The US National Ignition Facility has achieved even higher energy yields since breaking even for the first time in 2022, but a practical fusion reactor is still a long way off
I mean, it’s what the whole article is about. If you mean successfully generating sustainable electricity from fusion then yeah, maybe. Maybe not. People said flight was impossible too, you never know.
I am not saying anying will never work, I am saying nothing that is currently being used, trialed, tested, presently or in the past, and the foreseeable future, will not work. That is a far cry from what you are accusing me of saying. I suggest you and a few others should read more critically and with less emotion when you disagree and you might not make such a gross misinterpretation of what was written.
This reads kind of like Derrida, or JB Peterson, where it almost seems like the goal is to deliberately avoid communicating in a way that is clear. To paraphrase, “You all misinterpret what I say, not because I’m bad at communication but because you all are.” If one person misunderstands or misinterprets, maybe that’s on them. If everyone does, it’s more likely that it’s on you.
Why will a tokamak never work, exactly? We’ve been running fusion experiments in them for 60 years and have a pretty good idea that we can make one big enough to produce power. We’re just baby stepping through the work so we don’t build a $30 billion dollar power plant that’s missing a design element.
K-DEMO, JT-60, DEMO, CFETR, STEP, and the US DoE’s planned reactor suggest a high level of confidence that the science is already there. It’s just an engineering problem, much like the nuclear bomb in 1935.
That’s because your comment is on a post that is literally one of the sources you’d get. More efficiency, overcoming total input, making it a generator, etc are all ancillary.
It already has?
Citation please.
Got 'em
Those crazy sons of bitches actually did it!
Can’t drink it though, tastes like burning.
I mean, it’s what the whole article is about. If you mean successfully generating sustainable electricity from fusion then yeah, maybe. Maybe not. People said flight was impossible too, you never know.
We’ve harnessed the power of fusion in nuclear weapons for decades already.
We’ve literally put it in a small container.
You never know is the crack in the armor that allows snake oil salesmen and other charlatans in.
Combined with actual progress and scientific methods “you never know” is how you fly helicopters on other planets too.
You’re calling the US National Ignition Facility at LLNI snake oil salesmen?
Explain exactly how I did that.
Bro 😭
I’m all for skepticism but, like, how are you gonna hoodwink someone into nuclear fusion power? Can that even happen?
Reminds me of the Librarian in W40K, “An open mind is like a fortress with its gates unbarred and unguarded.”
The technology exists. There’s huge funding going into it recently. Europe’s ITER project is working towards it also, but in a different way.
The only major issue faced right now is how to increase the efficiency.
Yes, and that is the problem that isn’t going to be surmounted anytime soon if at all.
It is being surmounted now. Slowly but surely, it’s happening. And progress is accelerating also.
Citation please.
https://www.google.com/search?q=fusion+news
Citation?
Do you want me to cite all of nuclear science?
No, just the rate of improvement in efficiency of fusion reactors.
the reactor exist, isn’t comercially viable but it exist
November 1, 1952. Enewetak Atoll.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivy_Mike
Asking for a citation gets downvoted? Wow, that is scary. Am I in the midst of a bunch of Luddites?
I mean … the article is literally what it’s about.
You’re being downvoted because you’re being a cynical contrarian.
Asking For A citation is not being cynical.
You Don’t know the difference between cynical and skeptical.
Saying nothing will ever work ever and nothing is ever good is not being skeptical.
The article you’re commenting on is the citation, you’re being cynical and acting in bad faith.
People disagree with you, I’d wager if you used a little more tact you might have more reasonable discussion.
I am not saying anying will never work, I am saying nothing that is currently being used, trialed, tested, presently or in the past, and the foreseeable future, will not work. That is a far cry from what you are accusing me of saying. I suggest you and a few others should read more critically and with less emotion when you disagree and you might not make such a gross misinterpretation of what was written.
This reads kind of like Derrida, or JB Peterson, where it almost seems like the goal is to deliberately avoid communicating in a way that is clear. To paraphrase, “You all misinterpret what I say, not because I’m bad at communication but because you all are.” If one person misunderstands or misinterprets, maybe that’s on them. If everyone does, it’s more likely that it’s on you.
Another failure at reading without emotion. No wonder people think fusion is a sure thing.
Sure sounds like never.
Which part of the word ALMOST is where you lost your way?
“And it is almost a certainty not to be ever in the lifetime of man.”
Let’s just sliiiiide those goalposts a few hundred more feet huh?
And how long do you think man is gonna last the way things are going?
Why will a tokamak never work, exactly? We’ve been running fusion experiments in them for 60 years and have a pretty good idea that we can make one big enough to produce power. We’re just baby stepping through the work so we don’t build a $30 billion dollar power plant that’s missing a design element.
K-DEMO, JT-60, DEMO, CFETR, STEP, and the US DoE’s planned reactor suggest a high level of confidence that the science is already there. It’s just an engineering problem, much like the nuclear bomb in 1935.
Removed by mod
That’s because your comment is on a post that is literally one of the sources you’d get. More efficiency, overcoming total input, making it a generator, etc are all ancillary.