Hacker News Reader

Comment by pontifier | Hacker News Reader

It's an easy article to write, and it's easy because so many others have written the same thing.

It's like articles about Facebook and how their value fluctuates and this or that privacy issue is going to be fixed soon. People have heard about the big players, so big players get the attention.

I'm trying to do some fusion research myself, but it's extremely difficult to get anyone to take what I'm doing seriously.

I've got a completely new design, and it still needs to be tested. Do you know how difficult that is when nobody will even look at it, and I have to do everything myself?

I don't even know why I talk about it at all.

I've got some info about it at http://www.DDproFusion.com

View on HN

Recommendations include:

1) ditching the toxic negative attitude. It pushes away interest.

2) spend an afternoon or a few bucks on a web designer making your site look better than the "time cube" site. It practically screams crackpot theory.

3) build credibility with academics first. People not in the field will assume you're a swindler by default.

1 - I agree, I've been fighting too many battles on too many fronts and my optimism has been taking a hit.

2 - I see, I'll look into presenting more professionally.

3 - I believe Ideas should be evaluated on their merit, and what people think about the idea or myself isn't going to change the physics. It will either work or it won't

3 - It could work, but badly. That is what they are shooting for at ITER.

You have a 48 second youtube simulation video, and one paragraph explaining nothing.

How is this supposed to help people take you seriously? What are your credentials? Why should anyone take you seriously?

Are you an academic? Have you submitted this to academic journals or individuals? Have you tried to make or made any connections to anyone in the field?

Also, are you the guy who bought the warehouse full of CD's?

It's difficult to find the right balance between details and general concepts, and it's clear that I haven't refined my message clearly enough.

I'm not an academic, but have a reasonable level of physics understanding. The concept is simple enough that it should be understandable by people that have a basic understanding of how charged particles behave in a magnetic field.

It should be taken seriously because it's a good idea, and deserves to be studied. I readily admit that a full analysis is beyond my abilities, but I haven't been able to find anyone that can do any better at evaluating it, and I've talked to a lot of people.

I'm moving forward with the self funded construction of the prototype, because with this type of thing, I don't think ANYBODY can say with certainty that it will work or not. Even simulations aren't enough to tell for sure.

And yeah, I'm also trying to restart Murfie among other things.

Can I recommend dropping the use of royal we, with respect to how you describe your work on the project.

This is usually a lot more common in software projects, and it doesn't come across well when most the effort is clearly (at least from a quick overview)from a single person.

I'm sorry I keep forgetting to ask for your permission before I hire or fire someone.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com