chimpanzee's big project

[chimpanzee]

chimpanzee:

Any idea why Martin never seems to respond to your posts?

With all the name dropping and idea proposing you have done, has he seen fit to contact you about them?

I don't know, only he knows.

Probably, the Confidentiality factor in any future business venture.
[ the danger of sharks lurking, & stealing idea is always present. Story of my life.

I know full well I'm taking a risk, that some scoundrel out there could run with my idea. However, if I don't go public with the general idea, I could "miss the boat" by not addressing the needs of the eventual customer target..Tesla Roadster freaks on this forum ]

Also, there's that non-disparaging clause he signed, maybe his lawyer advised to play it safe & stay mum.

I get the impression he's pre-occupied with his own program these days. It looks like getting his Roadster & enjoying it (well deserved) was a priority this summer. It also looks like he has his own tight group of trusted friends, I'm a distant memory.

Name dropping is just that..naming names. All those people I KNOW, & have had previous experience with. Sure beats posting on Internet forums to the effect of:

"here's an article about the Roadster"
"here's a video about the Roadster"
"that sucks!"
"that's great!"
"I got my Roadster"
"I'm still waiting for my Roadster"

It's all "talk the talk", & no "walk the walk". What are YOU doing as far as making an effort to contribute to Alternative Energy?

"In the game of Life, there are passengers & there are drivers. Which are you?"
-- Volkswagen commercial

Martin is an example of a "driver", actively getting out & creating something (TM). Posting on forums is "passenger", watching the world go by passively. I'm naming contacts (mostly UIUC alumni, so they are less LIKELY to screw Martin in his next venture), for the purpose of creating an R&D Inst to help future Alternative Energy companies.


What I've done publicly (in order to stimulate some feedback from this forum, afterall what matters in any business is the CUSTOMER), is no different what people do at conferences. Trading small talk, inter-dispersed with some technical discussion. At the recent SIGGRAPH 2008 conference, I heard all sorts of worthless small talk that I found annoying. (example: a Columbia CS prof being wooed to Cornell, & his emailing pictures of himself in a coat to his former colleagues at Stanford & Caltech, "is this ok for New York winter?"). I really wonder about these people & their work ethic.

Example:
I've already done a project with YYY (Dr. yyy, who is a UIUC EE/Artificial Intelligence alumni like Martin & me), where the "top-down"approach worked. Contact through DARPA was made in 3 hrs, Dr. yyy contacted me via email 2hrs later, we traded mutual UIUC information, a conference call was arranged (him & his lead engineer for the DARPA GC '05), & a successful project was completed. It completely avoided the "bottom up" approach of proposal writing, submission (competing with a zillion other proposals), waiting, & probably getting a rejection.

Sometimes the best approach is in person, or the phone. Email & forums is still a little virtual & "distant". Take the case when Martin met with EM for a couple hrs, & had a handshake deal for xxx million. It was all done in person & verbal face-to-face. That's how TM got off the ground.

I had some communications issues w/Caltech profs, even my best contact over there (CS Dept) is totally unresponsive via email. Aargh. I have to go there PHYSICALLY, & he will be open & spend time with me. I did the same with a Mech Eng prof @Caltech. Another guy at ME Dept FINALLY called me back, & when I confronted him about the lack of communication via email, he told me "many professors won't even reply to emails from other professors"!! WTF.

Personal reference is really important in getting a job. If you call or email a professor, their "filters" (secretaries) will screen you. If you are not on their white-list, you're outta luck! When I was at JPL, my colleague was a world renowned researcher, & a secretary said "Jim will talk to xx, xx1, yy, yy1"..that's it. When I made some phone queries over to Georgia-Tech back in '05, I got in a heated exchanges with the departmental secretary. I asked them how they have any qualifications to screen technical people (if they are non-technical people to begin with). Eventually, I did get through to the Assoc Director of GTRI, who called me back. The researcher doing battery technology research finally called me back as well. Some profs I have to call AT HOME, to get a hold of them! (advice: don't do this)

I met a really smart researcher (woman at AMD/ATI) at SIGGRAPH 2008 who gave an outstanding demo, & my intial email to her went unanswered. So, I called her up, & she sent me an email response. She told me she just got back from the conference, & was hopelessly behind on catching up with her email. People are simply thrashed at work.

One of my ex colleagues (Georgia-Tech CS prof) told me "you can't get anything done during the day, only time is at night". These people are so busy during the day, many just don't answer the phone PERIOD. I know one MIT physics prof who gets offended if ANYONE attempts to interrupt him with a phone call during the day! (which I find offensive) He's that militant about time-management. Other people are totally opposite, very open & accessible (e.g., a Caltech theoretical physicists working on Quantum Computing & a well known Caltech geophysicist. Both are cordial/relaxed, & will spend time with me when I call them out of the blue). Some people are extremely PROFESSIONAL, like Dr. Ed Davidson & xx (ex MIT geophysicist, a woman). I left messages on both their answering machines, & both called me back promptly! That's rare (Colin Powell's peeve after leaving the Military, is unanswered phone messages). Ed Davidson was Martin's mentor @UIUC, & he certainly can get the ball rolling with me (former Dept Head @Univ of Michigan/EE dept). He told me so back in 2001, he had issues with NSF "compartmentalization" (i.e., they don't respond well to Interdisciplinary proposals).

I'm going forward with my idea, I've already picked up some key contacts. Just verbal discussion with people at SIGGRAPH (one guy sits on NSF review panels, & has been involved with Infrastructure Development of his own..33 million funded), gets the ball rolling. Another guy responded excitedly, via email. Look at how Steven Spielberg got his break: he was a nobody, waited outside the studio to make his pitch to a VIP executive..& the rest, as they say, is History! Personal contact is key, as opposed to submitting a proposal that gets stacked with zillion other ones..rejection is the probably outcome.

Heck, I can just motor on & somebody will respond. Just power your way through the problem, that's my modus-operanda.

"Victory belongs to the Most Persevering"
-- Napoleon

 

[TEG]

It's all "talk the talk", & no "walk the walk". What are YOU doing as far as making an effort to contribute to Alternative Energy?

Just personal efforts like you. Spent all my savings on solar panels and a utilitarian EV to commute to work. Made my house more efficient.

"In the game of Life, there are passengers & there are drivers. Which are you?"

Mostly a passenger myself, looking for good drivers.

I hang out on these forums mostly because I find it interesting, and a learning experience.

Martin is an example of a "driver", actively getting out & creating something.

Yes, he is. He also (like many other highly intelligent, successful people I have met) will ignore you unless you are tuned into his wavelength.

 

[bill]

R&D Comments

My wife and I own a small Pharmaceutical manufacturing company (Mom and Pop if you wish). I don't know a lot about cars. R&D has been our lifeblood. We recently obtained approval to produce a cancer drug and are designing a multitude of new products and technology to be produced and distributed overseas. Also, we expect to get into areas of Northern Africa where the people have nothing.

Over the years, we found that the most productive and creative R&D starts in house.

We work with some of the top independent scientists in the world. They provide us with science. We then develop our formulations around that. In a number of cases, we disagree
with the science and design accordingly.

We found that sending R&D to outside firms is a roll of the dice. Too many times you have nothing to show for it. It is better to take a very small piece of the puzzle and give it to people who have good expertise in a specific area.

TM has done an outstanding job with the roadster. Their approach has worked. We are simply making too much of a fuss over problems, real or imagined.

The only mistake I see so far was eliminating Martin. From what I read, he is genuine and a truly outstanding individual. I hope to meet him someday..!!!

 

[vfx]

I need more feedback from the "smarter than the average bear" members on this forum..

That leaves me out! :tongue:

 

[SByer]

Chimpanzee, more signal, less noise. There are interesting nuggets in your posts, but the name dropping and having to dig through them means that, well, I skip them sometimes (don't know about others).

I don't know about the kinds of items Martin develops, but I do know about software. For us, collaborating with university researchers has an "interesting" pay-off rate, but really requires another 90% of the work to be done to productize it (Pareto principle variant). Dealing with those who haven't actually ever shipped a product to customers can be frustrating, as they don't understand the gap between what they've produced and what is really needed. It's not quite demo-ware - it's often got pieces of real functionality and good technical qualifications behind it.

That remaining engineering work is the development part of R&D - and the part that pure researchers often overlook and/or underestimate significantly. Being "downstream" from the research lets me see and appreciate the level of work that goes into that part of it. The best researchers to work with are those that have had enough productizing experience to keep in mind the amount and significance of the "other" part of the work.

Just trying to help...

 

[Takumi]

I need more feedback from the "smarter than the average bear"

Me too! I'm on the forum to learn from the likes of you and try and spread the word to others such as myself.

 

[domenick]

I need more feedback from the "smarter than the average bear" members on this forum, to fine-tune the above. ...

Fold.

I'm not even smart enough to see the point of more ecumenical rigmarole.

 

[TEG]

Slightly related:
Battleground Earth Episode: Duel in the Desert : Planet Green

 

[TEG]

From Tesla Motors - think :
"...The $250 million facility will be home to a Model S assembly plant, corporate headquarters and a cutting-edge R&D campus...."

 

[chimpanzee]

I'd be more excited if they "delivered" 8 cars in one day. Heck, even 8 cars in a week would be nice.

This is all wishful thinking.

In everyone's dreams, this is the story-line.

I just got off the phone with a PV/Photovoltaic researcher (group leader) at NREL. We were reviewing our past experiences..inefficiency at Govt labs (CoB/"Curse of Beauracracy"). He pointed out small lean/mean/rock-and-roll-machines can bypass this sloth. It was a surprise to me (& many), that TM fell victim to CoB despite their startup lean-ness.

"It's good to be IDEALISTIC!"
-- Caltech CS prof, friend of mine

"grounded in Reality"
"staying in touch with Reality"

All the great scientific discoveries (& entrepeneurial breakthroughs) came about from dreamers. M. Eberhard is the dreamer behind TM. The Ideal drives a human effort to make a discovery (in Science), or a product (in Business). However, there are Realistic obstacles to be overcome. TM got their wake up call last year, with the tranmission issue. Durability/Reliability issues (after 2K miles) was a signal that they had to "get back to Reality". An R&D program would have protected them from this anomaly. It takes TIME to work out these engineering snafus. What did TM do? Change supplier, without letting Xtrac do development

[ as they did in Offroad, where their development partner worked thru breakage issues in 2007, & successfully came up with a solution. 1st place, 3rd place (podium), 1st place (2 weekends ago)..looking to Nov's Baja 1000 to take home the season points championship ]

& heave the problem to Magna. Who in turn, couldn't do it "overnight" & needed time for development. TM viewed this whole deal as "throwing money at the problem", like buying something off-the-shelf (with minimal development).

1) Knowledge Consumerism
throwing money at the problem

2) Knowledge Creation
R&D Program, Academic ("Book Knowledge") & Auto Racing ("Real World Knowledge")

They were doing 1), instead of doing 1+2. AND, so far as I know, they haven't made adjustments/changes to do 1+2. I hear of some auto racing thing, but nothing like the Xtrac development program in Offroad. Contracts signed, results produced, WINS in major auto races (beating world-class competition).

I've already made contact with the principals above, VP of Xtrac, owner of offroad development partner (I know the owner, who is a supporter of my project). Also, the Caltech Mech Eng prof (faculty advisor for the Caltech DARPA Grand Challenge team) & just now my NREL contact (high-school classmate, PhD U of Arizona in Materials Science, PV researcher). A meeting is planned soon, to fine-tune the concept for a virtual R&D Institute to target Alternative Energy companies like Tesla Motors. We already have a "valdiation prototype" (above R&D program in offroad) for a 2-speed Xtrac tranny, that can be "crossed over" to pavement applications. Funding should be straightfoward, they like concrete stuff with validation runs.

 

[chimpanzee]

From Tesla Motors - think :
"...The $250 million facility will be home to a Model S assembly plant, corporate headquarters and a cutting-edge R&D campus...."

"In order to Solve the Problem, you must first UNDERSTAND IT"
-- Einstein

That reference by TM to "cutting edge R&D campus" is just that..TALK.

I've made numerous references to how TM failed to setup an R&D program (short/medium/long term) to "cover themselves". Sure enough, they got bit by the transmission snafu. 2nd, they didn't give Xtrac (or Magna) the TIME (cursed word in any domain, Business or Research) to do some development. Whereas, Xtrac (heavily involved in Auto Racing: Formula 1, Rally, Indycar, Offroad) has its own development program, with development partners. Sure enough, Xtrac's development partner (sharp, well run team that's INTO TECHNOLOGY) diligently worked through 2007 tranny breakage & came up with a successful solution for 2008. 1st, 3rd (podium), 1st (2 weekends ago, 300 mile sprint race)..looking forward to November Baja 1000 for a season points championship. How did they do it?

"Slow & Steady wins the Race"
-- fable, Tortoise & Hare

"Steady as she goes"
-- Naval saying

"Smooth is Fast"
-- Robby Gordon, CART racer (California 500 @Fontana)

"The key is knowing when to go Fast [ powerline roads ], when to go Slow [ slow rocky sections, which are dangerous ]"
-- Ivan "Ironman" Stewart

They demonstrated Patience, & took the TIME to do thing right.

Tesla Motors was on a fast-pace, trying to do it overnight, trying to be everything to everyone (niche-market of sportscars & mass-market sedan), playing "loose & fast". I give credit for their daring/bravado, but you have to Manage Risk.

"You can't win it on the First Lap, but YOU CAN CERTAINLY LOSE IT"
-- auto racing saying

case in point:
YouTube - F1 CRASH

Basically, TM went on a "suicide mission". Hey, let's just go-for-it, & see what happens..maybe we'll get lucky. They dang nearly pulled it off, they attempted a "throw $$ at the problem" (minimal development, just contract vendors & see what they come up with) approach.

I mean, seriously. The above talk about a "state of the art R&D program"..man that's an UNDERTAKING in itself. My advisors (several discussions already, including my NREL friend the PV/Photovoltaic researcher) told me MY thing is a MONSTER in itself. Requires infrastructure, funding, recruiting people..it's like a TM startup in ITSELF!! "One step at at a time" was the advice (to follow my own advice, my criticism of TM), you can't "make it overnight". Take it easy.

"I grew up in the mountains. I learned something: you have to PACE yourself"
-- xx, CNN interview, Pakistani immigrant (CEO of XX, major furniture retailer in USA)

That thing by TM is just some hastily worded PR (probably based on my comments here on TMC).

I attended a course on "The Art of NSF Grant Writing" at SIGGRAPH 2008, & the NSF people were emphasizing the fact that "concrete" things have preference (with some validation prototypes), which have near-term payouts. They're CONSERVATIVE, they won't take risk on "blue sky" pie-in-the-sky projects. The days of Bell Laboratories "Curiosity Research"

[ which led to the invention of the Transistor..Bardeen was a UIUC Physics/EE prof btw, his 1st PhD student was Nick Holonyak who invented the LED. An article about him was in the same UIUC/EE/Resonance newsletter, that wrote up Martin/Tesla ]

are pretty much gone. Everyone is into "instant gratification". No one is laying the foundation for long-term RoI/Return on Investment, which is a BIG mistake. I was at the SIGGRAPH 2001 conference, where the NSF Program Director (Divison of Computer-Communication Research Numeric, Symbolic, & Geometric Computation) asked the NYU CS prof (Caltech PhD):

"what do we have to do today..to put us where we want to be 10 yrs..20 yrs down the line?"

This is the question TM didn't ask (otherwise they would have put in a R&D program, say with target dates of 1,2 4 years), & thus we are where we are today. They don't have an R&D program (& a 3rd party R&D Institute like I'm talking about, will take TIME to get going), & just saying "we gonna have state of art R&D"..is just HOT AIR. That's the exact words of my NREL PV researcher friend, he hears it ALL THE TIME. He was going to fly out here (on NREL's dollar), & meet with me (hopefully Martin, since he's 2 miles from me in Sierra Madre..I shop at the Vons on Sierra Madre Blvd), Caltech profs (Mechanical Eng, Computer Science), & others. We're making a list. His funding comes from DoE/Dept of Energy (the place where HEP/High Energy Physics gets their funding & where there is 80 million..?..in subsidies designed for TM), he's tops in his field. Friends with owners & CTO's of many solar energy startups & companies. He tells me there is 1 billion of VC money being targeted for his field: Photovoltaics. He almost left to joint a startup, & his long term future is probably there.

Like I say, some more work is need to "fine tune" the Concept. Certainly, an immediate Need (2-speed transmission for the Roadster) can be answered by a R&D Institute Solution. The "validation prototype" result in Offroad (see above), using the concept of crossover as per Interdisciplinary Research, will almost assuredly get it funded. Just a little more work, & a 2-speed pavement tranny could be made available to Roadster clients. The magic of R&D, "what goes around [ investment ] comes around [ payoff ]". In the end, Elon Musk gets what he wants. But, at the price of ejecting Martin (UIUC alumni), Wally Rippel (Caltech/Aerovironment alumni), Judy Estrin (icon in Silicon Valley startups), et al.

I say, TM has put themselves in a hole. They have basically eliminated any hirees from UIUC, Caltech (& others). No R&D plans in sight, & they CONTINUE to spend $$ like there's no tomorrow..hiring/poaching all these big names from Mazda, et al.

"You can have all the $$, you can keep spending $$, but you will never have enough $$"
-- Rob MacCachren, Offroad Racing Champ

[ he jumped into a Pro 2 "cold" & was a threat for a win everytime out, he was 2007 Driver of the Year ]

Offroad Racing is loaded with wealthy guys (1 donor to my project has 300 million, another one makes 7 million profit PER DAY, a Vegas casino executive got a 30 million dollar bonus, etc), & everyone KNOWS..you can burn through cash in a HURRY! Despite seemingly unlimited funds, you still have to abide by:

"It's not how much $$ you have, but HOW WISELY YOU SPEND IT"
"It's not what equipment you have, BUT HOW WELL YOU USE IT"

I hate to say it, but I get this feeling that TM is still in this modus-operanda of "throwing $$ at the problem". They need to sit down, CALM DOWN, & figure out a plan. Bring in some specialists (especially R&D), & get some experienced professionals to bear on the problem:

"A GOOD PLAN, will beat a Good Idea, anyday..10 to 1"
"There are SCOUNDRELS out there!"
-- BB, offroad racing marketing guru, private communication

I think TM is certainly a good idea (Martin the Dreamer, like Dr. Paul Macready/Aerovironment..a self-acknowledged dreamer). But, deep-down there was a flaw to the Plan, & sure enough Murphy's Law manifested itself in the tranny issue. Then, the Dr. Jekyll & Mr Hyde multiple personality made its presence felt ("it starts from the Top"), resulting in the Stealth Bloodbath. Whoah. Key question is:

"What is the next step? What do we have to do NOW..to put ourselves in a position to Win [ Alternative Energy ] 5 yrs..10 yrs..20 yrs from now"

"Life is 20% what happens to you..80% HOW YOU RESPOND TO IT"
-- a wise man once said

There's a bunch of Martin's ex-UIUC officemates lurking around in high positions & bigname companies (Intel Director of Research & VP Corporate Technology) & Universities (VP of Georgia-Tech & President of GTRI whose colleague is now President of Caltech, head of UC San Diego/CALIT2, UIUC connection). I might be the monkey-boy factor, a primate gone ape-sh*t who is able to see all these connections (& attacked as a name-dropper). Oh yeah.

Honestly, I wasn't that turned on by EV or Alternative Energy..but I'm really into it. It dovetails perfectly with my current focus on HEP/High Energy Physics (whose main funding source is DoE/Dept of Energy), & there's quite a beautiful/elegant concept linking the two. There's a LOT of activity within the Physics/Science community (scores of Nobel Laureates, & prominent scientists) to do a better job of Science Outreach to the public. Guess what? The Alternative Energy bandwagon is perfect, with the Tesla Roadster as the showpiece "product".

PS

I just found an ally, a Space Shuttle Astronaut (key figure in HST servicing missions. BTW, the Shuttle commander for the last servicing mission is a UIUC Aerospace Eng grad, Scot Altman):

"test" Multimedia Coverage of "PATS 2008" conference: Sat/Talks

A "blue sky" project like "Interdisciplinary Collaborative/Cooperative R&D Inst targeting Alternative Energy" needs some backing from powerful iconic figures. What better guy, is a mission specialist for Space Shuttle/HST missions? The Space Shuttle is a "platform for Technology" (technical as well as political), so the same "platform for Technology" is required for Alternative Energy. R&D, & other stuff.

 

[chimpanzee]

Just personal efforts like you. Spent all my savings on solar panels and a utilitarian EV to commute to work. Made my house more efficient.


Mostly a passenger myself, looking for good drivers.

I hang out on these forums mostly because I find it interesting, and a learning experience.



Yes, he is. He also (like many other highly intelligent, successful people I have met) will ignore you unless you are tuned into his wavelength.

Thanks for the feedback TEG.

I followed everything, until the last comment "tuned into his wavelength".

Can you tell me what I might be doing/saying to cause a "rift" between 2 universes?

Martin's world is a means (Technology) towards an end (Business, profit, making societal change)? If I don't show something like a concrete product with a Business Model, then I'm irrelevant?

High Energy Physicists have this problem as well:

"If you don't have a product to show [ funding agencies ], you are considered irrelevant"
-- Dr. xxx/SLAC, theoretical physicist
[ she attended JB Straubel's talk at SLAC last fall, which was well received by the SLAC attendees. She is involved with HEP outreach programs to the Public ]

I hate to say it, but the lack of perspective (appreciation of "Book Knowledge", manifesting itself in R&D) hurt Tesla Motors. Their management simply didn't respect this component, & resulted in an engineering crisis. Which in turn, caused a personnel crisis.

By the same token, I was never into the "big deal" at UIUC, during the time Martin & I were engineering students. The hot thing was to get a BS in Engineering, MBA (masters in Business Administration), & the supposedly you were hot sh*t in taking on the Market. My interest in Engineering was never about Product, but Knowledge.

"I'm interested in KNOWLEDGE..not Product!"
"It's not the hardware, but the BRAIN we're interested in!"
-- Dr Misha Mahowald, Neuromorphic Engineer (Caltech PhD, Dr. Carver Mead's star student)

[ she was a Biologist who entered the Interdisciplinary Field of Computional Neural Sciences, marriage of Biology, Physics, Electrical Engineering. She was building *custom* silicon circuits that emulated the nonlinear I/O response curves of neurons, that could "see". A Silicon retina. She added a 2nd eye, some stereo algorithms..whoala stereo silicon retina.

Whereas myself & Martin were using off-the-shelf digital hardware (see the Resonance article, where he used Intel 8051 microprocessors) *general purpose ICs* to build robots, computer vision systems, etc. My PhD thesis was in the area Computational Theory of Vision, a mathematical (physics & geometry) reductionist approach to stereo vision. Totally mathematical/computational algorithmic approach, validated by computer simulation. Not a piece of hardware was used! ]

I've gone thru this before, the universe I come from is "high-end research". Serious "book knowledge" stuff, but I have a lot of real-world skills/knowledge. My masters thesis was in the same area as Martin's (same advisor, BTW)..hardware for Artificial Intelligence/Robotics/Computer Vision.

It's a collision of 2 universes.

Knowledge Creation (R&D) VS Knowledge Consumerism (material goods)

I talk to people from another universe, & they don't understand me. They talk to me, & they seem to be focused on material things. Take some recent comments, there is a repeated reference to name-dropping. Well, those are "data points" (access to researchers) for building a new R&D institute.

"Go into it..with a group of people"
-- Dr XX, Caltech CS prof

TM forgot to include in their group, some R&D specialists. Otherwise, we wouldn't be where we are today. Tesla Roadsters would possibly have been delivered on schedule, & sending the Automotive Industry reeling. Well, the offroad development partner for Xtrac, has developed a working gearbox (at least for offroad racing), so now it's a matter of Technology Transfer to pavement applications. As in above, a proposal to DoE should get it funded, because they like "concrete" things with "concrete" validation prototypes.

 

[bill]

chimpanzee

Your comments are dazzling, creative, brilliant and often amusing. It's fun to read what you write. Keep up the great work. However, let's all admit it, TM has done superbly well without your help. They have developed a incredible street machine that is both high performance and simple in design. That is the genius of what they have done. It's a demonstration of the future of EV's.

 

[GSP]

Chimpanzee,

I'm not sure that the NSF is so conservative. Not while risking most of their funds on the LIGO gravity wave detectors, which may not be able to detect gravity waves!

Oh well, if LIGO doesn't do the job, maybe LISA (space based gravity wave detector) will (with a whole bunch more tax dollars)!

GSP

 

[TEG]

Can you tell me what I might be doing/saying to cause a "rift" between 2 universes?

"Rift" is probably/possibly an overstatement. Sometimes you are "close but no cigar". Like tuning the dial you get nothing but static until you are locked on.

People like Martin are probably too busy to take you seriously unless it seems you are right in sync with what they were already thinking. Why stop and take the time to try to guide someone when there are already enough people out there doing exactly what you want?

Anyways, I don't speak for Martin and don't really know what he is thinking. Just speculating... (which I have been trying to avoid lately but I felt compelled by your incessant effort with little response).

 

[doug]

Oh well, if LIGO doesn't do the job, maybe LISA (space based gravity wave detector) will (with a whole bunch more tax dollars)!

Heh... Speaking of name dropping... Some years ago, when I was an undergrad at Cornell, I had dinner with Kip Thorne. Among other things, LIGO was one of the topics we discussed. Of course at Stanford, I have friends who work on LIGO and on LISA. I know... la tee da tee daaa.....:tongue:

 

[chimpanzee]

"Rift" is probably/possibly an overstatement. Sometimes you are "close but no cigar". Like tuning the dial you get nothing but static until you are locked on.

People like Martin are probably too busy to take you seriously unless it seems you are right in sync with what they were already thinking. Why stop and take the time to try to guide someone when there are already enough people out there doing exactly what you want?

Anyways, I don't speak for Martin and don't really know what he is thinking. Just speculating... (which I have been trying to avoid lately but I felt compelled by your incessant effort with little response).

I will tell you there was an amazing "event" yesterday.

I left a message on Dr. xxx answering machine (leading PV researcher of world-wide repute, at NREL/National Renewable Energy Lab/Solar). He called me back 1st thing @7:54am (someone who returns phone calls like a professional..what a concept!). Within a minute of describing the Tesla Motors situation

[ Martin founder, Roadster transmission crisis due to lack of R&D program, Stealth Bloodbath (crackpot decision from the Top), successful "validation prototype" by Xtrac's offroad development partner (gearbox that got them 1st, 3rd, 1st place finishes this year), proposed virtual R&D Inst spanning universities & Industry targeting AE/Alternative Energy ]

he caught on, & we proceeded to have an intense conversation over the next hour. He's well connected among PV entrepeneurships (knows owners & CTOs, since his PV research is world-renowned, & even was lured by certain companies to leave NREL), & talked about the huge $$ (1 billion) being pumped into PV by SF based VC sources. As soon as he heard about Martin (& other Roadster clients) setting up their homes with solar arrays, he offerred to fly here (on NREL's dime) to meet with me (& others like Martin & Caltech Mechanical Eng profs..1 is on sabbatical to Northtrop-Grumman to explore the AE option. Both Martin & I are near Caltech). I emailed him a long "info packet", so he can absorb while he's on travel next week. The following week, we will try to set something up. Yes, "talk the talk" is moving towards "walk the walk".

Back to your original point: "compelled by your incessant effort with little response"

I'm sensing that the response is correlated with which "universe" one is from. My PV researcher friend @NREL (Materials Science PhD, U of Arizona, my high-school classmate..HS which was 1 block away from UIUC/Coordinated Scienc Lab where Martin did his '81 summer internship with our AARG lab) is from my "universe"..that of high-end research. Martin & Judy Estrin are the movers-shakers in Industry which use Technology ("means") towards an End ("societal change"). I recall an interview with Judy Estrin, where she pointed to diagram: "this is where we are..& where we want to go" (something like that). She was describing how "theoretical novelty" (academic R&D) gets transformed into "useful reality" (companies who built products). Good article here, where J. Estrin recognizes the value of R&D (& how this country is losing it)

It seems like innovation in many fields -- from Web 2.0 to personalized medicine -- is accelerating at a rapid pace in the United States, right?

Wrong. In fact, the underlying infrastructure of research, development, and application that produced these marvels -- as well as world-changing innovations like the Internet -- has drastically deteriorated in the U.S. in recent years. The decline of what I call our "Innovation Ecosystem" poses a grave threat to both the economic prosperity of our country and the security of our children's future. The state of innovation is a critical issue that should be getting more attention in the days leading up to the presidential election.

It's obvious from the above "event" from yesterday, that this could be of great interest to Martin's overall plan: CFPT/carbon-free personal transportation (EV + PV enhanced home power). This Dr. xxx/NREL (leading PV researcher of world-repute) has *connections* to PV companies (owners & CTOs & was even lured by them to join), told me himself that's his long-term future. He took initiative, & offerred to fly over here & talk with people. With Martin planning his next move, another entrepeneurial move in AE/Alternative Energy, well..

Standard Model:
startup a solar power company. Entrepeneurs have *indirect* access to PV researchers (Academia & Industry). There's that "information gap" between 2 universes. Things happen slowly, "Speed is Life" concept..doesn't happen.

Alternative Model:
same as above, with the following twist. Get those key contacts, go DIRECT to circumvent the "information gap". "Speed is Life" concept manifests into Execution. Things happen quickly. Dr. xxx/NREL is obviously a really interesting contact

[ my high-school classmate, UIUC grad in Ceramic Engineering & PhD U of Arizona in Materials Science, we went to a famous HS which produced 3 Nobel Laureates: Economics, Phyisics, Medicine..it's like a mini-Caltech. On UIUC campus, which attracted top talent like Martin ]

If Martin wanted to do something in EV/PV ("integrated solution" for carbon-free personal transportaton, call it CFPT), & get a jump on the competition (which is stuck on Standard Model), then an opportunity is staring at him in the mirror. Me, Dr. xxx/NREL, Martin..we're all UIUC alumni. Dr. xxx wants to setup a meeting & fly here to Pasadena..hmm.


There's a saying in Business: "Timing is Everything".

Seems like good timing (good thing Martin left TM, a "hole getting deeper" via lack of R&D foresight), people with common ancestry (UIUC) possibly coming together. Another person I need to contact is Judy Estrin. Turns out a husband/wife couple I know, a Caltech & UCLA PhD (both went thru her dad.. famous UCLA EE prof who was PhD advisor for Vinton Cerf/Internet pioneer), are now Intel researchers (computer networks). The husband worked for a company in Arcadia/CA (nearby Martin's Sierra Madre home), started by a Caltech CS professor, while his wife was working on her Caltech PhD. BTW, Martin's summer '81 co-intern at our AARG lab is now Director of Research & VP Corporate Technology (MIT PhD, former UIUC & UC San Diego Computer Science prof, his Dad was Martin's supervisor). Gordon Moore (Intel co-founder) has serious connections to Caltech (alumni, trustee & philantropist). I can see some kind of deal, involving Caltech & Intel with XXX. This R&D Inst or a CFPT involving PV research (something Martin might be interested in).

Here's David Baltimore's (Biologist, Nobelist in Medicine, ex Caltech president) Formula for Success:

"get a group of really smart people, great things will happen"

[ Martin & Marc were essentially using this formula to build TM, a dream team so to say (Judy Estrin was definitely a "smartie", good recruit) ]

Call it name-dropping, it's really making connections (especially with ex-alumni: Caltech, UIUC & new access-points like Intel). That's "the way the world works", as my geologist friend just told me. Schmoozing (what Dr. Kate Hutton/Caltech told me last weekend) is about finding people who you can TRUST, & then you do a Deal. "Deals are what make the world go 'round", as my lawyer friend (also HS classmate with me & Dr. xxx/NREL).

I essentially am continuing on TMC, the Transparency concept of TM blogs (when Martin was there). The sharing of information lets the powers-to-be to figure out the Needs of their Constituency (customers are king, it's their spending $$'s which drive the Business Model), & then design Solutions. This CFPT (Carbon Free Personal Transportation) concept, via EV & PV enhanced home is such a solution.

 

[chimpanzee]

Heh... Speaking of name dropping... Some years ago, when I was an undergrad at Cornell, I had dinner with Kip Thorne. Among other things, LIGO was one of the topics we discussed. Of course at Stanford, I have friends who work on LIGO and on LISA. I know... la tee da tee daaa.....:tongue:

Haha. Let me enhance the name-dropping. :tongue:

Okay, so my hobby is R/C electric airplanes (play with Nicad, LiIon, LiPo battery packs ad nauseum) & I fly at the Rose Bowl. Met Richard Feynman's son-in-law (who flies), A. Cocconi (flys 3D aircraft, got video of him in summer '06), a bunch of Caltech people. Like Postdoctoral scholar in DNA Computing, who just talked at the last TED conference. Paul Macready/Aerovironment flies there as well.

So, I meet this one guy at the flying field. Turns out he was a Caltech grad student working on LIGO (many years ago), now a PCC engineering instructor. Man, was that a can of worms he said! Lots of politics, internal bickering/fighting where a major figure was forced out. Sound familiar? (ala Tesla Motors crisis)

The whole thing almost came to grief because of a conflict of a kind that is quite common in large technology projects: a manager who has to make timely decisions to get things built on schedule and within budget runs up against a creative dreamer who wants to tinker with the design to make things better. In this case the dreamer was Caltech's Ron Dreaver, ''a short portly man with a bulbous nose and warm blue eyes,'' and the manager was Caltech's provost, Rochus Vogt, who ''with his short-clipped hair and black-framed glasses . . . strikes one as a taller and leaner Henry Kissinger.'' There is no doubt that LIGO would not exist without Vogt's formidable organizational skill, but when he summarily fired Dreaver from the project he touched off a chain of events that caused one observer to comment that Caltech needed ''to put Prozac in its water coolers.'' In the end Vogt, recently fired himself, was replaced as the project's director by Barry Barish, another Caltech professor who was liberated from his own field of high energy physics when, in 1993, Congress drove a wooden stake through the heart of the Superconducting Supercollider.

Man, does LIGO sound like a mirror of TM, or what! Big "blue sky" project, collision of management & dreamer, firing. Turmoil, still waiting for outcome..can Triumph win over Tragedy?

"If you're not FIGHTING, you're not trying HARD ENOUGH"

I don't doubt Elon Musk's motives/dreams, but he lacks Engineering background (& some management sense) to understand what last years tranny crisis boiled down to: lack of R&D program. It was NOT Martin's choice of contractors (Xtrac, Magna, etc) that was the problem (EM still thinks you can "spend your way through engineering problesm"), these kinds of engineering issues "go with the territory":

"in order to Push the Limits, sometimes you have to EXCEED THE LIMITS"

They just had to give Xtrac (or Magna) some TIME ("patience, grashopper!") to do some on-the-fly development. Well, sure enough Xtrac's offroad development partner conquered the problem (1st, 3rd, 1st place finishes in 2008 races), after 2007 year of tranny breakage. "Time will tell", & it sure did!

The unfortunate long-term effect of Stealth Bloodbath, is that TM could now be blackballed by UIUC & Caltech.

[ ironically, TM fell back to a 1-speed (heroic effort by JB Straubel to re-engineer the ACP PEM, overhauling it from analog to digital), which was Martin's backup plan. So, the end result was
a massive loss in Intellectual Property: Martin, Wally Rippel, Judy Estrin. Jeezus! ]

No way would any graduating engineer (from UIUC, Caltech, or any university for that matter) work at that place, given the abusive treatment experienced by Martin & Wally Rippel (recall his TM blog entry about R. Feynman "a strange character"). The way the Roadster delivery to Martin was mishandled is even more proof.

Reminds me of my JPL experience, terrible management. I had to leave, because "I couldn't take the bullsh*t no more". The ex LIGO alumnus communicated the same experience: turmoil & BS.

 

[chimpanzee]

Chimpanzee,

I'm not sure that the NSF is so conservative. Not while risking most of their funds on the LIGO gravity wave detectors, which may not be able to detect gravity waves!

Oh well, if LIGO doesn't do the job, maybe LISA (space based gravity wave detector) will (with a whole bunch more tax dollars)!

GSP

Here is how the "game is played", courtesy Tom Chester of IPAC/Caltech (Kip Thorne's PhD student):

Chas Beichman Roast

IRAS taught chas [ Chas Beichmann, IPAC head ] many lessons, which he applied throughout the rest of his ipac career:

1) The golden rule: he who has the gold rules.

2) There are difficult people in the world that you have to learn how to deal with.

3) Schmoozing and Salesmanship are important.

I can only surmise that all the above 3 rules were applied to get LIGO approved by NSF. 1) & 3) are quite important, Money ("gold") & Power (well connected people).

Look at how Tesla Motors got started. You had an equivalent to Kip Thorne (Martin), who turned to "gold" (Elon Musk & 40 million) & Power (VC funding, Google founders, et al). 2) Difficult People, haha.

I guess it's time for a Martin Eberhard "roast". A good way to wrap up his TM phase, & launch into his next entrepeneurial project (which will save the world, & finally get Alternative Energy over the threshold). Maybe I get to part of the latter, I dunno.

 

[chimpanzee]

Chimpanzee, more signal, less noise. There are interesting nuggets in your posts, but the name dropping and having to dig through them means that, well, I skip them sometimes (don't know about others).

In some way, that's a good thing. Those "nuggets" could be stolen & run with by "scoundrels/opportunists". That has actually happened to me in my last Project (last 3 years). So, the "smoke screen" of name-dropping has an accidental good effect of "protection".

I don't know about the kinds of items Martin develops, but I do know about software. For us, collaborating with university researchers has an "interesting" pay-off rate, but really requires another 90% of the work to be done to productize it (Pareto principle variant). Dealing with those who haven't actually ever shipped a product to customers can be frustrating, as they don't understand the gap between what they've produced and what is really needed. It's not quite demo-ware - it's often got pieces of real functionality and good technical qualifications behind it.

I had a research colleague during grad-school (U. of Mass/Amherst), who went on to Industry, then to Georgia-Tech Computer Science Dept, then left to Microsoft. He told me how his latter job of managing software development (delivering a product) was a completely different deal, than Academia.

That remaining engineering work is the development part of R&D - and the part that pure researchers often overlook and/or underestimate significantly. Being "downstream" from the research lets me see and appreciate the level of work that goes into that part of it. The best researchers to work with are those that have had enough productizing experience to keep in mind the amount and significance of the "other" part of the work.

Just trying to help...

Totally agree.

You are basically talking about "bridging the gap" between 2 universes. R&D & Production, or between fields. The latter is called Interdisciplinary Science. The flaw is that Infrastructures like the Beckman Inst, fail to understand that researchers in one field are tied physically to a particular university dept (say, Psychology). To do Interdisciplinary Science RIGHT (say with a Beckman Inst), they need *liaisons* (people who bridge the gap, between 2 disciplines & researchers of disparate disciplines) which are stationed at the Beckman Inst.

The flaw (as pointed out by my Dad, who was a prof/Dept Head) is that many of the offices @Beckman Inst are EMPTY. Because the cognizant professor is back in his own Dept. OR, the professors office in his own Dept is EMPTY, & he is at his office at Beckman Inst. The latter is true of my PhD advisor.

During my intensive 1 hr phone disucssion with Dr. xxx/NREL Solar yesterday, he repeatedly pointed out issues with Infrastructure. Some relevant quotes:

"efficient operations to develop Technologies"
"lots of Hot Air, breaks down in Implementation"
"Business = too many managers"
"overhead rate = 3 to 1, huge overhead, huge bureacracy"
"lots of $$ chasing Technology, not that straightforward
[ e.g., 1 billion of VC for PV research ]"
"getting to Manufacturing challenging, companies making mistakes"
[ just take TM's Roadster project for example, classic case ]
"Popular Science articles only goes so far. Science is intriguing, has to make it work [ product delivery ]"
"manipulating resources into effective operation/results"

Interestingly, he is heavily involved with software (e.g., data mining)

He made an interesting contrast between software & PV research:

Software:
can work on it night & day, make it work

PV Research:
can work on it night & day, can't make it work

Case in point with TM's tranny problem. Xtrac & Magna couldn't make it work..at least on-the-spot (near time-frame). Xtrac's development partner pulled it off..after ONE YEAR, just because the team is a "sharp, well-run team that's INTO TECHNOLOGY". I know the team-owner, & he's a sharp guy with roots in Europe (4 yr technical automotive degree). They do their own analysis of on-board telemetry data.

This is why Elon Musk made such a blunder in ejecting Martin, Wally Rippel, Judy Estrin. "In order to Solve a Problem, YOU MUST FIRST UNDERSTAND IT!" as per Einstein. There was some statement to the effect "certain people didn't come through, so there are consequences [ fired ]". Well, that's just BULLSH*T!! The problem was one with Management (hello!?): they didn't have the foresight to setup a short/medium/long term R&D program (say 1, 2, 4 years) to "cover themselves" for the Roadster project. Heck, it took Xtrac's offroad development partner 1 year (probably less) to figure it out! The severe shockload issue in offroad is very similar to the Roadster problem. Submit a NSF (or DoE) proposal with "validation prototype" (the successful offroad results), & there should be a funded project to build a durable/reliable 2-speed Xtrac available for the Roadster. A beautiful/elegant solution to the problem, courtesy of Interdisciplinary Science (crossover from offroad to pavement). I've already spoken to VP of Xtrac (who I've met at the offroad races) & Martin C (owner of the offroad team), & emailed info packets. Contacted a chassis designer (Formula 1, offroad, Nissan, etc & get this: he played with CVT/Continuous Variable Transmission for electric cars back in the early 90's!), & he likes the idea.

Something's gonna happen ("walk the walk") based on conversations between significant parties ("talk the talk").