Russell McMahon wrote:

>> I'm not following you here... How is accelerating the discovery, or
>> trying to influence the geopolitical location of the discovery, helping
>> in avoiding the catastrophe?

> If 'we' leave it to persons unknown to do the discovering then none of
> these are fully knowable and may be unknown for an extended period after
> discovery.

On a side note: I doubt that -- most technologies become generally known
pretty quickly; when they get discovered, it seems to be because it's their
time. Whoever it is who did it seems to be more a matter of chance: if it
hadn't been A, there would have been any number of B, C, D ... who were
working on the same thing and also pretty close.

But for the question in question this is not really relevant.

> While I suspect that if 'Cold Fusion' (CF) does exist then it will be a
> genii that cannot be put back in its bottle, it seems highly desirable
> for the US, that the US or those who walk reasonably in step with it be
> the discoverer. 

Why? This is the question...

> CF in the form it is thought liable to take (if it exists) * will open up
> the area of both "unlimited power" and nuclear capability to not only
> any country but even to almost any organisation of any significant size.

This is an assumption that we share. 

> [...] the US already has essentially unlimited nuclear weapons capability
> and has proven itself capable (albeit sometimes perhaps only just) of
> not using it, [...]

Homework assignment:
a) List all countries that have or had nuclear weapons.
b) List all countries that have used nuclear weapons.
c) Use the results of a) and b) to discuss the above statement. :)

> [...] it seems a somewhat more trustable body than some others to first
> discover such power and seek to limit its applications. 

This is exactly where I can't follow. I accept for this discussion that CF
opens up practically unlimited power and nuclear weapons capability to any
organization of significant size, and that the US is a trustworthy body of
power.

I don't see, however, that spending efforts in discovering it first will do
anything to prevent the feared disaster. If anything, it will speed up the
discovery process of everybody else -- so the to be feared organizations
will have the capability sooner rather than later, but they will get it.
And the nuclear stalemate we've had in the later part of last century won't
work with them. 

I agree with the part "seek to limit its applications" -- however, I don't
see how working on creating these applications is going in the right
direction. 

> If CF was discovered by any of a number of smaller countries which are
> hostile to the US then there is significant prospect that new classes of
> nuclear armaments would be both developed covertly and then used.

I don't see how this is affected by the sequence of discovery; it can
happen no matter what. As far as the timeline goes, as I said before I'm
rather convinced that an early discovery by the US (or anybody else) only
speeds up the discovery by everybody else -- but doesn't delay or even
prevent it.

Gerhard

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist