Messages in AirborneWindEnergy group.                          AWES 17946 to 17995 Page 253 of 440.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17946 From: benhaiemp Date: 5/19/2015
Subject: Increased the size of AWES vs increasing hub height of HAWT

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17947 From: benhaiemp Date: 5/19/2015
Subject: Risks from soft and rigid wings

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17948 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 5/19/2015
Subject: Re: Increased the size of AWES vs increasing hub height of HAWT

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17949 From: dougselsam Date: 5/19/2015
Subject: Re: Increased the size of AWES vs increasing hub height of HAWT

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17950 From: dougselsam Date: 5/19/2015
Subject: Re: Daisy test day

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17951 From: dave santos Date: 5/19/2015
Subject: Re: Daisy test day

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17952 From: Rod Read Date: 5/19/2015
Subject: Re: Daisy test day

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17953 From: dave santos Date: 5/19/2015
Subject: Re: Professor Crackpot: On the Loose Again!

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17954 From: dougselsam Date: 5/19/2015
Subject: Re: Professor Crackpot: On the Loose Again!

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17955 From: dougselsam Date: 5/19/2015
Subject: Re: Daisy test day

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17956 From: Rod Read Date: 5/19/2015
Subject: Re: Daisy test day

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17957 From: dave santos Date: 5/19/2015
Subject: Re: Professor Crackpot: On the Loose Again!

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17958 From: dave santos Date: 5/19/2015
Subject: Re: Daisy test day

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17959 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 5/19/2015
Subject: Douglas Spriggs Selsam

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17960 From: edoishi Date: 5/19/2015
Subject: Re: Enerkite's New Flying Wing

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17961 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 5/19/2015
Subject: Re: Enerkite's New Flying Wing

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17962 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 5/19/2015
Subject: Re: Enerkite's New Flying Wing

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17963 From: dave santos Date: 5/19/2015
Subject: Re: Douglas Spriggs Selsam

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17964 From: dave santos Date: 5/20/2015
Subject: Re: Professor Crackpot: On the Loose Again!

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17965 From: dave santos Date: 5/20/2015
Subject: Role of Advanced Physics in AWE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17966 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 5/20/2015
Subject: Re: Role of Advanced Physics in AWE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17967 From: dave santos Date: 5/20/2015
Subject: Re: Role of Advanced Physics in AWE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17968 From: dave santos Date: 5/20/2015
Subject: Active Soft Matter Paradigm (advanced kite physics)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17969 From: dave santos Date: 5/20/2015
Subject: More details of next-round Minesto Sea Trials

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17970 From: dougselsam Date: 5/21/2015
Subject: Re: Douglas Spriggs Selsam

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17971 From: dougselsam Date: 5/21/2015
Subject: Re: Enerkite's New Flying Wing

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17972 From: dougselsam Date: 5/21/2015
Subject: Re: Role of Advanced Physics in AWE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17973 From: dougselsam Date: 5/21/2015
Subject: Re: Role of Advanced Physics in AWE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17974 From: dougselsam Date: 5/21/2015
Subject: Re: Active Soft Matter Paradigm (advanced kite physics)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17975 From: Rod Read Date: 5/21/2015
Subject: Re: Active Soft Matter Paradigm (advanced kite physics)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17976 From: Rod Read Date: 5/21/2015
Subject: Re: Enerkite's New Flying Wing

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17977 From: dave santos Date: 5/21/2015
Subject: Re: Role of Advanced Physics in AWE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17978 From: dave santos Date: 5/21/2015
Subject: Re: Active Soft Matter Paradigm (advanced kite physics)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17979 From: dave santos Date: 5/21/2015
Subject: Trilobite Soft Kite Buzz at Texas AWE Encampment

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17980 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 5/21/2015
Subject: Re: Active Soft Matter Paradigm (advanced kite physics)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17981 From: dougselsam Date: 5/22/2015
Subject: Re: Active Soft Matter Paradigm (advanced kite physics)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17982 From: dougselsam Date: 5/22/2015
Subject: Re: Role of Advanced Physics in AWE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17983 From: benhaiemp Date: 5/22/2015
Subject: Semiology in AWE field

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17984 From: dougselsam Date: 5/22/2015
Subject: Re: Semiology in AWE field

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17985 From: dave santos Date: 5/22/2015
Subject: Re: Active Soft Matter Paradigm (advanced kite physics)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17986 From: dave santos Date: 5/22/2015
Subject: Re: Role of Advanced Physics in AWE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17987 From: dave santos Date: 5/22/2015
Subject: Re: Semiology in AWE field

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17988 From: dave santos Date: 5/22/2015
Subject: Re: Semiology in AWE field

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17989 From: Rod Read Date: 5/23/2015
Subject: ruggedised UAV

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17990 From: edoishi Date: 5/23/2015
Subject: Windlift News

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17991 From: dave santos Date: 5/23/2015
Subject: Re: Windlift News

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17992 From: dougselsam Date: 5/24/2015
Subject: Re: Windlift News

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17993 From: dougselsam Date: 5/24/2015
Subject: Re: Role of Advanced Physics in AWE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17994 From: dougselsam Date: 5/24/2015
Subject: Re: Semiology in AWE field

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17995 From: dave santos Date: 5/24/2015
Subject: Re: Windlift News



Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17946 From: benhaiemp Date: 5/19/2015
Subject: Increased the size of AWES vs increasing hub height of HAWT

 4th International Conference Advances in Wind Turbine Towers - Tower Concepts for Increased Hub Height 

This link shows some evolution of HAWT towards giant turbines. Conceptions in AWES should make the same² .


PierreB
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17947 From: benhaiemp Date: 5/19/2015
Subject: Risks from soft and rigid wings

Rigid wings: crash, shock, tether.

Soft wings: multiple tethers being able to take people.

For study,


PierreB
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17948 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 5/19/2015
Subject: Re: Increased the size of AWES vs increasing hub height of HAWT
The author fully missed a prime opportunity to get to higher altitude 
by 
... 
by tether.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17949 From: dougselsam Date: 5/19/2015
Subject: Re: Increased the size of AWES vs increasing hub height of HAWT
The industry has had articles like this from day one.
A big yawn. (zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz)
Note: They do not call them "windtowers".
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17950 From: dougselsam Date: 5/19/2015
Subject: Re: Daisy test day
DaveS asked: "Why not test Daisies with competing PTOs? Its an ideal demonstration just how well Gordon's torque-abhorrence and Galileo's square-cube principles hold up."
*** Answer:
1) a loop of string used as a giant fan-belt (as tempting as it first sounds) could transmit power downward, only in proportion to its tendency to pull the airborne apparatus downward (explained many times in the past, by me, on this forum).  That means extra energy used and materials required to remain aloft.  More cost per Watt.
2) real-world wind can change direction, sometimes pretty quickly.  (Not shown in Profethor Crackpot's diagrams, where the wind does what it is told) It would be mechanically awkward, use a lot of material, and take a lot of space, and add a lot of material and unnecessary complexity, to accomodate changes in wind direction.  What are you going to do, have long cables being dragged around by a ground station on wheels, with a circular road?  Sure, maybe you could multiply the cost by 100-fold while reducing reliability 100-fold.  Get real.
3) If you had very long lines dropping down, they could be hard to see, forming a hazard to the flock of airplanes flying around the apparatus.

A better question would be, Why do "an ideal demonstration" of a half-baked, half-thought-through notion from a bystander?  Why take something that works and immediately begin to screw it up in response to the protestations that "the bumblebee can't fly" from the peanut gallery?  You can't move forward if you respond to every naysayer.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17951 From: dave santos Date: 5/19/2015
Subject: Re: Daisy test day
Doug,

What you have overlooked for years is that high load-velocity of a drive line exponentially reduces the tension required to transmit useful power, as nicely documented by the old Rope -Driving treatise often referenced on the Forum. Open AWE just adds more cheap lift force if needed to keep a drive-loop running aloft.

Actual testing properly settles whose claims are realistic. If you are right, testing will confirm your predictions better than just "talk" on your part,

daveS
From: dougselsam@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]
Sent: ‎5/‎19/‎2015 9:13 AM
To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [AWES] Re: Daisy test day

 

DaveS asked: "Why not test Daisies with competing PTOs? Its an ideal demonstration just how well Gordon's torque-abhorrence and Galileo's square-cube principles hold up."
*** Answer:
1) a loop of string used as a giant fan-belt (as tempting as it first sounds) could transmit power downward, only in proportion to its tendency to pull the airborne apparatus downward (explained many times in the past, by me, on this forum).  That means extra energy used and materials required to remain aloft.  More cost per Watt.
2) real-world wind can change direction, sometimes pretty quickly.  (Not shown in Profethor Crackpot's diagrams, where the wind does what it is told) It would be mechanically awkward, use a lot of material, and take a lot of space, and add a lot of material and unnecessary complexity, to accomodate changes in wind direction.  What are you going to do, have long cables being dragged around by a ground station on wheels, with a circular road?  Sure, maybe you could multiply the cost by 100-fold while reducing reliability 100-fold.  Get real.
3) If you had very long lines dropping down, they could be hard to see, forming a hazard to the flock of airplanes flying around the apparatus.

A better question would be, Why do "an ideal demonstration" of a half-baked, half-thought-through notion from a bystander?  Why take something that works and immediately begin to screw it up in response to the protestations that "the bumblebee can't fly" from the peanut gallery?  You can't move forward if you respond to every naysayer.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17952 From: Rod Read Date: 5/19/2015
Subject: Re: Daisy test day

With the view from my parents house today it's tempting to suggest that you only fly awes tethered on small islands. And have a gen vessel drawn through the water. Works for so many schemes.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17953 From: dave santos Date: 5/19/2015
Subject: Re: Professor Crackpot: On the Loose Again!
This is only young people doing their best to create some thing new (bluff-body quasi-wingmill). If it doesn't work as well as the real wingmill pros, at least they learn something by trying. Any of them could migrate interest to AWE (their windtower is not airborne, so they are not even in our design-space yet), and not be held in contempt for having tested a prototype.


What is a real "crackpot" or crank like? Wikipedia- ""Crank" is a pejorative term used for a person who holds an unshakable belief that most of his or her contemporaries consider to be false.[1] A crank belief is so wildly at variance with those commonly held as to be ludicrous. Cranks characteristically dismiss all evidence or arguments which contradict their own unconventional beliefs, making rational debate a futile task, and rendering them impervious to facts, evidence, and rational inference." Doug's subject heading may better apply to himself than anyone else he has ever so maligned (a very long list).




On Monday, May 18, 2015 7:14 PM, "dougselsam@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
Thee? (see), Itth Bird-Friendly!
A good friend of mine, a PhD Chemist as a mater of fact, sent me this.  Then I talked with him on the phone.  He seemed to wonder how I could know the investors were going to lose their money - how did I know this idea was bunk?
I tried to explain "The Profethor Crackpot Thyndrome" and "Press-release science" to him, and how this has all the symptoms (It's bird-friendly!) but it's not easy.  In his field, the average person has no real opinions.  Amateurs don't normally try to enter the field of advanced Chemistry through the side-door claiming that, say, all those beakers and flasks are not needed.   I also tried to explain to him that we've already seen this idea a few times.  The last one was supposed to look like grass blowing in the breeze, when deployed in large numbers, remember?  Sayyy... what do you suppose ever happened to those fellows?  Have they "quietly gone away" yet?  Anyway, here you have it DaveS, another "wind-tower".
"Wind Power Without The Millth!  Wheeeeeee!!!!!...................
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17954 From: dougselsam Date: 5/19/2015
Subject: Re: Professor Crackpot: On the Loose Again!
DaveS said: "Thith ith only young people doing their best to create some thing new (bluff-body quasi-wingmill)."  *** It's more Crackpot nonsense, which you endlessly strive to defend since you feel at home in Professor Crackpot territory, which is all you know.  "only young people" - do you have a list of 1000 lame-ass excuses for things that SUCK?  I knew better as a teenager in the 1970's, so what's wrong with these kids?  Brain damage from GMO's?  Who even said these promoters are young?  The guy in your pic looks pretty bald to me.  Old enough to know better.

"If it doesn't work as well as the real wingmill pros,"
*** Now what the heck are you talking about?  More of your own private vocabulary, now "windtowers" have become "wingmills"?  By "real wingmill pros" you mean "People who actually have a clue", right?

"at least they learn something by trying."
*** Yeah, they learn it is one more lie, "press-release science", that doesn't work: They learn what it is to be Professor Crackpot.  They will probably never try to invent anything again.
Meanwhile, you have thousands of PhDs in unrelated fields being misled, e-mailing all their friends, repeating the nonsense: "It's bird-friendly!  Must be a big breakthrough!"
ALL of the Professor's wind energy contraptions are "bird-friendly", the classic symptom of Crackpot ineffectiveness.  Of course they don't kill birds, since they hardly do anything at all.

Here's Gizmag today promoting Professor Crackpot's latest idea,
Vortex bladeless turbines wobble to generate energy
(The good profethor is on a roll!)

 

which seems like something daveS would promote (he can't help himself) except he would claim it is all about Einstein and quantum physics.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17955 From: dougselsam Date: 5/19/2015
Subject: Re: Daisy test day
DaveS said: "Doug, What you have overlooked for years is that high load-velocity of a drive line exponentially reduces the tension required to transmit useful power"
*** Doug replies: One more DaveS lie:
1) I haven't overlooked it at all, as a matter of fact it is the first thing that occurs to someone like me who actually understands what is going on.
2) Velocity reduces line tension LINEARLY, not exponentially.  Exponentially is just one more daveS exaggeration, otherwise known as a blatant lie, or ignorant blather, take your pick.
3) There are many other pertinent factors that you have no idea about.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17956 From: Rod Read Date: 5/19/2015
Subject: Re: Daisy test day

All this open chat is only idle banter unless we pick up our games and  express our designs in standardised mathematical engineering terms.
I'm as guiltily as anyone here in avoiding proof development.
You two DS's are probably talking different systems /crossed purposes again..

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17957 From: dave santos Date: 5/19/2015
Subject: Re: Professor Crackpot: On the Loose Again!
No Doug, you were seemingly just like these kids, for example, naively patenting a driveshaft into the sky sprouting from a Darrieus turbine; nor was your original laddermill concept actually practical. These kids deserve respect for hopeful trying innovative wind ideas, while you seem to have given up trying long ago.

Its doubtful your PhD chemist friend would be happy with how you piss on strangers on the Net, while not actually able to advance AWE by any specific value. Crudely decrying small wind tower experimenters is not an expert-level AWE contribution.









On Tuesday, May 19, 2015 10:18 AM, "dougselsam@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
DaveS said: "Thith ith only young people doing their best to create some thing new (bluff-body quasi-wingmill)."  *** It's more Crackpot nonsense, which you endlessly strive to defend since you feel at home in Professor Crackpot territory, which is all you know.  "only young people" - do you have a list of 1000 lame-ass excuses for things that SUCK?  I knew better as a teenager in the 1970's, so what's wrong with these kids?  Brain damage from GMO's?  Who even said these promoters are young?  The guy in your pic looks pretty bald to me.  Old enough to know better.

"If it doesn't work as well as the real wingmill pros,"
*** Now what the heck are you talking about?  More of your own private vocabulary, now "windtowers" have become "wingmills"?  By "real wingmill pros" you mean "People who actually have a clue", right?

"at least they learn something by trying."
*** Yeah, they learn it is one more lie, "press-release science", that doesn't work: They learn what it is to be Professor Crackpot.  They will probably never try to invent anything again.
Meanwhile, you have thousands of PhDs in unrelated fields being misled, e-mailing all their friends, repeating the nonsense: "It's bird-friendly!  Must be a big breakthrough!"
ALL of the Professor's wind energy contraptions are "bird-friendly", the classic symptom of Crackpot ineffectiveness.  Of course they don't kill birds, since they hardly do anything at all.

Here's Gizmag today promoting Professor Crackpot's latest idea,
Vortex bladeless turbines wobble to generate energy
(The good profethor is on a roll!)
 
which seems like something daveS would promote (he can't help himself) except he would claim it is all about Einstein and quantum physics.


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17958 From: dave santos Date: 5/19/2015
Subject: Re: Daisy test day
Doug,

Thanks for the factual correction (excepting the paranoid parts). 

I meant that Power increases exponentially with load velocity (P=F*V). So now you can see how high load velocity drive option is a reasonable alternative to test Rod's Daisy at a higher altitude than a practical torque ladder can reach.

Nice to see you finally embracing fabric AWES solutions, after years of dismissing them utterly. You are learning something after all, thanks to us,

daveS




On Tuesday, May 19, 2015 10:57 AM, "Rod Read rod.read@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
All this open chat is only idle banter unless we pick up our games and  express our designs in standardised mathematical engineering terms.
I'm as guiltily as anyone here in avoiding proof development.
You two DS's are probably talking different systems /crossed purposes again..


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17959 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 5/19/2015
Subject: Douglas Spriggs Selsam

Douglas Spriggs Selsam

in quotes via Google Search nets "7,670 results"  (not sure if such are files or mentions, etc.). 

A researcher would also sort through Google Search with just some of these:   Selsam, wind, 


His AWE started apparently in the 1970s; and I hold out that he might be playing a huge stealth game; just maybe he is steadily watching all of AWE while he secretly forges AWE solutions.  It is tough to guess just when we will see the results of his possible secret AWE developments. 


=============

THIS topic thread invites respectful tracing of Doug's AWE reveal.   We have collected his patents, viewed his balloon-lifted multi-rotor torque machine turning a device based on a fixture based on his vehicle. We have photos and video of his lifter kite wing supporting some multi-rotor blades driving a hand-held electric generator. His investment in his many wind patents has been substantial. We have his public remarks in several forums.   A careful study of all of his released text, including the text of his business sites, could form a neat adventure.    Let us hope that he will add substantially to AWE. 


=============
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17960 From: edoishi Date: 5/19/2015
Subject: Re: Enerkite's New Flying Wing
Attachments :
    Looks like Enerkite have the new wing in the air.. looking forward to hearing more about its performance next month in Delft...
    		   @@attachment@@
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17961 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 5/19/2015
    Subject: Re: Enerkite's New Flying Wing

    Machine translation and some editing:


    http://enerkite.de/news/126-neuer-fluegeltyp-erstmals-in-der-luft

    • Printing
    • E-mail

    Published on Thursday, 20 November 2014 14:30

    We have taken an important step forward. The first samples of the new EnerKite-wing generation we first operated on our Demonstratoranlage  EK30. The two-year development work has paid off:  With amazing ease the wing took off and pulled its tracks in the sky.  Developers Max Ranneberg: "The day was a great success for me. After all the wind tunnel tests and calculations, it shows now that we are on the right track ".

    Source:  http://enerkite.de/news/126-neuer-fluegeltyp-erstmals-in-der-luft




    ---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <edoishi@yahoo.com
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17962 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 5/19/2015
    Subject: Re: Enerkite's New Flying Wing
    Several press documents: 

    [[ I keep wondering why someone in EnerKite doesn't take two seconds a month to post something in AirborneWindEnergy forum. [ ]  ????? ]]

     
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17963 From: dave santos Date: 5/19/2015
    Subject: Re: Douglas Spriggs Selsam
    JoeF,

    Doug is not likely hiding anything much, as years go by without fresh news. He would be filing patents and sharing demos as before (since he still advocates patenting and demos). There would be lots of clues, like even the stealthiest AWE stealth-venture necessarily discloses. If there is only Doug's years of unsupported Forum claims to have some hot secret going (but never say what), that's not enough.
     
    Its ever more likely that the active AWE world has its fundamental solutions mostly in hand, and Doug's chances are running out to find an overlooked AWES technical essential to justify his cranky claim to be the world's greatest living wind tech inventor.

    Hope I'm wrong about Doug; that somehow he brings on hidden creative engineering value to global AWE R&D,

    daveS



    On Tuesday, May 19, 2015 6:51 PM, "joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
    Douglas Spriggs Selsam
    in quotes via Google Search nets "7,670 results"  (not sure if such are files or mentions, etc.). 
    A researcher would also sort through Google Search with just some of these:   Selsam, wind, 

    His AWE started apparently in the 1970s; and I hold out that he might be playing a huge stealth game; just maybe he is steadily watching all of AWE while he secretly forges AWE solutions.  It is tough to guess just when we will see the results of his possible secret AWE developments. 

    =============
    THIS topic thread invites respectful tracing of Doug's AWE reveal.   We have collected his patents, viewed his balloon-lifted multi-rotor torque machine turning a device based on a fixture based on his vehicle. We have photos and video of his lifter kite wing supporting some multi-rotor blades driving a hand-held electric generator. His investment in his many wind patents has been substantial. We have his public remarks in several forums.   A careful study of all of his released text, including the text of his business sites, could form a neat adventure.    Let us hope that he will add substantially to AWE. 

    =============
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17964 From: dave santos Date: 5/20/2015
    Subject: Re: Professor Crackpot: On the Loose Again!
    If only Doug's AWES schemes were not  even more marginal as emotionally disturbed complaints about novel windtower experimenters.

    No one in AWE has less progress to show, nor is more hopeless. Even Einstein and QM are doing better in AWE, regarded on merits.
    From: dougselsam@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]
    Sent: ‎5/‎19/‎2015 12:18 PM
    To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
    Subject: Re: [AWES] Professor Crackpot: On the Loose Again!

     

    DaveS said: "Thith ith only young people doing their best to create some thing new (bluff-body quasi-wingmill)."  *** It's more Crackpot nonsense, which you endlessly strive to defend since you feel at home in Professor Crackpot territory, which is all you know.  "only young people" - do you have a list of 1000 lame-ass excuses for things that SUCK?  I knew better as a teenager in the 1970's, so what's wrong with these kids?  Brain damage from GMO's?  Who even said these promoters are young?  The guy in your pic looks pretty bald to me.  Old enough to know better.

    "If it doesn't work as well as the real wingmill pros,"
    *** Now what the heck are you talking about?  More of your own private vocabulary, now "windtowers" have become "wingmills"?  By "real wingmill pros" you mean "People who actually have a clue", right?

    "at least they learn something by trying."
    *** Yeah, they learn it is one more lie, "press-release science", that doesn't work: They learn what it is to be Professor Crackpot.  They will probably never try to invent anything again.
    Meanwhile, you have thousands of PhDs in unrelated fields being misled, e-mailing all their friends, repeating the nonsense: "It's bird-friendly!  Must be a big breakthrough!"
    ALL of the Professor's wind energy contraptions are "bird-friendly", the classic symptom of Crackpot ineffectiveness.  Of course they don't kill birds, since they hardly do anything at all.

    Here's Gizmag today promoting Professor Crackpot's latest idea,
    Vortex bladeless turbines wobble to generate energy
    (The good profethor is on a roll!)

     

    which seems like something daveS would promote (he can't help himself) except he would claim it is all about Einstein and quantum physics.
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17965 From: dave santos Date: 5/20/2015
    Subject: Role of Advanced Physics in AWE
    Bad news for anyone unable to do technical homework: AWE is a true aerospace specialty. For the winners, there is no avoiding a lot of complex modern engineering science. Even to just conceptually master the physics required is not trivial. The actual science consists of what can be observed; which means what is tested and measured, not just claimed. A vital role of fresh theory is to inspire bold new thinking, not just inform existing methods. No new thinking is expected form those who have no such inspiration.

    Advanced AWE physics may be too tough for non-experts to ever grasp, but the science is real. Not just classical equations-of-motion, but Thermodynamics, QM, Chaos Theory, Control Theory, Aerodynamics and many other specialties apply. Only testing ultimately validates the best AWES physics, by whichever R&D circle first masters the according methods. Already we see clear losers from failures to apply sufficiently-informed physics. The longstanding Forum prediction that "Best Physics will Win in AWE" remains the most credible view.
     
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17966 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 5/20/2015
    Subject: Re: Role of Advanced Physics in AWE

    "The longstanding Forum prediction that "Best Physics will Win in AWE" remains the most credible view."

    ***Sure, and "Worst Physics will lose in AWE".

     

    PierreB

     

     

     

     
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17967 From: dave santos Date: 5/20/2015
    Subject: Re: Role of Advanced Physics in AWE
    Agreed, "[Incorrect] Physics will lose in AWE" 
     
    In the short term, we are back to testing current predictions about torque v. rope-driving, as referenced to Gordon and Galileo's physics. In the long term we will be testing if advanced physics correctly apply to kites/AWES. By advanced physics is meant the actual modern wonderland of science, not just classical thinking.



    On Wednesday, May 20, 2015 2:04 PM, "Pierre BENHAIEM pierre.benhaiem@orange.fr [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
    "The longstanding Forum prediction that "Best Physics will Win in AWE" remains the most credible view."
    ***Sure, and "Worst Physics will lose in AWE".
     
    PierreB
     
     
     
     
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17968 From: dave santos Date: 5/20/2015
    Subject: Active Soft Matter Paradigm (advanced kite physics)

    Advanced students of AWE will find the concept of "kite matter" fitting within the emerging field of Soft Matter physics (under Debye Model thermodynamics)-

    A general intro-


    A paper touching deeper on kite-like aspects-
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17969 From: dave santos Date: 5/20/2015
    Subject: More details of next-round Minesto Sea Trials
    Large-scale prototype in the works-
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17970 From: dougselsam Date: 5/21/2015
    Subject: Re: Douglas Spriggs Selsam
    Thanks Joe.  You can get a lot of other results if you leave out "Spriggs", the quotes, or just use "Doug" instead of Douglas.  Meanwhile, I have to say all the attention has been nice, to a point, but then we are back to 99 out of every 100 new wind turbine models being blown to smithereens in the first storm.  The question becomes, can I (or anyone else) actually make a difference, beyond the hype?
    :O.................
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17971 From: dougselsam Date: 5/21/2015
    Subject: Re: Enerkite's New Flying Wing
    Joe said: "I keep wondering why someone in EnerKite doesn't take two seconds a month to post something in AirborneWindEnergy forum."
    *** Maybe they are not interested in being psychologically mis-diagnosed, misquoted, mischaracterized, then drawn into ridiculous arguments over things they never said or even implied.
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17972 From: dougselsam Date: 5/21/2015
    Subject: Re: Role of Advanced Physics in AWE
    Hey, Ace, if you are so freakin' smart, where is your system?
    Do you ever shut up?
    Let's look at the world of AWE with, and without, DaveS:
    Any difference?
    Not that I can see.
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17973 From: dougselsam Date: 5/21/2015
    Subject: Re: Role of Advanced Physics in AWE
    "The longstanding Forum prediction that "Best Physics will Win in AWE" remains the most credible view." ***OK so by "longstanding Forum prediction", you mean "DaveS repeatedly predicted on the forum", right?  And the implication of group agreement means either daveS agrees with daveS (the echo-chamber), or that the statement is too universal and obvious for anyone to disagree with.  (The thing that turns out to work will be the thing that turns out to work - back to mere wordplay at its lowest level).

    Of course, the Professor Crackpot version of "best physics" leads to such flawed reasoning as "Einstein is credited with breakthroughs in physics, so "best physics" MUST emanate from Einstein, therefore, the best wind energy system must be based on something Einstein came up with, which in this case seems to be a "Bose-Einstein Condensate" of flapping kites."

    DaveS: Your "longstanding Forum predictions" include:
    1) Kite experts (whom you consistently refer to as gods) will be the ones to conquer AWE (paraphrasing), and;
    2) Bose-Einstein stacks of flapping kites is definitely THE winning answer in AWE (as you claimed in one of your "eureka moments").

    So, after witnessing years of YOU attempting to hold everyone else's feet to the fire, how about applying your own standards to yourself, and let's see what that "certain answer" of Bose-Einstein stack of flappers can do?
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17974 From: dougselsam Date: 5/21/2015
    Subject: Re: Active Soft Matter Paradigm (advanced kite physics)
    In your Wikipedia link, did you see the phrase: "At these temperatures, quantum aspects are generally unimportant."?
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17975 From: Rod Read Date: 5/21/2015
    Subject: Re: Active Soft Matter Paradigm (advanced kite physics)

    Stay with it for the application chapter Doug.
    Soft materials are important in a wide range of technological applications. They may appear as structural and packaging materials, foams and adhesives, detergents and cosmetics, paints, food additives, lubricants and fuel additives, rubber in tires, etc. In addition, a number of biological materials (blood, muscle, milk, yogurt, jello) are classifiable as soft matter. Liquid crystals, another category of soft matter, exhibit a responsivity to electric fields that make them very important as materials in display devices (LCDs). In spite of the various forms of these materials, many of their properties have common physicochemical origins, such as a large number of internal degrees of freedom, weak interactions between structural elements, and a delicate balance between entropic and enthalpic contributions to thefree energy. These properties lead to large thermal fluctuations, a wide variety of forms, sensitivity of equilibrium structures to external conditions, macroscopic softness, and metastable states. Soft matters, such as polymers and lipids have found applications in nanotechnology as well.[3]
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17976 From: Rod Read Date: 5/21/2015
    Subject: Re: Enerkite's New Flying Wing

    I'd imagine that's highly likely Doug.

    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17977 From: dave santos Date: 5/21/2015
    Subject: Re: Role of Advanced Physics in AWE
    Doug,

    Of course you never pose advanced kite physics questions fairly and accurately, but only invoke clumsy straw-man caricatures in hope of idiotic flame war. Do the homework to enjoy the majestic view. That the best physics will win in AWE is of course true, as a tautology. Pierre sees it too; so can you.

    As for where my AWES systems are right now (blush), there are now several dozen successful experimental AWES scattered all over The closest one for you to enjoy is JoeF's flygen in LA. The World Kite Museum has several, and KiteLab Ilwaco even more, but Austin now has the most. Some have demoed in Germany, Italy, China, and Mexico. These machines generate test data foremost, but also electricity, pump air or water, grind, and so on. Today we flew the latest KiteSat production prototype over Austin (UTexas Research Campus, with several perfect self-relaunch cycles in lulls over a long session. We also flew modular parts of the big new kite rig under construction, which requires very high safety standards. Who cares if you think safe progress is too slow; we think safety is the most essential metric of AWE scaling, not your personal impatience.

    We we can agree I have a lot to learn, its strange that you think me to be somehow lacking hands-on experience and progress in the AWE testing realm. I seem to currently be the most widely experienced (even having operated many third-party AWES) while you seem to stuck in 2009. So thanks for calling me "Ace"; it was my dad's peer nickname in aviation, and he's my role-model in AWE. I hope you can also be called Ace, if you again manage to progress meaningfully in AWE. Make no mistake, the field is progressing, so keep up.

    JoeF is well aware that much vital PhD email traffic within our circle bypasses the Forum, and what role nasty Netiquette plays. If you wanted figures like Dr. Bormann on the Forum, while you helplessly vent Professor Crackpot  attacks, you came to the wrong place. Try being consistently cordial so the PhDs can come back. I am not alone to no longer invite PhDs here, since you seem bound to insult them, so we share off-Forum. How sad!

    daveS





    On Thursday, May 21, 2015 9:32 AM, "dougselsam@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
    "The longstanding Forum prediction that "Best Physics will Win in AWE" remains the most credible view." ***OK so by "longstanding Forum prediction", you mean "DaveS repeatedly predicted on the forum", right?  And the implication of group agreement means either daveS agrees with daveS (the echo-chamber), or that the statement is too universal and obvious for anyone to disagree with.  (The thing that turns out to work will be the thing that turns out to work - back to mere wordplay at its lowest level).

    Of course, the Professor Crackpot version of "best physics" leads to such flawed reasoning as "Einstein is credited with breakthroughs in physics, so "best physics" MUST emanate from Einstein, therefore, the best wind energy system must be based on something Einstein came up with, which in this case seems to be a "Bose-Einstein Condensate" of flapping kites."

    DaveS: Your "longstanding Forum predictions" include:
    1) Kite experts (whom you consistently refer to as gods) will be the ones to conquer AWE (paraphrasing), and;
    2) Bose-Einstein stacks of flapping kites is definitely THE winning answer in AWE (as you claimed in one of your "eureka moments").

    So, after witnessing years of YOU attempting to hold everyone else's feet to the fire, how about applying your own standards to yourself, and let's see what that "certain answer" of Bose-Einstein stack of flappers can do?
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17978 From: dave santos Date: 5/21/2015
    Subject: Re: Active Soft Matter Paradigm (advanced kite physics)
    What Doug continues to neglect is to define "temperature" in more modern exact thermodynamic terms of Debye temperature, where UHMWPE has a fantastically high Debye temperature comparable to diamond. For example, this physics course course states-


    "For temperatures below the Debye temperature, quantum effects become important and CV decreases to zero. Note that diamond, with a Debye temperature of 1860K, is a “quantum solid” at room temperature.[8]"





    On Thursday, May 21, 2015 12:24 PM, "Rod Read rod.read@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
    Stay with it for the application chapter Doug.
    Soft materials are important in a wide range of technological applications. They may appear as structural and packaging materials, foams and adhesives, detergents and cosmetics, paints, food additives, lubricants and fuel additives, rubber in tires, etc. In addition, a number of biological materials (blood, muscle, milk, yogurt, jello) are classifiable as soft matter. Liquid crystals, another category of soft matter, exhibit a responsivity to electric fields that make them very important as materials in display devices (LCDs). In spite of the various forms of these materials, many of their properties have common physicochemical origins, such as a large number of internal degrees of freedom, weak interactions between structural elements, and a delicate balance between entropic and enthalpic contributions to thefree energy. These properties lead to large thermal fluctuations, a wide variety of forms, sensitivity of equilibrium structures to external conditions, macroscopic softness, and metastable states. Soft matters, such as polymers and lipids have found applications in nanotechnology as well.[3]
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17979 From: dave santos Date: 5/21/2015
    Subject: Trilobite Soft Kite Buzz at Texas AWE Encampment
    One of several tests kPower flew today at UTexas Austin Research Campus was a cool new Trilobite SLK, loaned by Michael Lin of New Tech; which will be a re-seller of the kite. Its even suited to be a working pilot-lifter for KiteSats, Lin proposes, but is a full-on show-kite (very few designs meet this standard, like Martin Lester's Spirit kite). This new Trilobite is about 3m2, very well made, with many subtle design features not obvious to non-experts.

    Here is another indication of modern Chinese kite design beginning to drive technical progress (the Pansch Adam was a similar sign). The industrializing West built it's "Golden Age of Kites" on Eastern kite techne, and the burgeoning East is in turn building innovation on innovation. East and West are in fact working together, given jet-travel and the Net. The hybrid result is new kites no one even dreamed possible, with progress racing beyond all prior imagining, toward a new Golden Age (good luck explaining it all with only classical physics).

    Peter Lynn originated a "Trilobite" theme-kite years ago, but the new version is so well-developed that PL only is proud of such homage progress. PL may have first seen the new Trilobite via a NZ "mate", Jim Nichols, who made this rave video review-


    Image result for trilobite kite
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17980 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 5/21/2015
    Subject: Re: Active Soft Matter Paradigm (advanced kite physics)
    Nice!  The layered AWES dome complexes may be just the beginning of vortex-gobbling energy machines filling airspace.   Biological membrane - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia    ... a soft matter realm.

     
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17981 From: dougselsam Date: 5/22/2015
    Subject: Re: Active Soft Matter Paradigm (advanced kite physics)
    "Soft materials are important in a wide range of technological applications."(bla bla blah?)
    *** I'd say the topic of "soft materials" belongs in a kindergarten curriculum.  This is symptomatic of "The Professor Crackpot Syndrome", where any simple thing, understood by a 3-year-old (or less), turns into a  reason to make no progress - converting forward motion into "paralysis by analysis".
    OMG, did you REALIZE, some materials are SOFT?  Say it isn't so!   :)
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17982 From: dougselsam Date: 5/22/2015
    Subject: Re: Role of Advanced Physics in AWE
    "That the best physics will win in AWE is of course true, as a tautology. Pierre sees it too; so can you." *** He was making fun of you. The statement is empty of meaning, a circular definition, mere wordplay, like saying "The fastest car with the best driver will win the race" (no, really?).  Try this one:  "The rising of the sun will mark the beginning of the day". - there you go, Nostradamus.

    "As for where my AWES systems are right now (blush)... I seem to currently be the most widely experienced (even having operated many third-party AWES) while you seem to stuck in 2009. So thanks for calling me "Ace";
    *** Can you point us to any independent article, publication, paper, documentary, TV show, etc., mentioning your "work"?  Ever?  Is there anyone ELSE who thinks you are "the leading blah blah blah" or is it more of you agreeing with yourself, in your echo-chamber?

    "you helplessly vent Professor Crackpot  attacks, you came to the wrong place. Try being consistently cordial so the PhDs can come back."
    *** Anyone worth his salt in wind energy, or any other field, understands exactly what I am talking about, while nobody with actual expertise or competence would mistake themselves for a "Professor Crackpot". 

    In fact, a major aspect of "The Professor Crackpot Syndrome" is nobody thinks THEY could be an example, whether they are or not.  In the case of the competent practitioner, they have seen the professor and know the symptoms.   In the case of actual Professor Crackpots, if they COULD identify the symptoms, they would not have the symptoms - having the symptoms results from not being able to identify them. 

    I've carefully outlined these steps to failure in an attempt to help people from having the symptoms - to no avail.  The syndrome is not curable by its very nature, as you illustrate on a daily basis.  This is my opinion, based on experience, watching the same thing happen over and over.  (Wait, ANOTHER press-release for that same old failed idea AGAIN!!!???) 

    Methinks thou doth protest too much.  The title has nothing to do with whether someone actually happens to have a PhD, as anyone can clearly see.  In your case, if the shoe fits, wear it.  You've exhibited all the symptoms, to an extent I've never seen.  You represent the Professor on steroids - a whole new level of crackpot!  Crackpot squared?  cubed?


    ---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <santos137@...  
    "The longstanding Forum prediction that "Best Physics will Win in AWE" remains the most credible view." ***OK so by "longstanding Forum prediction", you mean "DaveS repeatedly predicted on the forum", right?  And the implication of group agreement means either daveS agrees with daveS (the echo-chamber), or that the statement is too universal and obvious for anyone to disagree with.  (The thing that turns out to work will be the thing that turns out to work - back to mere wordplay at its lowest level).

    Of course, the Professor Crackpot version of "best physics" leads to such flawed reasoning as "Einstein is credited with breakthroughs in physics, so "best physics" MUST emanate from Einstein, therefore, the best wind energy system must be based on something Einstein came up with, which in this case seems to be a "Bose-Einstein Condensate" of flapping kites."

    DaveS: Your "longstanding Forum predictions" include:
    1) Kite experts (whom you consistently refer to as gods) will be the ones to conquer AWE (paraphrasing), and;
    2) Bose-Einstein stacks of flapping kites is definitely THE winning answer in AWE (as you claimed in one of your "eureka moments").

    So, after witnessing years of YOU attempting to hold everyone else's feet to the fire, how about applying your own standards to yourself, and let's see what that "certain answer" of Bose-Einstein stack of flappers can do?
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17983 From: benhaiemp Date: 5/22/2015
    Subject: Semiology in AWE field

    There is progress in both sociology and semiology by Doug as an eminent specialist on the subject.

    Let us study concepts as "Professor Crackpot", or "echo-chamber", or  "paralysis by analysis" . Then let us understand the excess of the word in front of (not) real (AWE) world ...


    PierreB
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17984 From: dougselsam Date: 5/22/2015
    Subject: Re: Semiology in AWE field
    Yes, in fact, let's spend all day, every day, looking up definitions of words nobody knows or uses, and let's further spend all day analyzing the definitions of those words - obscure words that are never used in real life.  Maybe the secret to AWE will be producing an incomprehensible dictionary of the absurd, using only circular definitions. 

    Endlessly analyzing terms like "paralysis by analysis" would be a great start!  This is, once again, "The Professor Crackpot Syndrome"  The good professor, thinking he is making progress by endlessly analyzing the term "paralysis by analysis" does not see that by doing so, he is exhibiting the symptoms thereof.  Thanks for a great example, Pierre!
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17985 From: dave santos Date: 5/22/2015
    Subject: Re: Active Soft Matter Paradigm (advanced kite physics)
    Its true that kids are so bright and the ideas so wonderful that advanced physics, like new soft-matter discoveries and concepts, could be introduced in kindergartens, so that as adults the students better create and master new technologies, like engineered soft-matter in the sky as first presented on-Forum. The idle fear of "paralysis by analysis" does not apply here, since its the eager students of advanced kite physics that are most actively developing the ideas in soft-kite form,. Only the most uninformed and fearful are paralyzed and can only complain in vain about advanced physics, rather than add any knowledge to the topic.



    On Friday, May 22, 2015 6:44 AM, "dougselsam@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
    "Soft materials are important in a wide range of technological applications."(bla bla blah?)
    *** I'd say the topic of "soft materials" belongs in a kindergarten curriculum.  This is symptomatic of "The Professor Crackpot Syndrome", where any simple thing, understood by a 3-year-old (or less), turns into a  reason to make no progress - converting forward motion into "paralysis by analysis".
    OMG, did you REALIZE, some materials are SOFT?  Say it isn't so!   :)
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17986 From: dave santos Date: 5/22/2015
    Subject: Re: Role of Advanced Physics in AWE
    Leave it to Doug to have foolishly argued against the tautology that "best physics will win in AWE". The expert take is that the metrics will include highest-power-to-mass, widest wind range, highest effective altitude, greatest safety, lowest LCOE, etc.

    Doug seems unaware that the most press coverage in AWE highly correlates to excessive hype, so of course he scores very high with hardly anything accomplished, while many more hard-working developers, who do not focus on media coverage,  accomplish far more. 

    In my case, the legendary monthly HipFish reported me (spontaneously) in 2007 when I first publicly demoed at the first Rising Tide Climate Convergence (calling Dave Culp by kite-powered cell phone, an easy feat these days). My work was later closely covered by the World Kite Museum Newsletter, and the Drachen Foundation Journal. All four cases of press coverage reflected well on the merits of careful parametric experimentation, rather than being cases of major media-hype pimping a claimed solution. Testing is not about media hype, but a quest for useful knowledge.

    I did originate the AWE Documentary project as a means to get AWE information from all over the world into the public eye, so Doug might want to concede I do manage to generate serious coverage (over thirty AWE figures have been interviewed so far). Since we are in mid-story of what AWES tech will emerge as best, Doug must be patient. Whoever finally triumphs in AWE will surely garner more media acclaim than any currently over-hyped losers.



    On Friday, May 22, 2015 7:18 AM, "dougselsam@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
    "That the best physics will win in AWE is of course true, as a tautology. Pierre sees it too; so can you." *** He was making fun of you. The statement is empty of meaning, a circular definition, mere wordplay, like saying "The fastest car with the best driver will win the race" (no, really?).  Try this one:  "The rising of the sun will mark the beginning of the day". - there you go, Nostradamus.

    "As for where my AWES systems are right now (blush)... I seem to currently be the most widely experienced (even having operated many third-party AWES) while you seem to stuck in 2009. So thanks for calling me "Ace";
    *** Can you point us to any independent article, publication, paper, documentary, TV show, etc., mentioning your "work"?  Ever?  Is there anyone ELSE who thinks you are "the leading blah blah blah" or is it more of you agreeing with yourself, in your echo-chamber?

    "you helplessly vent Professor Crackpot  attacks, you came to the wrong place. Try being consistently cordial so the PhDs can come back."
    *** Anyone worth his salt in wind energy, or any other field, understands exactly what I am talking about, while nobody with actual expertise or competence would mistake themselves for a "Professor Crackpot". 

    In fact, a major aspect of "The Professor Crackpot Syndrome" is nobody thinks THEY could be an example, whether they are or not.  In the case of the competent practitioner, they have seen the professor and know the symptoms.   In the case of actual Professor Crackpots, if they COULD identify the symptoms, they would not have the symptoms - having the symptoms results from not being able to identify them. 

    I've carefully outlined these steps to failure in an attempt to help people from having the symptoms - to no avail.  The syndrome is not curable by its very nature, as you illustrate on a daily basis.  This is my opinion, based on experience, watching the same thing happen over and over.  (Wait, ANOTHER press-release for that same old failed idea AGAIN!!!???) 

    Methinks thou doth protest too much.  The title has nothing to do with whether someone actually happens to have a PhD, as anyone can clearly see.  In your case, if the shoe fits, wear it.  You've exhibited all the symptoms, to an extent I've never seen.  You represent the Professor on steroids - a whole new level of crackpot!  Crackpot squared?  cubed?


    ---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <santos137@...  
    "The longstanding Forum prediction that "Best Physics will Win in AWE" remains the most credible view." ***OK so by "longstanding Forum prediction", you mean "DaveS repeatedly predicted on the forum", right?  And the implication of group agreement means either daveS agrees with daveS (the echo-chamber), or that the statement is too universal and obvious for anyone to disagree with.  (The thing that turns out to work will be the thing that turns out to work - back to mere wordplay at its lowest level).

    Of course, the Professor Crackpot version of "best physics" leads to such flawed reasoning as "Einstein is credited with breakthroughs in physics, so "best physics" MUST emanate from Einstein, therefore, the best wind energy system must be based on something Einstein came up with, which in this case seems to be a "Bose-Einstein Condensate" of flapping kites."

    DaveS: Your "longstanding Forum predictions" include:
    1) Kite experts (whom you consistently refer to as gods) will be the ones to conquer AWE (paraphrasing), and;
    2) Bose-Einstein stacks of flapping kites is definitely THE winning answer in AWE (as you claimed in one of your "eureka moments").

    So, after witnessing years of YOU attempting to hold everyone else's feet to the fire, how about applying your own standards to yourself, and let's see what that "certain answer" of Bose-Einstein stack of flappers can do?
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17987 From: dave santos Date: 5/22/2015
    Subject: Re: Semiology in AWE field
    Doug,

    If you think AWE semiology is not a proper concern of the AWES Forum, you are in the wrong place. Even your own shrill non-technical semiotics about "SuperTurbines" and "Professor CrackPots" are of interest to us (if not actually useful in any engineering sense).  Future data-mining will handily refine golden technical semiotic content from garbage content, no matter who wrote what.

    Just keep in mind that you will never logically invalidate language itself by your dependence on language (including your public quest of provoking flame-wars in AWE). Let your years of soured postings archived here* represent your personal embrace of semiotics, even as you dismiss the mass semiotics of aerospace engineering, advanced physics, professional community, and so on,

    daveS

    -----------

    * AWES Forum posting accounting for a lot of Doug Selsam "hits", with many of his angry posts mercifully already suppressed by "safe search" profanity filters.



    On Friday, May 22, 2015 7:43 AM, "dougselsam@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
    Yes, in fact, let's spend all day, every day, looking up definitions of words nobody knows or uses, and let's further spend all day analyzing the definitions of those words - obscure words that are never used in real life.  Maybe the secret to AWE will be producing an incomprehensible dictionary of the absurd, using only circular definitions. 

    Endlessly analyzing terms like "paralysis by analysis" would be a great start!  This is, once again, "The Professor Crackpot Syndrome"  The good professor, thinking he is making progress by endlessly analyzing the term "paralysis by analysis" does not see that by doing so, he is exhibiting the symptoms thereof.  Thanks for a great example, Pierre!
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17988 From: dave santos Date: 5/22/2015
    Subject: Re: Semiology in AWE field
    This is a good place to remind AWE students the semiology of AWEs tech is wide open.

    Its fully evident the kites can embody many unique forms and still do the same flying jobs, and that the large soft-kite sail surfaces are as universal as any painter's canvas or movie screen in semiotic potential. We can trace out messages by endless means, like strings of lights, active pixels, drawing with smoke, and so on.

    AWE is obviously a hyper-semiotic medium; even its mere presence across the sky will convey a sense of "awe". Semiotic skill is why JoeF and I around 2008 picked an obscure phrase from an EU paper "airborne wind energy", and recast it into an effective global meme- "AWE", with professional confidence it would take hold. *

    All our new aviation fields are living fountains of new language, much as sailing grew on its nomenclatures. We have since added many other terms of art now in standard AWE usage, as we needed them for our engineering collaborations. The "Semiotics of AWE" properly remain a welcome topic on the AWES Forum, as posed by the most significant developers.

    --------------------
    * Ed Sapir of kPower is in fact the grandson of Edward Sapir, student of Franz Boas, both reckoned as founders of modern anthropology, particularly linguistics and semiotics.





    On Friday, May 22, 2015 7:43 AM, "dougselsam@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
    Yes, in fact, let's spend all day, every day, looking up definitions of words nobody knows or uses, and let's further spend all day analyzing the definitions of those words - obscure words that are never used in real life.  Maybe the secret to AWE will be producing an incomprehensible dictionary of the absurd, using only circular definitions. 

    Endlessly analyzing terms like "paralysis by analysis" would be a great start!  This is, once again, "The Professor Crackpot Syndrome"  The good professor, thinking he is making progress by endlessly analyzing the term "paralysis by analysis" does not see that by doing so, he is exhibiting the symptoms thereof.  Thanks for a great example, Pierre!
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17989 From: Rod Read Date: 5/23/2015
    Subject: ruggedised UAV
    This looks fun...
    got to be able to stick a robo-hook on the bottom of this.
    https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/ascentaerosystems/sprite-the-portable-rugged-totally-different-small

    Rod Read

    Windswept and Interesting Limited
    15a Aiginis
    Isle of Lewis
    UK
    HS2 0PB

    07899057227
    01851 870878
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17990 From: edoishi Date: 5/23/2015
    Subject: Windlift News
    Looks like Windlift is back... the website is finally "under construction." But check out a few high res images of the completely redesigned machine on this website .. and see the claim that a "a commercial model of the kite engine is now on the market"
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17991 From: dave santos Date: 5/23/2015
    Subject: Re: Windlift News
    The news here is Design Concepts is working (or worked) in AWE, a contract design house somehow connected to the Caterpiller engineers' work for WindLift. Whats shown is no product, but a fairly primitive prototype, given the unoptimized ad-hoc experimentalist construction. The choice of kite is interesting; not the accustomed WindLift LEI, but an HQ Apex parfoil with a wide depower range, but it seems like an older model. and the vague reference to a product may be the old AWES design. Could this be old stuff?







    On Saturday, May 23, 2015 7:32 PM, "edoishi edoishi@yahoo.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
    Looks like Windlift is back... the website is finally "under construction." But check out a few high res images of the completely redesigned machine on this website .. and see the claim that a "a commercial model of the kite engine is now on the market"
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17992 From: dougselsam Date: 5/24/2015
    Subject: Re: Windlift News
    "The answer is blowing in the wind"  Again?  I wonder if every author that uses that tagline as a title for their article thinks it is original?  It's the "I'm writing my first article about wind energy" syndrome... :)
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17993 From: dougselsam Date: 5/24/2015
    Subject: Re: Role of Advanced Physics in AWE
    "Leave it to Doug to have foolishly argued against the tautology that "best physics will win in AWE"."
    *** OK this is where you completely mischaracterize and misquote anything anyone else says:  No I did not "foolishly argue against" best physics, or as you now call it, "tautology".  In fact, I totally agree with "best physics".  Your mischaracterization of my words is:
    1) a lie
    1) a perfect example of your oft-cited "straw-man argument" complaint against everyone else.  Yi are incapable of arguing with what I actually said, so you lie and pretend I said something I did NOT say.  The straw man here is your suddenly claiming I actually took a position against "best physics".  Lets be clear, for the incurably comatose:  What I said was that "best physics" is so OBVIOUS as to not bear mention, a feeble attempt on your part to appear to have something relevant to say, when you actually have nothing whatsoever to say, so you play with word definitions.  You have no idea how to actually DO AWE, so you talk of "Einstein" and try appear to somehow gather the entire field of physics into your perceived corner, with name-dropping as your best effort, using "Einstein" as your "hail Mary" desperate grasp at predicting the future of AWE.  You hope that:
    1) Whatever the answer is will of course depend on the best use of physics, which is obvious to any child;
    2) You can then say "See, I told you so!"
    Why not just "predict" AWE will use the flow of a fluid to generate energy?  There you go, you can play "Nostradamus" forever.

    "The expert take is that the metrics will include highest-power-to-mass, widest wind range, highest effective altitude, greatest safety, lowest LCOE, etc."
    *** Oh here we go again: "THE expert take" - wait, let me guess, "THE expert is DaveS in his echo-chamber, and THE expert "take" is whatever daveS says that agrees with what daveS says, right?  Only thing is, you can always find something daveS says that completely disagrees with somethung else daveS says, meanwhile, the best he can pin down a road to success in AWE is to say it will involve the use of physics.  Gosh daveS, nobody knew that.  Thanks for identifying the field of physics. 

    "Doug seems unaware that the most press coverage in AWE highly correlates to excessive hype,"
    *** Oh yeah, sure daveS, I've never mentioned that at all, have I?  You mean like how the rest of the world thought there was a wind-powered blimp powering a small town in remote Alaska last year?  Who informed you that it was hype and not true?   Me.  How did I know?  By the mere smell.  I happen to be a few steps ahead of you in recognizing wind energy hype.  As always "The answer is blowin' in the wind".  People like you read a tagline like that and think it's new.  Why try to describe me, using characteristics that apply to you?
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17994 From: dougselsam Date: 5/24/2015
    Subject: Re: Semiology in AWE field
    "Doug, If you think AWE semiology is not a proper concern of the AWES Forum, you are in the wrong place."  *** You sound like a broken record, as usual.  A main aspect of your incurable version of "The Professor Crackpot Syndrome" is a fixation on mere words and their definitions.  Therefore you endlessly invoke larger and more obscure words, thinking that if only your fantasies can be made sufficiently incomprehensible, a case could somehow be made that you "know what you are talking about" or that you are contributing something new to the non-field of AWE.  So now we're on to re-defining words that merely talk about... defining words.  This is you in your echo-chamber, saying nothing, pretending to say something.  No you will never be able to "define" your way out of this paper bag you have crawled into.  Maybe you should get a job at a dictionary, where words definitions are the main thrust.  In the rest of the world, "a rose is a rose by any name".
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 17995 From: dave santos Date: 5/24/2015
    Subject: Re: Windlift News
    Doug,

    To only point out the tired wind cliche by Design Concepts' webmaster is not "expert level" helpful, but more unfocused negativity toward the world. Concentrate on adding useful new info to AWE, rather than constant irrelevant complaints.

    daveS

    PS Do you now understand Debye Temperature in the context of UHMWPE (as explaining the amazing thermodynamics of kite tug-force)? Its not enough to only complain against modern physics as if it was all just worthless cliche.




    On Sunday, May 24, 2015 6:24 AM, "dougselsam@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
    "The answer is blowing in the wind"  Again?  I wonder if every author that uses that tagline as a title for their article thinks it is original?  It's the "I'm writing my first article about wind energy" syndrome... :)