Do We Control Our Future

Can we control the future?     One belief is that time, the past, the future, everything in the universe already exists.  It is only our biological nature that forces our experience of the universe to be one of moving through time with the future gelling and then solidifying into the past.

Another is the more common believe that we exist in a point in time and create the future as we go along through our own decisions.

Even the Bible seems split on this topic, do we have free will or not?  I would suggest to you that free will is merely a frame of reference.  From a reference outside of time, in which you can see all of time, there is no free will, the universe is just fixed, all of past, all of future, and in every direction.  But from our biological perspective absolutely we do.  And so we must make decisions and take actions that create the future we desire.

Aliens and Transformer Fires

Aliens and Burning Transformers     The things in the upper right quadrant of this photo, I happened across a video of this on my television and these things were moving about and flashing on and off before the transformer went which leads me to wonder if they weren’t some sort of electromagnetic pulse weapon.

Future Nuclear Dream

     Last night I had a dream in which my job was to identify abandoned nuclear reactors, fuel rods, waste, for clean-up and reclamation.

     In the dream, I was particularly looking in Africa because many African governments had created reactors and because they were unstable they were abandoned when the government fell apart or was replaced.

     At this point in our history, we had developed a technique for removing waste from soil and most other things and packaging it in a shipping container for treatment.

     The treatment involved first extracting all the actinides from the fission products.  The actinides would be burned in a fast reactor leaving only relatively short-lived fission products.  The fission products would decay to safe materials in about 300 years versus a million years for waste containing actinides.

Fluoride Reactor

This is essentially the same as molten salt reactors.  It will not burn Thorium directly as Thorium 232 is NOT fissionable.  So it requires a fissionable isotope of Uranium or Plutonium to get things started.  Thorium 232 then absorbs a neutron to become Thorium 233, and then beta decays to Protactinium 233, which beta decays again to become Uranium 233 which is fissionable.  What is not stated in this video is that these reactors can fission most actinides because actinides are fissionable with fast neutrons generated in these reactors so the waste products that are left are only fission products and these all have half-lives that are short transforming a 500,000 year waste problem into a one or two hundred year waste problem and a waste volume less than 1/100th that of a conventional light water reactor.

US Power Grid

     Some time ago I wrote advocating tying together the three major US power grids with DC inter-ties. I am happy to see today that that has in fact been done.

     DC inter-ties are more efficient over distances greater than about 300 miles,immune to the effects of solar induced or nuclear induced magnetic interference, and do not require the networks be phase synchronized.

     This allows load peaks to be distributed over a wider geographical area, flattening the peak somewhat because of the varying time zones.


     If you’ve been following what has been happening in Hawaii lately on the big island, Kilauea has been sending lava through underground channels and then fissures are opening up 25 miles away from the volcano and spewing forth lava.

     I can’t help but wonder if there are any connections between the different hot spots on Earth.  If the Hawaii hot spot is becoming more active, does that indicate any changes to come for Yellowstone, Indonesia, Africa and all the other hot spots around the world?

Future – Respecting Mars

     On the subject of the planned missions to Mars by SpaceX and NASA respectively, I’m personally going to predict that SpaceX has a better chance of getting people there and back alive, but not on schedule.

     Only half of NASAs non-manned missions to Mars have succeeded and 50-50 odds are a bit short of what I would be comfortable with as an astronaut.