Raising the level of civilization may be a pipe dream

8/9/26:

Some say the internet is forever. But these old links go dead a lot. It's a good practice to check the old posts on a regular basis and see if they're still good. This one has a link that is still working, but the article link isn't there, or it wasn't good to begin with.

As for the title of this post, the level of civilization will rise, but not evenly. There is always the possibility of collapse, though.

The original post was on 2/15/12:

After getting back into the world for the last few weeks, I realize the difficulty of the concept of raising the level of civilization. Progress doesn't come easy, and it is also not guaranteed to continue with the gains that have been made.

People are not that civilized. I see it every day.

Are people really just smart apes after all?

Civilization has outraced biology. Human beings may not be ready for the high tech living we now enjoy, nor for any further advances.

This is not in any way considering the Luddites as correct. I would prefer continued progress, but progress may not be easy against the headwinds that also exist.

Docudharma ...blogging the future

8/8/26:

As Yogi Berra once said: "Predictions are hard, especially about the future."

The hydrogen economy didn't materialize. It looks like the world is going to go for the batteries. But how to charge the batteries? It still takes hydro-carbons to power the world.

So-called "renewables" won't cut it. If that was going to work, it would've by now.

Nuclear power yields the most power, but that is being blocked for various reasons. Perhaps molten-salt reactors? Perhaps aneutronic fusion? It's still a waiting game after all these years.

11/6/11: The original post:

Marrying Stranded Wind and Freight Rail Electrification

The darker the blue, the windier it is- that's better for power generation

excerpts:

• It should, I hope, be clear that much of the best resource is in areas that do not have the highest electricity consumption.
• That right of way is used to establish long distance High Voltage DC trunk lines to bring sustainable energy from the places that have it to places the need it [ comment:  What if you can do away with high voltage trunk lines?  What I'm saying is, why does this have to be necessary?  Couldn't you make your fuel "in situ" and use it on the spot?  That is, synthesize fuel from wind power.  You can synthesize methanol and then use the methanol in a fuel cell, or use the methanol to make diesel.  How to build the synthesis plants?  You could possibly use airships to bring in the construction equipment and supplies to build the plants.  After finishing construction, the airships could bring raw materials for the synthesis of the fuel.  The fuel can be also be transported to fuel depots in a like manner.]

The next step is to see if airships can operate in high altitudes. That might be a problem, as most of these windy areas are in high altitudes.  This may be achievable if the effort needed was deemed to be worthy.

Update:

Strolling through memory lane.  Here's a post almost a year old which describes how methanol can be synthesized in a nuclear reactor.  Substitute wind power for nuclear power and you can synthesize methanol that way.  It is all a part of the master plan to switch to the hydrogen economy.

The Morning Summary, April 25, 2011

8/6/26:

Folks may want to know some stats. This blog was cross-posted from the original blog, and so this post was on the original blog. It should still be there, but this update won't be. Different blog now.

I'll give some general stats for this blog starting now.

All time views, per Google's Blogger Platform: 361464

April 25, 2011 : The original post:

The statistics:

Time approx 4:30 am

Sitemeter; Mon. am. 4618; v. Sun. am 4599; 19 up 1 from Sun

Blogger: Sun. 83, up 24 from Sat. (59); overnight is 12 so far, compared with 21 this time yesterday.

Nothing to report on bids, nor sales, still zero on revenues, no clicks on Amazon.  Nobody appears to be clicking on the Products page nor on the Marketing pages.

New record for this blog on Blogger pageviews.

YouTube page: 848 v 847 channel views previously, 493 v. 492 upload views previously. Channel views improve by 1, upload views improve by 1.

It is gratifying to hit new records. On the other hand, the lack of marketing success is frustrating.

Update:

I think I am going to be lite with the blogging today. That's my agenda today. Just to think.


Update:

One thing I thought about was the Space Show yesterday. If you were to get large quantities of turpentine and nitric acid in orbit at a reasonable cost, that could be a plus. On the other hand, these hypergolics may be hard to find and to synthesize in space. It would be necessary to get this up there somehow. Once up there, they can be more useful than trying to store cryogenics. The big dumb rocket could send up buttloads of the stuff. Also, the Space Cannon concept may be able to send it up at a reasonable price.

Also, after I finished the above post, I started reading up on fusion. I may need to spend some time in these forums.

Update:

It is interesting to go back and look at previous posts like this.  It is all an education, just like yesterday.  I didn't know about Interorbital until I listened to the Space Show.  It is still a matter of getting educated on what's out there.

If I may interject a thought into these discussions.  Everybody is going at this in their own way.  But what if no single way exists?  That's a question that should be considered.  Take fusion, for example.  The fact that fusion can take place now is not in dispute.  The problem is getting it to do what we want.  But if we want to do something like generating electricity, it may not be possible by a direct approach.  Let's say if you wanted to use fusion for propulsion and then use that propulsion to emplace solar stations that would send energy back to the Earth.  But I don't think anyone is thinking that way.  Instead, they want to get it to produce net electrical power.  Maybe that isn't even necessary.  That's my point. 

The human factor in research

8/6/26:

I'll take this opportunity to disclose that I've increased my position in Focus Fusion. This took place more than a month ago, but I've kept it quiet. Not sure about what to say about it. Let's say it's a hope and a prayer that this ship comes in soon.

4/16/26:

Today is an oldies kind of day. I'm reviewing posts for those which gathered the most attention. This one and the one previously posted this morning caught my eye. So I wrote an update for each.

What could be more human than finding something and then forgetting it? Then finding it again? The same is true on the historic scale as it is on the personal. I'm thinking of the Roman era, which was more advanced than some may have thought. Roman life may have been like living in nineteenth century, but it was a very long time ago--in ancient times. When Roman civilization collapsed in the Western half of Europe, there was an era called the Dark Ages. Life became primitive for centuries. It took a long time to recover.

There are lessons in history if you bother to notice. It is a lot like studying this blog and rediscovering posts like these. A question comes to mind: what does the future hold? As of now, there is no solution to the energy problem. There seems to be a war in Iran that is closely related to the problem of energy. If the energy problem were solved, would that help bring about world peace? It's a thought.

5/20/11:

Not too long ago, I did a number of posts on the subject of Rossi Focardi fusion research.  Then, yesterday, I came across the energy from Thorium proposition.  Both are attempting to do the same thing: generate energy from the atom.  The difference between the two is that one is fusion while the other is fission.  The similarities are that both had a lot of promise at one point, but seemed to fall by the wayside and recently rediscovered.

There has been a great deal of fear about nuclear energy.  Not to mention the worry about the wastes.  This did not concern me as much as others may have been because of what I read in Dixy Lee Ray's book  Trashing the Planet.  I suspect that a lot of the fear has to do with a lack of understanding which is exacerbated by the way that mishaps get reported in the news.  Hence, the Three Mile Island incident effectively shuts down the nuclear industry here.  A few years later, Chernobyl reinforced that fear.  Now Fukishima just adds to the climate of fear of things nuclear- these things just don't seem safe.  Now, Germany abandons nuclear power.  All of this is an overreaction.  Sadly, it may be unavoidable.  People will fear something they don't understand.   What to do?

The star crossed history of fission has been the impetus for fusion research.  But fusion is much harder.  After all these decades, we still don't have a fusion reactor which is net energy.  But people are looking and looking hard.  As for me, I've been looking closely at the energy issue for several years now.  I came across Dr. Bussard's Polywell concept.  It was one of the first things I wrote about on this blog.  Lately, two other concepts have caught my attention- Focus Fusion and Rossi Focardi's "cold fusion".   My own experience studying these ideas has brought something else to my attention- the human factor.  People fall in love with their ideas.  It is entirely human, but it is also hazardous in its own way.  It may blind us to other paths that we may take.  That's because to fall in love means the exclusion of all other choices.

To fear and to love are all too human.  But it is also possible to learn and keep an open mind.  Unfortunately, when emotions take over, the mind tends to close down.  Reason and logic go overboard and big mistakes can be made.  The reaction to this may draw the reaction- who do you think you are, Spock?  Yeah, maybe you weren't thinking that at all, and the Spock reference turns you off.  I've described times when I got turned off by something only to reconsider.  Sometimes to reconsider can be helpful.  Jumping to conclusions can't be good.  But it is easy to fall into that trap.  I try to avoid that as well as avoiding "drinking the Kool Aid."  I wrote about this Kool Aid stuff on this blog too.  I won't be drinking anybody's Kool Aid.  I'm keeping an open mind.

I haven't fallen in love with any one way of solving the energy problem.  It may turn out that the best way will get overlooked when something else is found.  Such has been the case of fission.  Just looking at the way we generate electricity now may look foolish in the future in comparison to how it might be done better with Thorium reactors.  Thorium reactors are smaller, cheaper and safer.  That is not a mere theoretical possibility.  They have already been built.  They weren't commercialized because it was thought better to be able to make bombs.  Thorium is not useful for making bombs.

However, Rossi Focardi may be right around the corner.  This idea may get the lead on Thorium and it may be back to the sidelines for Thorium.  Frankly, it doesn't make any difference to me who wins.  I think we all win when we solve the energy problem.  If it gets solved by fission or fusion- who cares, as long as it works.

Hydrogen peroxide & baking soda

8/6/26:

Ah, yes. It was about that time when I tried growing tomatoes, but it failed. Obviously, I haven't tried again.

The original post: 8/11/19: ... can help you grow your tomatoes.

It is cheap stuff and it probably works.  But I wouldn't know yet, because I haven't tried it.

It is useful to stockpile videos like these because one of these days...

Why go back to the Moon?

8/5/26:

The nation is now committed to going to the Moon again.

Not only the nation, but Elon Musk.

There are practical reasons for going there. There is an abundance of oxygen bound up in the rocks. Oxygen makes up roughly 80% of the reaction mass for the Raptor engines. This reaction mass can be sent to lunar orbit with relatively little cost through the use of propulsion devices on the surface. That could consist of the same kind of technology that flings jets off the new Ford class of Supercarriers--no fuel needed. Not only oxygen, but methane could be produced from the water recycling process used on the ISS. Methane is vented off the ISS, but methane could find some useful purposes on the lunar surface as well. One of these purposes could be in the manufacture of rocket fuels.

The Moon could also be a launching point for the trip to Mars, since its gravitational pull is much less than Earth's. Since the Ship would be full, it could develop a lot more delta-v for a faster trip. A faster trip could lower the exposure of the crew to microgravity and radiation.

The moon could also be developed for its other resources. This and the reasons above could make it economically profitable in its own right. In other words, there's money to be made.

11/19/18: The original post follows: Let's look back at why President Kennedy wanted to go to the Moon.




An analysis of the speech is here.

Key points of the analysis:

• Fear of Sputnik, and the breakneck speed of advancement of that time prepared the audience in advance for the ambitious undertaking that the President advocated.  America must lead that effort, he said.
• The march of progress will go on whether we lead it or not.
• Framed within the context of the Cold War, and inextricably linked to it, it was hard for opponents to be critical of the President's goal.
• Need to be challenged--- "We go to the moon not because it is easy, because it is hard."
• There will be sacrifice of life and treasure, but the sacrifice will be worth it.
• It is like the reason given for climbing Mt. Everest, "it is there".
• Finally, the speech was said to be well executed and effective.

How does that speech compare with the present?  There is no Cold War, but there could be a conflict of some kind on the horizon with China.  The march of progress has gone on indeed, and is much more broad based than just space.  The US is in danger of being left behind across the board, in my opinion.  As for the need for a challenge, it is probably more necessary now than ever.  This country has become too inured to the easy way out.  We need the challenge so that we don't become too soft.  

Mt. Everest is still there, and so is the Moon.  Why not go?  We may be surprised at what we find.

How to use Shotcut in order to make videos

8/4/26:

Almost have forgotten that I have this installed on the computer. Here's another how to video in order to remind me.

7/6/26: The original post is below:

Where does this blog go for the future?

8/2/26:

The future is now, as far as yours truly is concerned. Whatever I do, I must do soon. Know what I mean, Vern? This is not being morbid, but at this age, anything can happen at any time.

The original post follows:

7/24/24:

Not only will off-grid posts go here, but also cutting edge tech. Not much else to say on the subject right now. Politics has the floor, so to speak.



Correction to right sidebar when I get around to updating it. In the link described as up to date spacex mission info, substitute this link. Still going through the list, so bear with me.

Hot Air: Bad news from NASA: If we don’t reduce carbon emissions, the aliens might come and kill us; Update: Not a NASA report

July 31, 2026:

It seems like a joke to me. Whatever.

August 20, 2011: The original post follows below:

The bad news is, they might not find them. The good news is, the resulting alien invasion will inspire the Keynesian orgy of Paul Krugman’s wettest dreams.

Krugman gets slammed pretty good there, ha ha.   Unfortunately, the incompetence is out there.  The story here is of that very thing.  It has gotten pretty darned bad.  At least NASA isn't that far gone, they have disavowed the report, but the perps are "affiliated" with NASA, nonetheless.  It is really sad that people could write such nonsense.  Even sadder still is that there's people who may believe it.

So will this... (water purification)

Always interesting to rediscover what was already known for hundreds or even thousands of years.