Talk:Robert W. Bussard

message: "most interstellar hydrogen exists in an ionized state"
: Doesn't that mean "protons"?  If so, shouldn't it be called "interstellar plasma"? — Omegatron 22:22, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  No, ionized means positively or negatively charged MOLECUlES. An ion is a molecule that does not containt equal numbers of electrons and protons. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 134.10.121.63 (talk) 22:18, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  If the H is a positive ion, what's the diff between that and a regular P+? Oh well, this isn't the place for the discussion. Paperweight 04:45, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interstellar gas 

message: Apparently Dr. Bussard's Inertial-Electrodynamic Fusion (IEF) Device has won the International Academy of Science's 2006 Outstanding Technology of the Year award. I think this should be mentioned somewhere...  The question is, where?  In this article or another? / Hiddekel 15:54, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Polywell? — Omegatron 15:55, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Outstanding Technology of the Year Award - 2006 

message: ;User:JzG removed the following 
* http://www.rexresearch.com/farnsworth/fusor.htm#ligon
inrelation to:
* In an article entitled  "The World's Simplest Fusion Reactor: How To Make It Work" in the December 12, 1998
J. D. Redding 23:05, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed ref

message: Link is a little strange and doesn't provide much information.  Site is apparently registered to Bussard, though.  
: If this really works, why can't he convince something real to fund it? — Omegatron 17:16, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Since when does every feasible, realistic idea receive funding?  There are many ways to spend money, donating it is generally not high on people's list. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.137.223.153 (talk) 21:31, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Someone should dig up some discussion on the merits of donation / private financing / corporate share issue financing for the fusor project and make a section on it here. Oh, and he is trying to convince "something real" to finance it. Paperweight 04:51, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  And eventually succeeded. — Omegatron 02:13, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link for donations 

message: The report that the Navy had resumed funding was a false alarm . —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jabowery (talk • contribs) 16:46, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've looked through the various references I found and the closest thing to a confirmation seems to be This article, which doesn't say that the research group is still funded, only that Bussard got funding before he died and that "Work on Bussard’s fusion reactor continues at the company he founded... colleagues said." I certainly hope his work is being funded, but it's hard to tell, and the various blogs claiming confirmation all seem to lead back to the same article. Even the EMC2 company site says almost nothing. Can we get clearer info on this issue? -Kris Schnee (talk) 03:44, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that it would be nice to find out who is providing the funding.Kevinp2 (talk) 18:38, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: False Alarm

message: I removed a phrase saying that the Navy funding was canceled specifically because of "Iraq War budget costs," because of its unsourced and speculative nature. Seem reasonable? Bussard, assuming that the <a href=http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=58665#27>forum post attributed to him</a> was his, said, "the entire Navy Energy Program was cut to zero in FY 2006, and we were a part of this cut. The funds were clearly needed for the more important War in Iraq." Do we know that to be the reason though? We could also just give this quote as his opinion, to the extent that the forum post is trustworthy. -Kris Schnee (talk) 03:16, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it should be stated as his words. — Omegatron 02:11, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Iraq Claim 

message: I am a basic technology guru type and was once like Dr. Bussard, a nuclear security covered person.  I held the world's neutron standard in my own personnel storage locker while employed at the NIST as the building 245 safety supervisor.
NIST is the National Institute of Standards and Technology, the US national standards laboratory.
The neutron standard is now being debated as a continued nuclear security standard or to advance the world to new science. Bussard's designs will never be understood in Standard Model Theory, because he like me was inside nuclear security.
I was to vote in the afirmative, and so the neutron was to be recalibrate in 2010.  A world congress was to monitor the new neutron number.  Beleive it or not, the fission neutron binding values calibrate the number. Nuclear physics was diverted for 80 years by the use of a miscalibrated neutron.  An exact number of neutrons are emitted for each fission.
Bussards design is real it is dangerous, but it will project humanity.  Simple reactors in valleys designed for excursion are all that was necessary.  A valley dedicated to the future power sources was to be Clinch River in Va.  A failed fusion system is truely explosive and a small fusion event would occur with maybe 10% probability over ten yearss.  A death of plant personnel as true scientific advisors to humanity.
We will simply use coal or use fusion was the test.  ANd greenhouse is to advise.  We must turn to fusion now.  Security cleared personnel for all reactors, that is all.  A strange fusion plant where security covers all aspects will occur.
The new science was all we needed.
--207.69.140.22 (talk) 15:54, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fusion Power and Bussard

message: This was briefly on Polywell but was removed as unimportant to that article. Mentioning here in case anyone thinks it should be added here.
Award 
In 2006, Dr Bussard and the Polywell device were awarded the Outstanding Technology of the Year Award by the International Academy of Science (Missouri). 
-- Writtenonsand (talk) 12:27, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Oops. I now see that this was already mentioned here. -- Writtenonsand (talk) 12:28, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Outstanding Technology of the Year Award 2006 

message: "In June 1995, Bussard claimed in a letter to all fusion laboratories, as well as to key members of the US Congress, that he and the other founders of the program supported the Tokamak not out of conviction that it was the best technical approach but rather as a vehicle for generating political support, "
The letter linked to, assuming it is legitimate, does not state this at all (relevant page: )  It simply says that the DOE has a commitment to fusion because of its commitment to large budgets in general, and used the fusion program as an excuse for this. His "confession" is just that they tried to raise very large budgets as a matter of course so they could have the money to use at their own discretion. Whether one thinks this is a good idea or not, it is not at all what the statement above implies. It's fairly standard procedure for agency funding, for better or worse. Its reference to the Tokamak is just as an example of large fusion funding, and it says nothing about technical approaches vs. political support. --140.247.241.114 (talk) 18:51, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see why you're arguing against this here.  By your own interpretation, they used the tokamak approach because it would get them lots of funding, quite irrespective of whether it was technically superior or not.  That's exactly what Dr. Bussard wrote.  "Political support" means "funding".  And if you don't see anything about technical approaches, well, that just corroborates the suggestion that it wasn't even a consideration.  So I don't see any contradictions here.  Besides, whatever you or any of us opine is WP:OR, while the letter is WP:VERIFY. Kevin Baastalk 20:26, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Political subterfuge? 

message: i mean yeah, most obviously this guy didnt exist till like the 1950's. there is no background history, nore where he came from? is he an outerspace alien or what? common folks lets gather some solid information!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brais (talk • contribs) 04:05, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  The personal life 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Robert W. Bussard. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070224220614/http://www.fusor.net/board/view.php?site=fusor&bn=fusor_announce&key=1143684406 to http://www.fusor.net/board/view.php?site=fusor&bn=fusor_announce&key=1143684406
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:34, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified