Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion on Wikipedia japanes and chinese
I agree too that most of incentive in Science is status (science in real life is very like political in a way as my dear MP secretary explained to me). about removing older people from decision, I think it can be evil too. From decision maybe, but from discussion no. I see that older people often, because they can have no huge ambition for future, because they can have enough protection to feel safe, because they can have more ego than fear of the future, those fearless people, can play the rebels... In the early 20th century , young could play the rebels, they had to, but I'm afraid modern generation of scientists are so dependent on career and funding, that they cannot take the risk to think out of the funding box. They are also often too submitted to fashion, while oldies can remind of a period when things were different. they will be what Norbert Alter called alien, people who Today in many controversies,; I see only oldies, who take , for best and worst (I don't agree, mostly for best), crazy positions against the consensus, based on old knowledge, old evidences, of their memory of a period where feeling and trends were different. In the late 19th century, oldies were conservatives in a stable society. Today oldies are keepers of dead times, of dead culture, of outdated consensus, washed by waves of fashions and new consensus. Oldies are rebels, aliens, foreigner of their time, like were the young before. Like old heros, they can decide to suicide their career to defend their micro-ethics, not afraid of anything worse than the planned story... retirement and death. Maybe they are wrong, but sure you should not remove them from the story. They are what the young were before. If you look for young rebel, forget in science, go to business. However I agree that out of science, oldies often are more defending their honeypot, surfing on fashion, rather than rebels or defender of old values. 2013/9/25 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote: There is also opposition from many ordinary people and many stupid people at places like Wikipedia In all of these cases we're dealing with the incentives of social status more than authority structure. I agree. I would say it is ordinary primate behavior, similar to what you see in our cousins the chimpanzees, and in other group hunting predators such as wolves. (I am not denigrating this behavior. I have great respect for other species.) So how do you identify the Jason(s) most likely to be more concerned with national security than peer pressure? I wouldn't know. I have never met 'em. I don't even know who they all are. I know some people who have met with them, and meet with them every year. I get the impression the Jasons are a bunch of washed up old farts who are opposed to everything that wasn't discovered before they turned 30, which was a long time ago. But I could be wrong. I know that one or two of them often pull strings to have cold fusion funding cancelled. It is big mistake to give any scientist over 30 a role in allocating money or making decisions. The way to make progress is get a large pot of money and hand it out to young people, letting them do whatever they please with it. Some of them will waste it. A few may steal it. But most will make far better use of it than an old scientist could. Young people succeed in doing things the older people think are impossible, because the young people have not yet learned where the boundary between possible and impossible likes. Actually, that boundary is imaginary, like a geographical boundary -- a state line, or a property line. No one knows what is possible and what isn't. No one can even imagine. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion on Wikipedia japanes and chinese
The scientific approach, of course, would be two establish two groups, one a control group and the other a treatment group where the treatment is the proposed change, in this case the age limit. On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.comwrote: I agree too that most of incentive in Science is status (science in real life is very like political in a way as my dear MP secretary explained to me). about removing older people from decision, I think it can be evil too. From decision maybe, but from discussion no. I see that older people often, because they can have no huge ambition for future, because they can have enough protection to feel safe, because they can have more ego than fear of the future, those fearless people, can play the rebels... In the early 20th century , young could play the rebels, they had to, but I'm afraid modern generation of scientists are so dependent on career and funding, that they cannot take the risk to think out of the funding box. They are also often too submitted to fashion, while oldies can remind of a period when things were different. they will be what Norbert Alter called alien, people who Today in many controversies,; I see only oldies, who take , for best and worst (I don't agree, mostly for best), crazy positions against the consensus, based on old knowledge, old evidences, of their memory of a period where feeling and trends were different. In the late 19th century, oldies were conservatives in a stable society. Today oldies are keepers of dead times, of dead culture, of outdated consensus, washed by waves of fashions and new consensus. Oldies are rebels, aliens, foreigner of their time, like were the young before. Like old heros, they can decide to suicide their career to defend their micro-ethics, not afraid of anything worse than the planned story... retirement and death. Maybe they are wrong, but sure you should not remove them from the story. They are what the young were before. If you look for young rebel, forget in science, go to business. However I agree that out of science, oldies often are more defending their honeypot, surfing on fashion, rather than rebels or defender of old values. 2013/9/25 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote: There is also opposition from many ordinary people and many stupid people at places like Wikipedia In all of these cases we're dealing with the incentives of social status more than authority structure. I agree. I would say it is ordinary primate behavior, similar to what you see in our cousins the chimpanzees, and in other group hunting predators such as wolves. (I am not denigrating this behavior. I have great respect for other species.) So how do you identify the Jason(s) most likely to be more concerned with national security than peer pressure? I wouldn't know. I have never met 'em. I don't even know who they all are. I know some people who have met with them, and meet with them every year. I get the impression the Jasons are a bunch of washed up old farts who are opposed to everything that wasn't discovered before they turned 30, which was a long time ago. But I could be wrong. I know that one or two of them often pull strings to have cold fusion funding cancelled. It is big mistake to give any scientist over 30 a role in allocating money or making decisions. The way to make progress is get a large pot of money and hand it out to young people, letting them do whatever they please with it. Some of them will waste it. A few may steal it. But most will make far better use of it than an old scientist could. Young people succeed in doing things the older people think are impossible, because the young people have not yet learned where the boundary between possible and impossible likes. Actually, that boundary is imaginary, like a geographical boundary -- a state line, or a property line. No one knows what is possible and what isn't. No one can even imagine. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion on Wikipedia japanes and chinese
We are discussing a complicated issue. All old people and young people are not the same and it is not fair to stereotype everyone. It has been my observation that people tend to think in manners that are a result of their life experiences. An older scientist with a clear open mind has the ability to bring a vast amount of experience to the table. He has already made uncountable mistakes in judgement about nature whereas the youngster has just started finding that he does not understand everything about the universe. Some of our friends on this list harbor a lot of knowledge that they can and do offer to the discussions. It is critical to listen to what they have to say about new ideas since these can be filtered by their past experiences. The young guys are brave and willing to make mistakes which is a good thing as long as they continue to learn from these. It is refreshing to find some of the older scientists willing to speculate about LENR in open discussions where they understand that some of their ideas might be ridiculed. There is no shame in finding yourself defending your beliefs as long as the penalty is not too severe. All I request is that people keep asking questions about unexpected observations and not be of the firm belief that they have all the answers. Whether young or old, anyone with the proper mental state can find important pieces to the complex puzzle that we call LENR and we should encourage their inputs. One day soon the operation of these devices will be understood and we will all look back and see how the evidence was there the entire time. Dave -Original Message- From: Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com To: Vortex List vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Sep 25, 2013 11:16 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion on Wikipedia japanes and chinese I agree too that most of incentive in Science is status (science in real life is very like political in a way as my dear MP secretary explained to me). about removing older people from decision, I think it can be evil too. From decision maybe, but from discussion no. I see that older people often, because they can have no huge ambition for future, because they can have enough protection to feel safe, because they can have more ego than fear of the future, those fearless people, can play the rebels... In the early 20th century , young could play the rebels, they had to, but I'm afraid modern generation of scientists are so dependent on career and funding, that they cannot take the risk to think out of the funding box. They are also often too submitted to fashion, while oldies can remind of a period when things were different. they will be what Norbert Alter called alien, people who Today in many controversies,; I see only oldies, who take , for best and worst (I don't agree, mostly for best), crazy positions against the consensus, based on old knowledge, old evidences, of their memory of a period where feeling and trends were different. In the late 19th century, oldies were conservatives in a stable society. Today oldies are keepers of dead times, of dead culture, of outdated consensus, washed by waves of fashions and new consensus. Oldies are rebels, aliens, foreigner of their time, like were the young before. Like old heros, they can decide to suicide their career to defend their micro-ethics, not afraid of anything worse than the planned story... retirement and death. Maybe they are wrong, but sure you should not remove them from the story. They are what the young were before. If you look for young rebel, forget in science, go to business. However I agree that out of science, oldies often are more defending their honeypot, surfing on fashion, rather than rebels or defender of old values. 2013/9/25 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote: There is also opposition from many ordinary people and many stupid people at places like Wikipedia In all of these cases we're dealing with the incentives of social status more than authority structure. I agree. I would say it is ordinary primate behavior, similar to what you see in our cousins the chimpanzees, and in other group hunting predators such as wolves. (I am not denigrating this behavior. I have great respect for other species.) So how do you identify the Jason(s) most likely to be more concerned with national security than peer pressure? I wouldn't know. I have never met 'em. I don't even know who they all are. I know some people who have met with them, and meet with them every year. I get the impression the Jasons are a bunch of washed up old farts who are opposed to everything that wasn't discovered before they turned 30, which was a long time ago. But I could be wrong. I know that one or two of them often pull strings to have cold fusion funding cancelled. It is big mistake to give any scientist over 30 a role in allocating money or making
Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion on Wikipedia japanes and chinese
Being one of the old people, I would like to share my impression of this issue. Most young people are ignorant, self-centered, and without much imagination. When they become old people, most remain ignorant, self- centered, and without imagination. Growing old simply gives a person who wants knowledge a chance to get knowledge. It does not increase the incentive to get knowledge. Therefore, if you want advice from either the young or old, do not look at the age. Look at the willingness to learn and at the degree of imagination. Consequently, this discussion is focusing on the wrong variable. On Sep 25, 2013, at 9:46 AM, James Bowery wrote: The scientific approach, of course, would be two establish two groups, one a control group and the other a treatment group where the treatment is the proposed change, in this case the age limit. On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote: I agree too that most of incentive in Science is status (science in real life is very like political in a way as my dear MP secretary explained to me). about removing older people from decision, I think it can be evil too. From decision maybe, but from discussion no. I see that older people often, because they can have no huge ambition for future, because they can have enough protection to feel safe, because they can have more ego than fear of the future, those fearless people, can play the rebels... In the early 20th century , young could play the rebels, they had to, but I'm afraid modern generation of scientists are so dependent on career and funding, that they cannot take the risk to think out of the funding box. They are also often too submitted to fashion, while oldies can remind of a period when things were different. they will be what Norbert Alter called alien, people who Today in many controversies,; I see only oldies, who take , for best and worst (I don't agree, mostly for best), crazy positions against the consensus, based on old knowledge, old evidences, of their memory of a period where feeling and trends were different. In the late 19th century, oldies were conservatives in a stable society. Today oldies are keepers of dead times, of dead culture, of outdated consensus, washed by waves of fashions and new consensus. Oldies are rebels, aliens, foreigner of their time, like were the young before. Like old heros, they can decide to suicide their career to defend their micro-ethics, not afraid of anything worse than the planned story... retirement and death. Maybe they are wrong, but sure you should not remove them from the story. They are what the young were before. If you look for young rebel, forget in science, go to business. However I agree that out of science, oldies often are more defending their honeypot, surfing on fashion, rather than rebels or defender of old values. 2013/9/25 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote: There is also opposition from many ordinary people and many stupid people at places like Wikipedia In all of these cases we're dealing with the incentives of social status more than authority structure. I agree. I would say it is ordinary primate behavior, similar to what you see in our cousins the chimpanzees, and in other group hunting predators such as wolves. (I am not denigrating this behavior. I have great respect for other species.) So how do you identify the Jason(s) most likely to be more concerned with national security than peer pressure? I wouldn't know. I have never met 'em. I don't even know who they all are. I know some people who have met with them, and meet with them every year. I get the impression the Jasons are a bunch of washed up old farts who are opposed to everything that wasn't discovered before they turned 30, which was a long time ago. But I could be wrong. I know that one or two of them often pull strings to have cold fusion funding cancelled. It is big mistake to give any scientist over 30 a role in allocating money or making decisions. The way to make progress is get a large pot of money and hand it out to young people, letting them do whatever they please with it. Some of them will waste it. A few may steal it. But most will make far better use of it than an old scientist could. Young people succeed in doing things the older people think are impossible, because the young people have not yet learned where the boundary between possible and impossible likes. Actually, that boundary is imaginary, like a geographical boundary -- a state line, or a property line. No one knows what is possible and what isn't. No one can even imagine. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion on Wikipedia japanes and chinese
Hi I signed up for this newsletter a few days ago. I guess I am answering the wrong way. Let me know the right way and I will do it correct. Just could not sit and listen to some of the the comments. Read Edmund Storms comment a couple of times. I am a rather old guy and I am working in the field of leadership development. I am what you call a serial entrepreneur and have an interest in energy (also an engineering degree in the sixties). I have met people in their eighties with more gusto than some in their twenties. You can wish for twenty-five year old decision makers all you want but that is not the answer and as you know you have to be careful about what you wish for you might just get it. I am sure it is frustrating to have ideas and ambitions but no response from people able to help and support. That means that you have to change the format we operate under. To eliminate by race , sex age or . . . is first of all illegal so it wont work. So, do I argue that you should give up? No, far from that. However, you need to do what all small start ups are doing - MARKET YOURSELF AND YOUR IDEAS. Also find out who is more likely to be supportive. Make your marketing appealing for those able to help and make the message appealing to them. I have an old say that requires you know the basics about horses. If you want a horse to act on your wishes you cannot hang behind the load and scream at the horse - you need to go up and take the halter and lead the horse. It is not an age thing. As an example I mentor a 27 year old entrepreneur with a software product and I am almost as excited as he is. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 6140 Horseshoe Bar Road Suite G, Loomis CA 95650 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 9:14 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote: Being one of the old people, I would like to share my impression of this issue. Most young people are ignorant, self-centered, and without much imagination. When they become old people, most remain ignorant, self-centered, and without imagination. Growing old simply gives a person who wants knowledge a chance to get knowledge. It does not increase the incentive to get knowledge. Therefore, if you want advice from either the young or old, do not look at the age. Look at the willingness to learn and at the degree of imagination. Consequently, this discussion is focusing on the wrong variable. On Sep 25, 2013, at 9:46 AM, James Bowery wrote: The scientific approach, of course, would be two establish two groups, one a control group and the other a treatment group where the treatment is the proposed change, in this case the age limit. On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.comwrote: I agree too that most of incentive in Science is status (science in real life is very like political in a way as my dear MP secretary explained to me). about removing older people from decision, I think it can be evil too. From decision maybe, but from discussion no. I see that older people often, because they can have no huge ambition for future, because they can have enough protection to feel safe, because they can have more ego than fear of the future, those fearless people, can play the rebels... In the early 20th century , young could play the rebels, they had to, but I'm afraid modern generation of scientists are so dependent on career and funding, that they cannot take the risk to think out of the funding box. They are also often too submitted to fashion, while oldies can remind of a period when things were different. they will be what Norbert Alter called alien, people who Today in many controversies,; I see only oldies, who take , for best and worst (I don't agree, mostly for best), crazy positions against the consensus, based on old knowledge, old evidences, of their memory of a period where feeling and trends were different. In the late 19th century, oldies were conservatives in a stable society. Today oldies are keepers of dead times, of dead culture, of outdated consensus, washed by waves of fashions and new consensus. Oldies are rebels, aliens, foreigner of their time, like were the young before. Like old heros, they can decide to suicide their career to defend their micro-ethics, not afraid of anything worse than the planned story... retirement and death. Maybe they are wrong, but sure you should not remove them from the story. They are what the young were before. If you look for young rebel, forget in science, go to business. However I agree that out of science, oldies often are more defending their honeypot, surfing on fashion, rather than rebels or defender of old values. 2013/9/25 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote: There is also
Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion on Wikipedia japanes and chinese
MARKET YOURSELF AND YOUR IDEAS It seems to me that a LENR system is a jigsaw puzzle make up of 10,000 pieces. How do you hold the interest of a customer of the LENR concept long enough for them to endure the hard job of learning about all those thousands of obscure pieces? Especially when the customer is not sure the pieces fit together into a coherent picture. I think, you must provide the customer with a working commercial quality system to motivate them to endure the pain of learning a very difficult and convoluted process. I am sure that the software product that your acolyte is trying to sell is a high quality demonstrable product and is not vaporware. Once your customer sees a comprehensive demo of the amazing functions of that software product, he will be willing to trust the builder and to put in the long hours to understand how it works. On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 2:07 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.comwrote: Hi I signed up for this newsletter a few days ago. I guess I am answering the wrong way. Let me know the right way and I will do it correct. Just could not sit and listen to some of the the comments. Read Edmund Storms comment a couple of times. I am a rather old guy and I am working in the field of leadership development. I am what you call a serial entrepreneur and have an interest in energy (also an engineering degree in the sixties). I have met people in their eighties with more gusto than some in their twenties. You can wish for twenty-five year old decision makers all you want but that is not the answer and as you know you have to be careful about what you wish for you might just get it. I am sure it is frustrating to have ideas and ambitions but no response from people able to help and support. That means that you have to change the format we operate under. To eliminate by race , sex age or . . . is first of all illegal so it wont work. So, do I argue that you should give up? No, far from that. However, you need to do what all small start ups are doing - MARKET YOURSELF AND YOUR IDEAS. Also find out who is more likely to be supportive. Make your marketing appealing for those able to help and make the message appealing to them. I have an old say that requires you know the basics about horses. If you want a horse to act on your wishes you cannot hang behind the load and scream at the horse - you need to go up and take the halter and lead the horse. It is not an age thing. As an example I mentor a 27 year old entrepreneur with a software product and I am almost as excited as he is. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 6140 Horseshoe Bar Road Suite G, Loomis CA 95650 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 9:14 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote: Being one of the old people, I would like to share my impression of this issue. Most young people are ignorant, self-centered, and without much imagination. When they become old people, most remain ignorant, self-centered, and without imagination. Growing old simply gives a person who wants knowledge a chance to get knowledge. It does not increase the incentive to get knowledge. Therefore, if you want advice from either the young or old, do not look at the age. Look at the willingness to learn and at the degree of imagination. Consequently, this discussion is focusing on the wrong variable. On Sep 25, 2013, at 9:46 AM, James Bowery wrote: The scientific approach, of course, would be two establish two groups, one a control group and the other a treatment group where the treatment is the proposed change, in this case the age limit. On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.comwrote: I agree too that most of incentive in Science is status (science in real life is very like political in a way as my dear MP secretary explained to me). about removing older people from decision, I think it can be evil too. From decision maybe, but from discussion no. I see that older people often, because they can have no huge ambition for future, because they can have enough protection to feel safe, because they can have more ego than fear of the future, those fearless people, can play the rebels... In the early 20th century , young could play the rebels, they had to, but I'm afraid modern generation of scientists are so dependent on career and funding, that they cannot take the risk to think out of the funding box. They are also often too submitted to fashion, while oldies can remind of a period when things were different. they will be what Norbert Alter called alien, people who Today in many controversies,; I see only oldies, who take , for best and worst (I don't agree, mostly for best), crazy positions against the consensus, based on old
Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion on Wikipedia japanes and chinese
I think you may be misunderstanding Jed's point, Dave. Jed is far from implying that among LENR researchers the young are better represented than the old. Indeed, it is manifestly obvious that LENR research is kept alive almost entirely by the freedom older scientists enjoy either under tenure or retirement -- and there is a serious problem attracting younger researchers to the field because they dare not do a thesis on LENR. This might seem to be a paradox: If the younger researchers are pursuing their thesis under the direction of older researchers, and LENR research is largely the domain of older if not elderly researchers, then there should be an explosion of young researchers being directed toward LENR for their thesis work. But that is a logical fallacy. On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 11:05 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: We are discussing a complicated issue. All old people and young people are not the same and it is not fair to stereotype everyone. It has been my observation that people tend to think in manners that are a result of their life experiences. An older scientist with a clear open mind has the ability to bring a vast amount of experience to the table. He has already made uncountable mistakes in judgement about nature whereas the youngster has just started finding that he does not understand everything about the universe. Some of our friends on this list harbor a lot of knowledge that they can and do offer to the discussions. It is critical to listen to what they have to say about new ideas since these can be filtered by their past experiences. The young guys are brave and willing to make mistakes which is a good thing as long as they continue to learn from these. It is refreshing to find some of the older scientists willing to speculate about LENR in open discussions where they understand that some of their ideas might be ridiculed. There is no shame in finding yourself defending your beliefs as long as the penalty is not too severe. All I request is that people keep asking questions about unexpected observations and not be of the firm belief that they have all the answers. Whether young or old, anyone with the proper mental state can find important pieces to the complex puzzle that we call LENR and we should encourage their inputs. One day soon the operation of these devices will be understood and we will all look back and see how the evidence was there the entire time. Dave -Original Message- From: Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com To: Vortex List vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Sep 25, 2013 11:16 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion on Wikipedia japanes and chinese I agree too that most of incentive in Science is status (science in real life is very like political in a way as my dear MP secretary explained to me). about removing older people from decision, I think it can be evil too. From decision maybe, but from discussion no. I see that older people often, because they can have no huge ambition for future, because they can have enough protection to feel safe, because they can have more ego than fear of the future, those fearless people, can play the rebels... In the early 20th century , young could play the rebels, they had to, but I'm afraid modern generation of scientists are so dependent on career and funding, that they cannot take the risk to think out of the funding box. They are also often too submitted to fashion, while oldies can remind of a period when things were different. they will be what Norbert Alter called alien, people who Today in many controversies,; I see only oldies, who take , for best and worst (I don't agree, mostly for best), crazy positions against the consensus, based on old knowledge, old evidences, of their memory of a period where feeling and trends were different. In the late 19th century, oldies were conservatives in a stable society. Today oldies are keepers of dead times, of dead culture, of outdated consensus, washed by waves of fashions and new consensus. Oldies are rebels, aliens, foreigner of their time, like were the young before. Like old heros, they can decide to suicide their career to defend their micro-ethics, not afraid of anything worse than the planned story... retirement and death. Maybe they are wrong, but sure you should not remove them from the story. They are what the young were before. If you look for young rebel, forget in science, go to business. However I agree that out of science, oldies often are more defending their honeypot, surfing on fashion, rather than rebels or defender of old values. 2013/9/25 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote: There is also opposition from many ordinary people and many stupid people at places like Wikipedia In all of these cases we're dealing with the incentives of social status more than authority structure. I agree. I would
Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion on Wikipedia japanes and chinese
we can discuss on intrinsic qualities linked to age, and I would mostly agree. interpersonal differences are more important that the average changes in character with age... Experience, and time in the system have more impact than age... experience , and lack of experience have respective qualities. Being new in a system or having a huge network can cause good or bad. . Some good well installed people use their networks to protect the weakest, to protect innovation... this happen in administration, or in venture capital however what I was supporting when talking of young and old scientist is more linked to incentive linked to their economic and social position. I won't say the old are better than young, but that people who expect nothing from the system, who already have much, cannot have more, or no more expect anything, are more free. Being free is important. Today scientist, like most workers, starts with huge debts, with huge need to have a career, with huge social expectations and ambition... Debt is really, as says Taleb, something that make people less antifragile, more fragile. people with debt, with minimal expectation, are afraid to lose, and even sometime, afraid not to succeed. this is not good for innovation. Young poor people without debt, would prefer to take risk that to stay where they are... They would take any cheap option with the crazy hope to win. Indebted people do the opposite. The beginning of Antifragile book starts with a stoicism philosopher, who was rich, but who advised people to use few comfort so they can enjoy their unexpected wealth and accept their normal troubles... as taleb report, some great scientist and innovators were having a safe job, or a safe wealth, allowing them to do what they wanted in science. Another way to allow someone to take risk without being in risk. young or old we should give freedom to scientists. today I noticed that old scientists, not far from retirement, with adult children, with good saving, with small needs, can be free to bash the top scientists of their time, to raise their fingers to the community, to Nobel committee, to the funding agency, to their boss... There was a period when young scientist could do that, and older could not... Time have changed. anyway there are individual who can ignore incentive, but much less. moreover they are quickly eliminated by the law of survival and economics. 2013/9/25 Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com Hi I signed up for this newsletter a few days ago. I guess I am answering the wrong way. Let me know the right way and I will do it correct. Just could not sit and listen to some of the the comments. Read Edmund Storms comment a couple of times. I am a rather old guy and I am working in the field of leadership development. I am what you call a serial entrepreneur and have an interest in energy (also an engineering degree in the sixties). I have met people in their eighties with more gusto than some in their twenties. You can wish for twenty-five year old decision makers all you want but that is not the answer and as you know you have to be careful about what you wish for you might just get it. I am sure it is frustrating to have ideas and ambitions but no response from people able to help and support. That means that you have to change the format we operate under. To eliminate by race , sex age or . . . is first of all illegal so it wont work. So, do I argue that you should give up? No, far from that. However, you need to do what all small start ups are doing - MARKET YOURSELF AND YOUR IDEAS. Also find out who is more likely to be supportive. Make your marketing appealing for those able to help and make the message appealing to them. I have an old say that requires you know the basics about horses. If you want a horse to act on your wishes you cannot hang behind the load and scream at the horse - you need to go up and take the halter and lead the horse. It is not an age thing. As an example I mentor a 27 year old entrepreneur with a software product and I am almost as excited as he is. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 6140 Horseshoe Bar Road Suite G, Loomis CA 95650 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 9:14 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote: Being one of the old people, I would like to share my impression of this issue. Most young people are ignorant, self-centered, and without much imagination. When they become old people, most remain ignorant, self-centered, and without imagination. Growing old simply gives a person who wants knowledge a chance to get knowledge. It does not increase the incentive to get knowledge. Therefore, if you want advice from either the young or old, do not look at the age. Look at the willingness to learn and at
Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion on Wikipedia japanes and chinese
Regarding: Experience, and time in the system have more impact than age Brian David Josephson, is a Welsh physicist. He became a Nobel Prize laureate in 1973 for the prediction of the eponymous Josephson Effect. You would normally assume that this fine and clever fellow would have some authoritative standing in the science community as a sponsor for the LENR concept. But the rank and file in science now think he is a wacko for this support for LENR. A guy even smarter than Richard P. Feynman, Julian Schwinger is another Nobel Prize winner who supported LENR and was put permanently in the science penalty box for his LENR theories. LENR is so toxic that anybody, no matter how eminent they were before their great and brilliant mind was before they were infected by LENR, this leprosy of the thought must turn them into a contagious intellectual pariah. We must deduce from these examples of LENR intellectual status in science require that absolute and undeniable proof is required. On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 4:08 PM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.comwrote: we can discuss on intrinsic qualities linked to age, and I would mostly agree. interpersonal differences are more important that the average changes in character with age... Experience, and time in the system have more impact than age... experience , and lack of experience have respective qualities. Being new in a system or having a huge network can cause good or bad. . Some good well installed people use their networks to protect the weakest, to protect innovation... this happen in administration, or in venture capital however what I was supporting when talking of young and old scientist is more linked to incentive linked to their economic and social position. I won't say the old are better than young, but that people who expect nothing from the system, who already have much, cannot have more, or no more expect anything, are more free. Being free is important. Today scientist, like most workers, starts with huge debts, with huge need to have a career, with huge social expectations and ambition... Debt is really, as says Taleb, something that make people less antifragile, more fragile. people with debt, with minimal expectation, are afraid to lose, and even sometime, afraid not to succeed. this is not good for innovation. Young poor people without debt, would prefer to take risk that to stay where they are... They would take any cheap option with the crazy hope to win. Indebted people do the opposite. The beginning of Antifragile book starts with a stoicism philosopher, who was rich, but who advised people to use few comfort so they can enjoy their unexpected wealth and accept their normal troubles... as taleb report, some great scientist and innovators were having a safe job, or a safe wealth, allowing them to do what they wanted in science. Another way to allow someone to take risk without being in risk. young or old we should give freedom to scientists. today I noticed that old scientists, not far from retirement, with adult children, with good saving, with small needs, can be free to bash the top scientists of their time, to raise their fingers to the community, to Nobel committee, to the funding agency, to their boss... There was a period when young scientist could do that, and older could not... Time have changed. anyway there are individual who can ignore incentive, but much less. moreover they are quickly eliminated by the law of survival and economics. 2013/9/25 Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com Hi I signed up for this newsletter a few days ago. I guess I am answering the wrong way. Let me know the right way and I will do it correct. Just could not sit and listen to some of the the comments. Read Edmund Storms comment a couple of times. I am a rather old guy and I am working in the field of leadership development. I am what you call a serial entrepreneur and have an interest in energy (also an engineering degree in the sixties). I have met people in their eighties with more gusto than some in their twenties. You can wish for twenty-five year old decision makers all you want but that is not the answer and as you know you have to be careful about what you wish for you might just get it. I am sure it is frustrating to have ideas and ambitions but no response from people able to help and support. That means that you have to change the format we operate under. To eliminate by race , sex age or . . . is first of all illegal so it wont work. So, do I argue that you should give up? No, far from that. However, you need to do what all small start ups are doing - MARKET YOURSELF AND YOUR IDEAS. Also find out who is more likely to be supportive. Make your marketing appealing for those able to help and make the message appealing to them. I have an old say that requires you know the basics about horses. If you want a horse to act on your wishes you cannot
Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion on Wikipedia japanes and chinese
It remind me one of the old rebel, who beside shaking the scientific community, being insulted by journalist and holder of The True Truth, do babysitting after the conferences... This fearless and hopeless scientist, with a huge carreer in his domain, said that he was forced to do the job alone or with few old apes, because if he employed some young student for a thesis it would ruin their career and close them the doors of all research centers. the worst is that the defender of the truth says that the dissenters are funded by billions... fact is that the lobbyists are on of True Truth side... another problems... off topic. It make me laugh when I see those holder of true truth talk in detail of how to identify conspiracy theories. (see http://translate.google.fr/translate?sl=autotl=enjs=nprev=_thl=enie=UTF-8u=http%3A%2F%2Ffavisonlus.wordpress.com%2F2013%2F09%2F24%2Fbufale-scientifiche-mietono-vittime-ma-e-piu-facile-smascherarle%2F ) this make me however cautious today when I am sure of something... good lesson. I've noticed also that many member of the militia of True Truth are often quite young... Maybe stockholm syndrome, Mutual Assured Delusion, because they are too dependent on the system. maybe also they have too few experience, seen too few generation and places, too few delusions, crisis... I started to understand the collective delusion after participating two bubbles/crash. as I said, older people are sometime the required alien from another time, facing a system which is too modern, where young people unlike before bring no new vision, because all is their own vision. we need free people, we need alien, from another time (past or future) another place, another domaine, another approach, another sex, another social milieu... we need unexpected! young or old... but unexpected, alien and free. 2013/9/25 James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com I think you may be misunderstanding Jed's point, Dave. Jed is far from implying that among LENR researchers the young are better represented than the old. Indeed, it is manifestly obvious that LENR research is kept alive almost entirely by the freedom older scientists enjoy either under tenure or retirement -- and there is a serious problem attracting younger researchers to the field because they dare not do a thesis on LENR. This might seem to be a paradox: If the younger researchers are pursuing their thesis under the direction of older researchers, and LENR research is largely the domain of older if not elderly researchers, then there should be an explosion of young researchers being directed toward LENR for their thesis work. But that is a logical fallacy. On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 11:05 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.comwrote: We are discussing a complicated issue. All old people and young people are not the same and it is not fair to stereotype everyone. It has been my observation that people tend to think in manners that are a result of their life experiences. An older scientist with a clear open mind has the ability to bring a vast amount of experience to the table. He has already made uncountable mistakes in judgement about nature whereas the youngster has just started finding that he does not understand everything about the universe. Some of our friends on this list harbor a lot of knowledge that they can and do offer to the discussions. It is critical to listen to what they have to say about new ideas since these can be filtered by their past experiences. The young guys are brave and willing to make mistakes which is a good thing as long as they continue to learn from these. It is refreshing to find some of the older scientists willing to speculate about LENR in open discussions where they understand that some of their ideas might be ridiculed. There is no shame in finding yourself defending your beliefs as long as the penalty is not too severe. All I request is that people keep asking questions about unexpected observations and not be of the firm belief that they have all the answers. Whether young or old, anyone with the proper mental state can find important pieces to the complex puzzle that we call LENR and we should encourage their inputs. One day soon the operation of these devices will be understood and we will all look back and see how the evidence was there the entire time. Dave -Original Message- From: Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com To: Vortex List vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Sep 25, 2013 11:16 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion on Wikipedia japanes and chinese I agree too that most of incentive in Science is status (science in real life is very like political in a way as my dear MP secretary explained to me). about removing older people from decision, I think it can be evil too. From decision maybe, but from discussion no. I see that older people often, because they can have no huge ambition for future, because they can have enough
Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion on Wikipedia japanes and chinese
Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: Being one of the old people, I would like to share my impression of this issue. Most young people are ignorant, self-centered, and without much imagination. When they become old people, most remain ignorant, self-centered, and without imagination. . . . True. But the fact is, nearly all important innovation in science, math and technology is done by young people. Theoretical physics are mainly a young person's game. Most innovations in programming are by young people. There are exceptions of course. Niklaus Wirth published some of his famous contributions after age 40. But he contributed to theory. Programmers who made new programs or founded corporations, such as Bill Gates, Wozniak or Zuckerberg, were usually in their 20s when they did their best work. (People criticize Gates, but he wrote some excellent software back in the 1970s, when you consider the limitations of the early personal computers. So did I, if I do say say so myself.) In the case of cold fusion, I think Martin came up with some of the ideas when he was young, but he put off implementing them. Also, he was aware of work in the 1920s and 30s that pointed to cold fusion. Older people make important contributions to literature, music and graphic arts, especially painting. Monet painted some of his masterpieces a few years before he died, which were unlike anything in his youth, and unlike anything anyone painted before. Older people sometimes make important contributions to natural science, biology, other observational sciences, and archaeology. These things depend on a large base of knowledge and experience, rather than intuition or a new perspective unencumbered with older ideas. In physics, generally speaking, Planck's other constant holds. Progress occurs funeral by funeral. Regrettably, in cold fusion, the wrong gang of old coots are dying off. Also, we have a unfortunate generational role reversal, because of social and economic circumstances. See: http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJcomparison.pdf - Jed
[Vo]:ICCF18 stats
http://iccf18.research.missouri.edu/files/ICCF18_Statistics.pdf
Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion on Wikipedia japanes and chinese
I think this is inverted in the LENR community. TG On Wed, 25 Sep 2013 16:49:57 -0400, Jed Rothwell wrote: Edmund Storms wrote: Being one of the old people, I would like to share my impression of this issue. Most young people are ignorant, self-centered, and without much imagination. When they become old people, most remain ignorant, self-centered, and without imagination. . . . True. But the fact is, nearly all important innovation in science, math and technology is done by young people. Theoretical physics are mainly a young person's game. Most innovations in programming are by young people. There are exceptions of course. Niklaus Wirth published some of his famous contributions after age 40. But he contributed to theory. Programmers who made new programs or founded corporations, such as Bill Gates, Wozniak or Zuckerberg, were usually in their 20s when they did their best work. (People criticize Gates, but he wrote some excellent software back in the 1970s, when you consider the limitations of the early personal computers. So did I, if I do say say so myself.) In the case of cold fusion, I think Martin came up with some of the ideas when he was young, but he put off implementing them. Also, he was aware of work in the 1920s and 30s that pointed to cold fusion. Older people make important contributions to literature, music and graphic arts, especially painting. Monet painted some of his masterpieces a few years before he died, which were unlike anything in his youth, and unlike anything anyone painted before. Older people sometimes make important contributions to natural science, biology, other observational sciences, and archaeology. These things depend on a large base of knowledge and experience, rather than intuition or a new perspective unencumbered with older ideas. In physics, generally speaking, Planck's other constant holds. Progress occurs funeral by funeral. Regrettably, in cold fusion, the wrong gang of old coots are dying off. Also, we have a unfortunate generational role reversal, because of social and economic circumstances. See: http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJcomparison.pdf [2] - Jed Links: -- [1] mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com [2] http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJcomparison.pdf
Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion on Wikipedia japanes and chinese
Ooh! That was an anser to Jeds post. Not to Storms post. On Thu, 26 Sep 2013 01:27:04 +0200, torulf.gr...@bredband.net wrote: I think this is inverted in the LENR community. TG On Wed, 25 Sep 2013 16:49:57 -0400, Jed Rothwell wrote: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: Being one of the old people, I would like to share my impression of this issue. Most young people are ignorant, self-centered, and without much imagination. When they become old people, most remain ignorant, self-centered, and without imagination. . . . True. But the fact is, nearly all important innovation in science, math and technology is done by young people. Theoretical physics are mainly a young person's game. Most innovations in programming are by young people. There are exceptions of course. Niklaus Wirth published some of his famous contributions after age 40. But he contributed to theory. Programmers who made new programs or founded corporations, such as Bill Gates, Wozniak or Zuckerberg, were usually in their 20s when they did their best work. (People criticize Gates, but he wrote some excellent software back in the 1970s, when you consider the limitations of the early personal computers. So did I, if I do say say so myself.) In the case of cold fusion, I think Martin came up with some of the ideas when he was young, but he put off implementing them. Also, he was aware of work in the 1920s and 30s that pointed to cold fusion. Older people make important contributions to literature, music and graphic arts, especially painting. Monet painted some of his masterpieces a few years before he died, which were unlike anything in his youth, and unlike anything anyone painted before. Older people sometimes make important contributions to natural science, biology, other observational sciences, and archaeology. These things depend on a large base of knowledge and experience, rather than intuition or a new perspective unencumbered with older ideas. In physics, generally speaking, Planck's other constant holds. Progress occurs funeral by funeral. Regrettably, in cold fusion, the wrong gang of old coots are dying off. Also, we have a unfortunate generational role reversal, because of social and economic circumstances. See: http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJcomparison.pdf - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion on Wikipedia japanes and chinese
Obviously originality in physics is age related, but that is just a side effect when it comes to the gate keepers being tiresomely set in their ways. The reason for that is explained by Jerry Pournelle's iron law. Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy states that in any bureaucratic organization there will be two kinds of people: First, there will be those who are devoted to the goals of the organization. Examples are dedicated classroom teachers in an educational bureaucracy, many of the engineers and launch technicians and scientists at NASA, even some agricultural scientists and advisors in the former Soviet Union collective farming administration. Secondly, there will be those dedicated to the organization itself. Examples are many of the administrators in the education system, many professors of education, many teachers union officials, much of the NASA headquarters staff, etc. The Iron Law states that in every case the second group will gain and keep control of the organization. It will write the rules, and control promotions within the organization. So over time you will end up with people blocking new ideas and yes they will be old, but only because it has taken time for them to reach that position of power as a gatekeeper.It doesn't follow that old people in general will be that way.I will be eighty in a few months and was an early supporter of LENR and tireless advocate -- mainly to people who won't listen.It is most unlikely I will come up with the theory that explains LENR although I might have if I were still in my 20s when I was inventive by nature.
Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion on Wikipedia japanes and chinese
To get back on track: Yes the Jasons started out as a way for young men to breakthrough the bureaucratic types and yes the Jasons has now been occupied by the likes of Nate Lewis, who was listed as third author of the Jasons report: Reducing DoD Fossil-Fuel Dependencehttp://www.fas.org/irp/agency/dod/jason/fossil.pdf . Nevertheless there are a number of other Jasons who are listed as contributors, as well as being listed as first and second authors of that report. All it takes is one to break ranks and others may follow. On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 7:21 PM, a.ashfield a.ashfi...@verizon.net wrote: Obviously originality in physics is age related, but that is just a side effect when it comes to the gate keepers being tiresomely set in their ways. The reason for that is explained by Jerry Pournelle’s iron law. Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy states that in any bureaucratic organization there will be two kinds of people: “First, there will be those who are devoted to the goals of the organization. Examples are dedicated classroom teachers in an educational bureaucracy, many of the engineers and launch technicians and scientists at NASA, even some agricultural scientists and advisors in the former Soviet Union collective farming administration. Secondly, there will be those dedicated to the organization itself. Examples are many of the administrators in the education system, many professors of education, many teachers union officials, much of the NASA headquarters staff, etc. The Iron Law states that in every case the second group will gain and keep control of the organization. It will write the rules, and control promotions within the organization.” ** ** So over time you will end up with people blocking new ideas and yes they will be old, but only because it has taken time for them to reach that position of power as a gatekeeper. It doesn’t follow that old people in general will be that way. I will be eighty in a few months and was an early supporter of LENR and tireless advocate – mainly to people who won’t listen. It is most unlikely I will come up with the theory that explains LENR although I might have if I were still in my 20s when I was inventive by nature.
