Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Guardian)   The time has come for nuclear fusion   (guardian.co.uk) divider line 72
    More: Obvious, nuclear fusions  
•       •       •

6768 clicks; posted to Geek » on 16 Sep 2012 at 6:19 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



72 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-09-16 04:40:24 PM  
Nuc-u-lar...
 
2012-09-16 04:44:07 PM  
Looks like it's all coming together nicely.
 
2012-09-16 04:48:45 PM  
I think moderately sized examples of current nuclear fusion technology should be liberally distributed across the surface of the planet
 
2012-09-16 05:14:54 PM  
Again. I'll believe it when they are up and running.
 
2012-09-16 05:53:02 PM  

basemetal: Again. I'll believe it when they are up and running.


Yeah, but there is actually a plant under construction this time.
 
2012-09-16 06:22:01 PM  
Holy shiat.
 
2012-09-16 06:25:44 PM  
I can't wait!
I wonder what they are going to do when the entire earth begins to fuse?
Fusion/containment, choose one of two...
 
2012-09-16 06:28:50 PM  

basemetal: Again. I'll believe it when they are up and running.


This. Just another "a few years around the corner" piece of tech that happens again every few years.
 
2012-09-16 06:29:17 PM  
As the sun has an extremely low energy output per cubic meter (about 18 watts per cubic meter), why exactly do we consider this such an exciting technology anyways?
 
2012-09-16 06:32:17 PM  

MindStalker: As the sun has an extremely low energy output per cubic meter (about 18 watts per cubic meter), why exactly do we consider this such an exciting technology anyways?


Try doing that math just for the portion of the Sun where fusion is actually occurring.
 
2012-09-16 06:33:29 PM  
Well, this is a step forward. For the last 50 years fusion has been 20 years away. Now it's only 10 years away.

So maybe in my lifetime.
 
2012-09-16 06:33:36 PM  
Funny how technology that hasn't been invented is always described as being safe, clean, and having no side effects.
 
2012-09-16 06:36:09 PM  
All we need is some ice-nine and we're in business!
 
2012-09-16 06:39:31 PM  
I want a power station that uses a quantum singularity instead.
 
2012-09-16 06:47:40 PM  

Gergesa: I want a power station that uses a quantum singularity instead.


I have a working model of one of those. I just need $10,000 to iron out a few loose ends. I'll let you get in on the ground floor. I - that is - we will make millions.
 
2012-09-16 06:47:44 PM  

MindStalker: As the sun has an extremely low energy output per cubic meter (about 18 watts per cubic meter), why exactly do we consider this such an exciting technology anyways?


That's the point. We have to create conditions far more extreme than the center of a star for fusion to be an energy source on Earth. Unless we come up with fusion-bomb-wind windmill generators.

MrEricSir: Funny how technology that hasn't been invented is always described as being safe, clean, and having no side effects.


Well, I'd like to see who honestly thinks that. Nuclear activation of the structure will leave us with radioactive waste too, but it's far less dangerous than the current fission mess.

Mr. Eugenides: Well, this is a step forward. For the last 50 years fusion has been 20 years away. Now it's only 10 years away.

So maybe in my lifetime.


It's a tough nut to crack. These guys are interesting

http://www.generalfusion.com/

revrendjim: MindStalker: As the sun has an extremely low energy output per cubic meter (about 18 watts per cubic meter), why exactly do we consider this such an exciting technology anyways?

Try doing that math just for the portion of the Sun where fusion is actually occurring.


OK, but this doesn't help us on Earth.
 
2012-09-16 06:48:55 PM  
I say we do it manhattan project style.
Build a city in the desert, relocate the worlds smartest people there, give them everything they need and put the military in charge with "get results at all costs" orders.
...and don't fret the bill, because it's going to be pricy.

/but you'll get what you want.
/after you make the energy available, the next trick is making a better way to carry it.
 
2012-09-16 06:50:36 PM  
 
2012-09-16 06:50:48 PM  
yeah, but China has a stranglehold on the dilithium crystal market.
 
2012-09-16 06:50:50 PM  

MindStalker: As the sun has an extremely low energy output per cubic meter (about 18 watts per cubic meter), why exactly do we consider this such an exciting technology anyways?


The vast majority of the sun isn't undergoing fusion. The purpose of a fusion reactor is to create a plasma that is almost entirely undergoing fusion.

taurusowner: This. Just another "a few years around the corner" piece of tech that happens again every few years.


The difference is that there has been real progress in fusion technology. JET has taught us a lot about the actual challenges.

It sucks that the early decades of research completely underestimated the technological challenge. They were mislead by the jump from fission bomb to fission reactor, and assumed that the jump from fusion bomb to fusion reactor would be similar.
 
2012-09-16 06:52:27 PM  

MrEricSir: Funny how technology that hasn't been invented is always described as being safe, clean, and having no side effects.


Safe and clean are relative.
 
2012-09-16 06:58:58 PM  

Gergesa: I want a power station that uses a quantum singularity instead.


Meh. Amateur.

www.stargate-sg1-solutions.com
 
2012-09-16 07:02:03 PM  

Quantum Apostrophe: MindStalker: As the sun has an extremely low energy output per cubic meter (about 18 watts per cubic meter), why exactly do we consider this such an exciting technology anyways?

That's the point. We have to create conditions far more extreme than the center of a star for fusion to be an energy source on Earth. Unless we come up with fusion-bomb-wind windmill generators.

MrEricSir: Funny how technology that hasn't been invented is always described as being safe, clean, and having no side effects.

Well, I'd like to see who honestly thinks that. Nuclear activation of the structure will leave us with radioactive waste too, but it's far less dangerous than the current fission mess.

Mr. Eugenides: Well, this is a step forward. For the last 50 years fusion has been 20 years away. Now it's only 10 years away.

So maybe in my lifetime.

It's a tough nut to crack. These guys are interesting

http://www.generalfusion.com/

revrendjim: MindStalker: As the sun has an extremely low energy output per cubic meter (about 18 watts per cubic meter), why exactly do we consider this such an exciting technology anyways?

Try doing that math just for the portion of the Sun where fusion is actually occurring.

OK, but this doesn't help us on Earth.


We're probably not going to pursue gravitational confinement.
 
2012-09-16 07:04:59 PM  

taurusowner: basemetal: Again. I'll believe it when they are up and running.

This. Just another "a few years around the corner" piece of tech that happens again every few years.


Yep. The main problem is fuelling, you need a meta-material that can both survive in the reactor chamber and only release on the second proton (I think it's proton could be neutron I admit... Don't have that issue of SciAm to hand) hit, not the first or it'll over-fuel.
 
2012-09-16 07:07:18 PM  

basemetal: Again. I'll believe it when they are up and running.


At a net gain.

You can make a working fusion machine in your garage if you have $1500 and a few weekends. But it produces a lot less energy than it takes to start running.
 
2012-09-16 07:17:17 PM  
i76.photobucket.com
 
2012-09-16 07:25:46 PM  
No dbz references?

/leaving disapoint
 
2012-09-16 07:42:55 PM  
In three years we'll be able to harness the power of the atom from our household garbage.
 
2012-09-16 07:50:25 PM  
Three more years.
blogs.discovermagazine.com
 
2012-09-16 07:56:10 PM  
Call me when there's a Mr Fusion for my Delorean....
 
2012-09-16 07:56:58 PM  

Nem Wan: Three more years.
[blogs.discovermagazine.com image 500x317]


Damn you!!!!
/I hadn't refreshed in a while....
 
2012-09-16 07:58:48 PM  
LFTR
 
2012-09-16 08:16:49 PM  
I'm waiting for the eventual rip into the fabric of space when it explodes
 
2012-09-16 08:22:03 PM  

MindStalker: As the sun has an extremely low energy output per cubic meter (about 18 watts per cubic meter), why exactly do we consider this such an exciting technology anyways?


Keep stalking that mind you're after, friend. One day you'll catch it.
 
2012-09-16 08:23:28 PM  

GAT_00: basemetal: Again. I'll believe it when they are up and running.

Yeah, but there is actually a plant under construction this time.


There have been fusion plants "up and running". They just haven't been able to generate enough energy to be viable.

Link
 
2012-09-16 08:25:27 PM  

diaphoresis: I'm waiting for the eventual rip into the fabric of space when it explodes


upload.wikimedia.org
 
2012-09-16 08:29:02 PM  

MrEricSir: Funny how technology that hasn't been invented is always described as being safe, clean, and having no side effects.


The technology DOES exist to produce a fusion powered reactor, has existed in some form since 1946.
HOWEVER it is not economical at this point since the reactor uses more power to produce the reactiom than it produces itself.
This is what they are working on, once they can make the reactor produce more energy than it uses to generate the fusion reaction THEN it will go into commercial usage.
It's not even hard to produce the reaction itself, it's just hard to make it self-sufficient.
example: http://www.grandchallengestories.org/stories/story/39

ALOT of Universities have small scale experimental fusion reactors, but until they become economically feasible, that is where they will stay.
 
2012-09-16 08:30:58 PM  

Quantum Apostrophe: diaphoresis: I'm waiting for the eventual rip into the fabric of space when it explodes

[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x342]


At least we'll be in a parallel reality where that book would be right....

The human race sucks...
 
2012-09-16 08:44:32 PM  
I'm still holding out for Polywell fusion..
 
2012-09-16 08:51:53 PM  
Fortunately, before they make the reactor they'll create the time machine, and by going through endless loops they'll have the reactor in no time!

/they just have to make sure they don't meet themselves or...
//...I've said too much!!!
 
2012-09-16 08:53:46 PM  
How has this reference not yet been made?

images4.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2012-09-16 08:57:17 PM  
Wait... did a science article from a major newspaper actually demonstrate scientific literacy above a grammar-school level, and not say anything blatantly physically impossible?

Huh. Better measure my walk to the nearest bomb shelter and buying those phosphor-tipped anti-zombie rounds for the .40, then. Anyone know where you can get a lot of canned food at a discount?
 
2012-09-16 09:26:43 PM  

Jim_Callahan: Wait... did a science article from a major newspaper actually demonstrate scientific literacy above a grammar-school level, and not say anything blatantly physically impossible?


That's the Guardian for you. They make the NY Times look like The Sun.
 
2012-09-16 09:36:04 PM  

revrendjim: MindStalker: As the sun has an extremely low energy output per cubic meter (about 18 watts per cubic meter), why exactly do we consider this such an exciting technology anyways?

Try doing that math just for the portion of the Sun where fusion is actually occurring.


Sadly, that only jumps us to a bit over 200 W/m3 at the Sun's center. However, as noted, we're not worried about gravitational confinement; magnetic and electric confinement are a whole lot more powerful.

Nature created an awesome fusion reactor for nature. We have to take the next few steps ourselves...
 
2012-09-16 09:55:07 PM  

diaphoresis: Quantum Apostrophe: diaphoresis: I'm waiting for the eventual rip into the fabric of space when it explodes

[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x342]

At least we'll be in a parallel reality where that book would be right....

The human race sucks...


I'm waiting for someone to come up with a simple way of tapping dark energy and changing it to useful work - only to find that the energy they can harvest is only several times the average density of matter in the universe per cubic meter. Which happens to be very, very low.
 
2012-09-16 09:59:04 PM  
If fusion puts atoms together and creates energy, and fission breaks molecules apart to create energy, what if we just connected a fission reactor and a fusion reactor?
i3.kym-cdn.com
See more on Know Your Meme
 
2012-09-16 10:00:04 PM  

Scruffinator: [i76.photobucket.com image 640x480]


Heh, I had a teacher who had a drift boat named "Cirrhosis of the River".

/he was an ace blackboard eraser pitcher
 
2012-09-16 10:13:28 PM  

Dr. Nick Riviera: How has this reference not yet been made?

[images4.wikia.nocookie.net image 128x85]


I only came here for this.
 
2012-09-16 10:15:04 PM  

Dr. Nick Riviera: How has this reference not yet been made?

[images4.wikia.nocookie.net image 128x85]


If it makes you feel better, this is what I came here for.

/leaving satisfied
 
2012-09-16 10:19:24 PM  
Gergesa: I want a power station that uses a quantum singularity instead.

Nonsense, those are used to power the farcasters!
 
Displayed 50 of 72 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report