This is a consolidation of a couple of posts I made in the comments for the poscast in question.
A new term for nuclear power eh? Perhaps some variant of the terms ‘prototype’ or ‘archetype’, to reflect the fact that nuclear is the basic energy source of the universe, and most the forms we are familiar with (fossil fuels, wind, solar, hydro, geothermal) ultimately derive from it… but it needs to be snappier. Archic? Archeonic? Perhaps even ur-power (from the German prefix ur, which means the same as “original’, ‘primeval’). Unfortunately my language skills aren’t sufficient to give an authoritative answer, but perhaps someone else can run with this.
If we were to go down the ‘archeonic’ (or something similar) path, the root ‘arch’ also has the feature that it is associated with words which have an aura of supremacy, rulership, and pre-eminence, such as ‘archon’, ‘monarch’, ‘hierarchy’, and so forth, as well as being associated with origins and prime causes, like ‘architect’, ‘archetype’, ‘archaeology’, and whathaveyou.
Perhaps it should be spelled 'archaeonic'.
supernova power?
Supernova power... I dunno. I thought the idea was to get away from images of things that go bang.
Your suggestions have me thinking. Keep the ideas flowing.
One of the random thoughts that have been bouncing around in my head for a couple of days is the fact that hydrogen managed to keep a positive image even though Hydrogen bombs (H-bombs) are more powerful than the original nuclear bombs by a couple orders of magnitude.
Any thoughts on why that might be true?
Because there was already a pre-existing image of 'hydrogen' in the public mind? Although that surely would have been tarnished by the Hindenburg Zep disaster. Possibly because of it's subconcious association with water?
I like "supernova power."
Binding energy liberation.
Bound energy liberation.
Strong force energy.
Strong energy.
Heavy metal conversion.
Carbonless burning.
Oklo energy.
Oklo natural power.
Rod & Finrod - this is extremely entangled issue. First the name 'nuclear power' does bind with all kinds of images of archaic fears (and hopes!), alchemy, Frankenstein, eternal life/destruction and what not. Nuclear is emotionally powerful issue because of all this cultural baggage. See [1] for detailed discussion.
However I think these images were willfully exploited to portray the safest and the only scalable clean energy resource as some kind of evil.
[1] Nuclear Fear: A History of Images by Spencer R. Weart, http://www.amazon.com/Nuclear-Fe...t/dp/
0674628365
or deep space energy?
Either way it would be an interesting conversation explaining someone how we want to utilize supernova power or to extract the deep space energy or alike.
That would combine the power of wackiness together with something of a substance. Youtube may provide the proper audience.
Wow, Mr. Adams, you should hear todays Moneytalk (Bob Brinker on ABC radio). It's live right now, might be echo chamber music to you, but know that his audience is in the millions.
I'm a subscriber. I'm sure he'd be okay with me e-mailing you a copy for professional exerpts if you like. He should have you as a guest (most third of three hours are guests).
Subjects: nuclear power v. coal, a Wamco guy calls in about his work on _Nautilus_, etc.
Reese:
Please send me whatever you can. If you have a way to suggest guests for Moneytalk, you certainly have my permission to send them contact information.
BTW - it's just Rod.
Rod,
Watch for two roughly 7MB e-mails from me sent to rod underscore adams at symbol atomicinsights dot com. They are todays first and second hours of Moneytalk, commercial free.
Yours,
That's "today's" and "excerpt." Jeez. Can't spell/punctuate. Not as bad as the "loose" and "lose" problems on Depleted Cranium, though.
rod underscore adams at symbol atomicinsights dot com
This is the contact address given at
atomicinsights.com/contact.html.
"The mailbox is full."
Can you suggest a more appropriate address? Or clean it out and I re-send?
I'm at rrandlr at symbol concentric dot net (as is required to comment). At work, it is rpreese at symbol sandia dot gov. (I'm also trying to prevent 'bots from harvesting.)
Nuclear energy is not the basic energy of the universe. Conversion of hydrogen to iron yields some energy, but when this happens in a large star, the collapse of its core often yields more energy than all its hydrogen-fusing up till then.
Some of this gravitational energy is stored in uranium.
G.R.L. Cowan> Good point with the gravitation force transformation! This would be an argument for deep space energy or archeonic energy or such.
However IMHO all the 4 forces are fundamental the same, gravitation is not any more 'basic' than the strong force.
Here is something to bounce off you all.
How about "Adomic power" as in powered by Adoms? (Say it out loud and think about where I am coming from.)
Let's see....
Neutral power (from neutrons, twice over.. oh...)
Bineutral power
Einstein power
Star power
Stellar power
Terrestrial power (w/a William Tucker)
Fizz
Alchemy
Magic
NewFire
Phier
Barnstorming
... ok that was fun!
Thumbs down from me on "adomic", Rod: I pronounce my t's.
"Adomic Energy?" Hmmmmm. Hmm. Well, you're the proprietor here. You're a LCDR, Annapolis no less. You've proven your prowess in many matters (so to speak). My instinct around people like you is to say, "Swell idea."
Joffan, I like "neutral power," "fizz" and "alchemy," though that last would probably scare people as unnatural. "Phier" I don't get, other than an alternate spelling of the homonym.
How about one of my first two suggestions as an acronym. "Ring my BEL, baby!"
I don't believe rebranding is a good thing to try. The attempt would certainly fail, and would be spun by oil and gas interests as evidence of our guilty conscience.
Why yes, they would know better. What's your point?
NUCLEAR. Nuclear, nuclear, nuclear. Nuclear cachet. Nuclear climate-friendliness. Nuclear cleanliness and inexhaustibility.
Your last, Convert, "nuclear climate friendliness," sounds good, except for those of us that don't see the climate connection. That's not the point, though. So for marketing purposes, I can see it, if necessary.
Something non-climate that's close? "Nuclear enviro-care?" "Nucleo-sustainablility?" Jeesh: all my tries have too many syllables-- nothing wrong with syllables, but it's gotta be short and snappy.
Maybe I will just stick with Atomic for my corner of the business. I have been using that word as part of my company's brand for almost 15 years. I choose it carefully to point to a time when people had a positive view about the potential for benefits from splitting atoms and because I like alliteration.
The main reason for suggesting Adoms is that I can register that as a trademark and because it allows modern, lazy people an easier way to refer to Adams Atomic Engines, Inc.
(For those who did not notice, if you look at Adams and Atoms, they can each morph into Adoms by changing a single letter.)
Commenting by HaloScan
