Oil Depletion and the Second Law of Thermodynamics: THE ETP MODEL

[Billy T]

I am once again requesting that James R, or someone with a sufficient physics background, make some determinations of some basic physics questions that are under dispute here. I don't believe there is any useful way to proceed until this happens. In the meantime, thank you all for your patience.---Futilitist

You don't think I have? Despite a 30 year carrier at the Applied Physics Lab of JHU, rising to the highest rank / level ("principle staff"), which mainly only the department managers, not many physicists do, and a Ph.D. in physics from JHU, which caused APL to offer me an unsought job a year before getting my Ph.D.
(APL was forming a new small group concerned with Plasma physics, and I was the only one at the university doing experimental work in that area.)

Just to make sure their offer was generous, I did go talk with people at NBS, who were also investigating fully ionized Argon plasma. They wanted me to join their group, but could only offer "GS-11" salary, significantly lower than APL's offer, and I was tired of Argon, young and idealistic, so wanted to work on the "controlled fusion" problem (Harnessing the H-bomb, for unlimited power) I now think man kind will "crack that nut" even thought for three decades the solution has been "a couple of years into the future." Problem is that fusion power will be several times more costly than another energy source which also has "free energy" and only capital cost - Solar power.

APL/JHU was great place to work: High pay, very qualified staff - A large group with me got our 30 year pins in the annual "pin ceremony," about a dozen got the 40 year pin, and one his 50 year pin but that is rare.

PS The useful way to proceed is for you to disappear again for a few years - until new members are here you can BS with your ignorant of physics nonsense.

 

[billvon]

If Billvon does not post the last three paragraphs in the "Etp model" thread soon, I will, but hope he does - he should get the credit.

Go for it! The above was a quote from the Peak Oiler, not my own words anyway.

 

[Futilitist]

In other words, you don't like the answers being given... so you want to put the thread on hold until someone agrees with you...

In other words, the site seems to be stonewalling the Etp model. Why?

Are you saying that James R agrees with me? Why can't he speak for himself? It is almost like he just doesn't want to go on record on the Etp model. That seems strange to me. If James R thinks the Etp model has some merit, he could say so. If he thinks it is bullshit, he could say that. I will accept either answer. I just don't like stonewalling.


James R, will you please clear this up? What do you think of the Etp model?



---Futilitist

 

[exchemist]

In other words, the site seems to be stonewalling the Etp model. Why?

If James R thinks the Etp model has some merit, he could say so. If he thinks it is bullshit, he could say that. I will accept either answer. I just don't like stonewalling.



---Futilitist

Of course he might equally think this has nothing to do with physics. Or that you are too mad to be worth corresponding with. Nobody has a right to demand the participation of another person in a forum discussion.

Since we are now on page 6 of this thread it seems odd to claim it is being "stonewalled".

 

[billvon]

Are you saying that James R agrees with me? Why can't he speak for himself?

He may (quite rationally) decide that speaking to you is pointless. You have ignored the comments of physicists and chemists because what they say does not agree with your pet theory. Thus why bother with a few more comments for you to ignore?

 

[Futilitist]

Of course he might equally think this has nothing to do with physics. Or that you are too mad to be worth corresponding with. Nobody has a right to demand the participation of another person in a forum discussion.

I am not mad. I have been asking for James R's opinion on the Etp model for some time. It sounds like you are making excuses for stonewalling.

It would be very simple for James R to just answer the questions I asked him. Any answers he gives will be satisfactory to me, as long as he is clear.



---Futilitist

 

[Futilitist]

He may (quite rationally) decide that speaking to you is pointless. You have ignored the comments of physicists and chemists because what they say does not agree with your pet theory. Thus why bother with a few more comments for you to ignore?

Because if he answers me, the matter will be settled. Simple. Otherwise, I don't know how to proceed on this thread.

So, the question still stands.

James R, will you please clear this up? What do you think of the Etp model?

Tick tock.



---Futilitist

 

[exchemist]

I am not mad. I have been asking for James R's opinion on the Etp model for some time. It sounds like you are making excuses for stonewalling.

It would be very simple for James R to just answer the questions I asked him. Any answers he gives will be satisfactory to me, as long as he is clear.



---Futilitist

You think I am stonewalling? I have been an active contributor to this thread from the start and my most recent answer to a question you asked me was yesterday. In that answer, I asked you a question, to which I have not had a response. So if anyone is stonewalling here, it is you.

 

[Kittamaru]

Indeed... however, I do believe it is time to move this farce into the "alternative theories" section...

 

[Beer w/Straw]

I find this juxtaposition makes somehow awesomoner.

Nobody has a right to demand the participation of another person in a forum discussion.

If rpenner responds, I will harass rpenner.

 

[Kittamaru]

I am not mad. I have been asking for James R's opinion on the Etp model for some time. It sounds like you are making excuses for stonewalling.

It would be very simple for James R to just answer the questions I asked him. Any answers he gives will be satisfactory to me, as long as he is clear.



---Futilitist

I am curious... what gives you the right or power to issue a demand to an administrator of this site?

 

[Futilitist]

I am curious... what gives you the right or power to issue a demand to an administrator of this site?

I am a member of this "community". I am not demanding anything. I am only asking a few simple questions.

Are you saying definitively that James R is refusing to answer?

If James R is refusing to answer, I need to hear it from him, otherwise it wouldn't be official. I just want to be fair.



---Futilitist

 

[Kittamaru]

I am a member of this "community". I am not demanding anything. I am only asking a few simple questions.

Are you saying definitively that James R is refusing to answer?

If James R is refusing to answer, I need to hear it from him, otherwise it wouldn't be official. I just want to be fair.



---Futilitist

So you are demanding that James R must answer to state that he is refusing to answer...?

That's like telling someone they have the "right to remain silent" but only if they answer and acknowledge said right, thereby breaking said silence...

 

[Futilitist]

So you are demanding that James R must answer to state that he is refusing to answer...?

No. I am just asking him to weigh in on the validity of the Etp model. This is a science forum, right?

I have no way of knowing if he is even aware of my questions.

That's like telling someone they have the "right to remain silent" but only if they answer and acknowledge said right, thereby breaking said silence...

You make it sound like James R is on trial. I never suggested such a thing.

Why is everyone running interference for James R? This seems a little childish to me.



---Futilitist

 

[Kittamaru]

No. I am just asking him to weigh in on the validity of the Etp model. This is a science forum, right?

I have no way of knowing if he is even aware of my questions.


You make it sound like James R is on trial. I never suggested such a thing.

Why is everyone running interference for James R? This seems a little childish to me.



---Futilitist

Why are you demanding an answer from James R? When has he ever proclaimed to be an expert on all-things physics?

When have I suggested he was "on trial"? Please, show me where I said that.

 

[Russ_Watters]

In other words, the site seems to be stonewalling the Etp model. Why?

Again, since none of us, including you, have access to the ETP model, the best we can do is my (and other similar) responses to the apparent flaws in the output. We can't discuss the details of a model we don't have access to!

Because of that and your conduct as a result, (since you are unable to discuss the topic, you are just trolling to tread water) I agree that this thread s childish and suggest that this thread be cesspooled and you banned for it.

 

[Kittamaru]

Given that your personal blog has less than 400 views over 5 years... I don't think anyone particularly cares...

 

[Futilitist]

Given that your personal blog has less than 400 views over 5 years... I don't think anyone particularly cares...

That is not true. My blog has had 7,645 reads as of today. It has been up only since Aug. of 2012. Why did you just make up the 5 year thing? Your math skills are questionable.

So, anyway, I do hereby resign my membership to this so called science forum, again.

Goodbye.


---Futilitist

 

[Kittamaru]

That is not true. My blog has had 7,645 reads as of today.

I do hereby resign my membership to this so called science forum.

Goodbye.


---Futilitist

Hm... well, that may be - I am not overly familiar with blogger and its layout... however, according to your profile page, you have a mere 374 profile views.

EDIT - make that 376 - hitting refresh twice caused that to increment, so apparently it doesn't count "unique" views...

*shrugs* either way, make whatever libelous claims you wish

 

[Futilitist]

Blog hits are not the same as profile views. People read more about what I write than who I am.

I have had 994 page views in the last month alone.

Thanks for the offer to say more stuff about this stupid site. But I am done here.



---Futilitist