Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion on Wikipedia japanes and chinese

[James Bowery]

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 Dependence
.

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  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.
>

Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion on Wikipedia japanes and chinese

[a.ashfield]

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

[torulf.greek]

Ooh! That was an anser to Jeds post. Not to Storms post.
 
On Thu, 26 Sep 2013 01:27:04 +0200,  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  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

[torulf.greek]

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

[Vo]:ICCF18 stats

[Jed Rothwell]

http://iccf18.research.missouri.edu/files/ICCF18_Statistics.pdf

Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion on Wikipedia japanes and chinese

[Jed Rothwell]

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

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion on Wikipedia japanes and chinese

[Alain Sepeda]

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=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=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 

> 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 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 
>> To: Vortex List 
>> 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
>>

Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion on Wikipedia japanes and chinese

[Axil Axil]

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 wrote:

> 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 
>
>> 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.

Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion on Wikipedia japanes and chinese

[Alain Sepeda]

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 

> 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 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. 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 wil

Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion on Wikipedia japanes and chinese

[James Bowery]

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  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 
> To: Vortex List 
> 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 
>
>> James Bowery  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 ag

Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion on Wikipedia japanes and chinese

[Axil Axil]

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 wrote:

> 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 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. 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 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

Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion on Wikipedia japanes and chinese

[Lennart Thornros]

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 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. 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 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 
>>
>>> James Bow

Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion on Wikipedia japanes and chinese

[Edmund Storms]

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  
 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 
James Bowery  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

[David Roberson]

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 
To: Vortex List 
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 

James Bowery  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 

Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion on Wikipedia japanes and chinese

[James Bowery]

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 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 
>
>> James Bowery  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

[Alain Sepeda]

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 

> James Bowery  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
>
>