
The bolded part implies a sort of conspiracy or collusion, barfo.
Click to expand...

No it doesn't. Funding didn't occur because the results didn't, and still don't, justify funding. What's your suggested alternative? Just fund everything anyone proposes? It's not easy to get research funding, there are a lot of people with good ideas. Why should ideas that have not panned out receive additional funding?

If it happens in this part of science, what makes you think it doesn't occur elsewhere?
Click to expand...

It doesn't happen in this part of science. The community took a good hard look at cold fusion. Lots of people spent lots of time on it.

barfo
 
barfo said:
No it doesn't. Funding didn't occur because the results didn't, and still don't, justify funding. What's your suggested alternative? Just fund everything anyone proposes? It's not easy to get research funding, there are a lot of people with good ideas. Why should ideas that have not panned out receive additional funding?



It doesn't happen in this part of science. The community took a good hard look at cold fusion. Lots of people spent lots of time on it.

barfo
Click to expand...

They did justify it. Two studies of the concept by your precious government agencies said so.

And you're just a denier now.
 
Denny Crane said:
They did justify it. Two studies of the concept by your precious government agencies said so.

And you're just a denier now.
Click to expand...

Denny, I'm sympathetic towards modest funding of your conspiracy theories.

That is not a promise that I or anyone else is going to send you any money.

barfo
 
Denny Crane said:
http://web.archive.org/web/20080226...es/DOE-SC/2004/low_energy/CF_Final_120104.pdf

Read it.

It's by your government.
Click to expand...

And what part of

Several reviewers specifically stated that more experiments similar in nature to those that have been carried out for the past fifteen years are unlikely to advance knowledge in this area.
Click to expand...

do you have trouble understanding?

They said that funding agencies should consider funding individual well-designed proposals in specific areas. Now, if you show me that there were good proposals in those specific areas that were unreasonably denied funding, you might have some sort of a case.

barfo
 
barfo said:
And what part of



do you have trouble understanding?

They said that funding agencies should consider funding individual well-designed proposals in specific areas. Now, if you show me that there were good proposals in those specific areas that were unreasonably denied funding, you might have some sort of a case.

barfo
Click to expand...

Selective reading on your part.

They were denied funding. All funding for it is private.

I don't think it is viable as is, but there is evidence it can work and it is more worthy of research than shrimps on treadmills.

Denier.
 
Denny Crane said:
Selective reading on your part.

They were denied funding.
Click to expand...

So what? Show me evidence that it was more worthy of funding than what was actually funded from the programs where they applied. If you can't do that you don't have a case.

All funding for it is private.
Click to expand...

The flat earth society is privately funded also.

barfo
 
Post #18, barfo.

And flat earth gets hundreds of billions in govt. grants.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

truebluefan
Why Humanity's Survival May Depend on Colonizing Mars
Replies
0
Views
182
truebluefan
truebluefan
SlyPokerDog
Science Chemical that shouldn’t be there spotted in Venus’ atmosphere
Replies
18
Views
877
andalusian
andalusian
truebluefan
Venus Williams reaches Rogers final
Replies
0
Views
164
truebluefan
truebluefan
truebluefan
Venus Williams wins at Family Circle
Replies
0
Views
357
truebluefan
truebluefan
truebluefan
Venus Williams out of Brussels Open
Replies
0
Views
250
truebluefan
truebluefan

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top