Pine Barrens Mafia Posted August 18, 2005 Posted August 18, 2005 To wit: "The new findings were detailed in a peer-reviewed paper appearing in the May issue of the journal Nuclear Engineering and Design." Pretty cool when someone in any field actually does something potentially revolutionary rather than just talk and spew. 410744[/snapback] That's what I thought. Well, Dexter?
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted August 18, 2005 Posted August 18, 2005 That's what I thought. Well, Dexter? 410877[/snapback] Well...your reading comprehension skills are pathetic. I said I had to READ it. And I've tried. I'm not paying $30 for a reprint of a paper in a third-tier journal confirming somebody else's paper. But the abstract alone raises serious questions. I'm trying to get the original research published in Phys Rev E right now...
KRC Posted August 18, 2005 Posted August 18, 2005 Well...your reading comprehension skills are pathetic. I said I had to READ it. And I've tried. I'm not paying $30 for a reprint of a paper in a third-tier journal confirming somebody else's paper. But the abstract alone raises serious questions. I'm trying to get the original research published in Phys Rev E right now... 410911[/snapback] You are going to read the article before responding? I think you are on the wrong board.
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted August 18, 2005 Posted August 18, 2005 You are going to read the article before responding? I think you are on the wrong board. 410915[/snapback] Yep. Then I'll post a review of the research, with my opinion. Then everyone will tell me I don't know what I'm talking about, because a press release from Purdue trumps my understanding of peer-reviewed literature based on my decade's experience in the field... You're right. I AM on the wrong board.
Ghost of BiB Posted August 18, 2005 Posted August 18, 2005 Yep. Then I'll post a review of the research, with my opinion. Then everyone will tell me I don't know what I'm talking about, because a press release from Purdue trumps my understanding of peer-reviewed literature based on my decade's experience in the field... You're right. I AM on the wrong board. 410922[/snapback] Welcome to MY world.
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted August 18, 2005 Posted August 18, 2005 Welcome to MY world. 410967[/snapback] What do you know, you bin Laden apologist?
Reuben Gant Posted August 18, 2005 Posted August 18, 2005 I believe the last thing I read. This has really simplified my life.
philburger1 Posted August 18, 2005 Author Posted August 18, 2005 A good comparison with the exceptions that the ebonics flap was in Oakland which is in northern California and took place in 1996, nine years ago, while the evolution flap is a statewide issue in Kansas that is taking place now. 409581[/snapback] Please pay attention a little more: Southern California School District to 'affirm' Ebonics July 18, 2005 'It should be considered a foreign language' A school district in Southern California approved the "affirmation and recognition" of Ebonics into its curriculum as a way to help black students improve academic performance. The San Bernardino Board of Education says a pilot of the policy, known as the Students Accumulating New Knowledge Optimizing Future Accomplishment Initiative, has been implemented at two city schools, according to the daily San Bernardino Sun. Ebonics, a dialect of American English spoken by many blacks, was recognized as a separate language by the Oakland, Calif., school board in 1996. Mary Texeira, a sociology professor at Cal State San Bernardino, believes the program will be beneficial to students. "Ebonics is a different language, it's not slang as many believe,' Texeira told the Sun. "For many of these students Ebonics is their language, and it should be considered a foreign language. These students should be taught like other students who speak a foreign language." Texeira acknowledged there are African Americans who disagree with her. "They say that [black students] are lazy and that they need to learn to talk," she said. The program, which will be implemented gradually, begins this fall when teachers receive training on black culture and customs. The district curriculum will include information on the historical, cultural and social impact of blacks in society. Len Cooper, coordinator of the pilot program at the two city schools, said Ebonics won't actually be incorporated into the program, because of its "stigma." "We are affirming and recognizing Ebonics through supplemental reading books for students," he explained. Although the program is aimed at black students, other students can choose to participate, the Sun reported. Board member Danny Tillman told the paper he pushed for the policy because he hoped it would increase the number of black students going to college and participating in advanced courses. But Teresa Parra, board vice president, worries other minority groups, including Hispanics, will want their own programs. "I've always thought that we should provide students support based on their needs and not on their race," she said. Ratibu Jacocks, a member of a coalition of black activists – the Westside Action Group – said they are working with the district to ensure the policy is implemented appropriately. "This isn't a feel-good policy. This is the real thing," said Jacocks. He welcomes the idea of other ethnic groups lobbying for their own program. "When you are doing what's right, others will follow,' Jacocks said. "We have led the way before the civil-rights movement opened the door for women's rights and other movement
Typical TBD Guy Posted August 18, 2005 Posted August 18, 2005 Yep. Then I'll post a review of the research, with my opinion. Then everyone will tell me I don't know what I'm talking about, because a press release from Purdue trumps my understanding of peer-reviewed literature based on my decade's experience in the field... You're right. I AM on the wrong board. 410922[/snapback] Mr. CTM, you are a physicist, correct? So then maybe you can answer my questions: Is the title of this thread wrong in calling this discovery "cold fusion?" I thought cold fusion is fusion that takes place at room temperature, while this bubble fusion allegedly occurs at the typical millions of degrees needed for nucleosynthesis... Also, isn't there a huge difference between achieving a fusion reaction and actually sustaining it? So this discovery may still very well be a dead end in solving the world's energy crisis, right? Finally, what's the general scientific opinion of cold fusion right now? I read an internet article a year ago alluding to the idea that this field is mostly a crackpot field and has been since the Pons/Fleischmann debacle. True or not?
Dan Gross Posted August 18, 2005 Posted August 18, 2005 What do you know, you bin Laden apologist? 410968[/snapback] Get it right, he's bin Laden's lap-dog.
Ghost of BiB Posted August 18, 2005 Posted August 18, 2005 Get it right, he's bin Laden's lap-dog. 411170[/snapback] Woof.
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted August 18, 2005 Posted August 18, 2005 Mr. CTM, you are a physicist, correct? So then maybe you can answer my questions: Is the title of this thread wrong in calling this discovery "cold fusion?" I thought cold fusion is fusion that takes place at room temperature, while this bubble fusion allegedly occurs at the typical millions of degrees needed for nucleosynthesis... Also, isn't there a huge difference between achieving a fusion reaction and actually sustaining it? So this discovery may still very well be a dead end in solving the world's energy crisis, right? Finally, what's the general scientific opinion of cold fusion right now? I read an internet article a year ago alluding to the idea that this field is mostly a crackpot field and has been since the Pons/Fleischmann debacle. True or not? 411145[/snapback] Good catch. This thread should have been titled LOW-COST fusion rather than "cold" fusion.
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted August 18, 2005 Posted August 18, 2005 Good catch. This thread should have been titled LOW-COST fusion rather than "cold" fusion. 411251[/snapback] Or even "small-scale" fusion, since 1) there's nothing that points to cost in any economic sense in the announcement, and 2) there's nothing that suggests it'll be a self-sustaining reaction capable of generating power. But labelling it "cold fusion" was a big marketing faux paux, since cold fusion a la Pons and Fleischman is pretty much accepted as a crock. KH, I can't answer your questions in detail right now...I'll try later.
Recommended Posts