Jump to content

Fusion Power Is Here. Maybe?

TrustMe

By TrustMe
in Free Fire Zone

 Share

Recommended Posts

TrustMe Crew

TrustMe

Posted
  • Author
Posted

My post is a more modern one than the one you posted. The new post did say that the experiment did output more energy than was input in.

sunday Hierophant Lord

sunday

Posted
Posted (edited)

Nope, that was the old post. 

Let me quote your more modern post:
 

Quote

An experiment carried out on 8 August yielded 1.35 megajoules (MJ) of energy - around 70% of the laser energy delivered to the fuel capsule. Reaching ignition means getting a fusion yield that's greater than the 1.9 MJ put in by the laser.

This more modern post also makes a reference to the previous result:

Quote

But in 2013, the BBC reported that during experiments at NIF, the amount of energy released through fusion had exceeded the amount of energy absorbed by the fuel - a breakthrough and a first for any fusion facility in the world. Results from these tests were later published in the journal Nature.


Also, let me guess, you did not study Physics.

Edited by sunday
sunday Hierophant Lord

sunday

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, TrustMe said:

Your post says it was made in "year 2013". Mine says this year.

The article you linked says:
 

Quote

An experiment carried out on 8 August yielded 1.35 megajoules (MJ) of energy - around 70% of the laser energy delivered to the fuel capsule. Reaching ignition means getting a fusion yield that's greater than the 1.9 MJ put in by the laser.

So this writing of yours is clearly false:
 

Quote

A team in the US has built a fusion device that produces more power than what was put in to generate it.

 

DB Crew

DB

Posted
Posted

The reporting seems to be a little confused, but it's a bit harsh to question the poster's credentials when they're trying to report third-hand something that has been pre-mangled by the BBC.

You might expect something calling itself "phys.org" to be a lot better at this, but it's also a bit confusing. 

https://phys.org/news/2021-08-major-nuclear-fusion-milestone-ignition.html

Quote

While the latest experiment still required more energy in than it got out, it is the first to reach the crucial stage of 'ignition', which allowed considerably more energy to be produced than ever before, and paves the way for 'break even', where the energy in is matched by the energy out.

This article does not define "ignition" clearly, seemingly basing it on a specific energy output, which seems odd. Nevertheless, they claim ignition was achieved even though break even is not.

I see this as being more of a "look at me" statement as inertial confinement-based fusion has been a bit quiet compared to the recent stuff surrounding tokamaks and their variants.

DB Crew

DB

Posted
Posted

Disclaimer: I worked on a relatively low-powered laser confinement experiment in the summer of 1988. Our experiment didn't work properly, either.

sunday Hierophant Lord

sunday

Posted
Posted (edited)

DB, for some posters' credentials to be questioned, there need to be some credentials at all, and I was expecting a better understanding of the written English language from someone that claims to be English. So I asked for clarification in my first post, but the original poster doubled down, with the results that should have been expected.

Edited by sunday
sunday Hierophant Lord

sunday

Posted
Posted

Moreover, in order for ICF to work the amount of fusion-generated energy needs to be double or triple the amount of laser energy expended. Unless that is achieved, there is no surplus energy to power the lasers, and to sell to the public.

TrustMe Crew

TrustMe

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, sunday said:

DB, for some posters' credentials to be questioned, there need to be some credentials at all, and I was expecting a better understanding of the written English language from someone that claims to be English. So I asked for clarification in my first post, but the original poster doubled down, with the results that should have been expected.

You should of been more open about you're first post instead of simply saying "Really" and not giving me any more data.

As for the article I believe that if we get a working fusion power source - assuming it doesn't produce any radiation. Could give us the ability to go into outer space and colonize the solar system.

Edited by TrustMe
sunday Hierophant Lord

sunday

Posted
Posted

Are you going to apologize, or are you going to keep trying to deflect and put the fault in yours truly?

TrustMe Crew

TrustMe

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I have nothing to apologise for. At the same time though I don't fight endless flame wars so I won't be responding to anything you post on this topic that's negative. Life's to short.

glenn239 Hierophant Lord

glenn239

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, sunday said:

Moreover, in order for ICF to work the amount of fusion-generated energy needs to be double or triple the amount of laser energy expended. Unless that is achieved, there is no surplus energy to power the lasers, and to sell to the public.

So, to sum up, it always seems promising, it's always 10 years away from working and it always absorbs more than it gives back. 

Fusion, the Socialism of energy sources.

sunday Hierophant Lord

sunday

Posted
Posted
Just now, glenn239 said:

So, to sum up, it always seems promising, it's always 10 years away from working and it always absorbs more than it gives back. 

Fusion, the Socialism of energy sources.

Barring some new, revolutionary advance, yes. Also provides some high class engineering welfare to, for instance, ITER personnel, with no end on sight.

In the meanwhile, tried and trustworthy nuclear fission is being demonized.

sunday Hierophant Lord

sunday

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, TrustMe said:

I have nothing to apologise for. At the same time though I don't fight endless flame wars so I won't be responding to anything you post on this topic that's negative. Life's to short.

Well, writing less than truthful statements is something one could apologize for.

Sorry if your feelings were hurt, but feelings have an energy content of 0 Joules.

DB Crew

DB

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, sunday said:

DB, for some posters' credentials to be questioned, there need to be some credentials at all, and I was expecting a better understanding of the written English language from someone that claims to be English. So I asked for clarification in my first post, but the original poster doubled down, with the results that should have been expected.

This isn't really the place to discuss manners, and this is very mild compared to much that happens in the FFZ, I feel it was appropriate to suggest that your response looked a bit heavy-handed, and it prompted a response from TrustMe that could have been expected. Now you're both in a position where ego overcomes good manners, and sadly this topic becomes just another FFZ casualty.

sunday Hierophant Lord

sunday

Posted
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, DB said:

This isn't really the place to discuss manners, and this is very mild compared to much that happens in the FFZ, I feel it was appropriate to suggest that your response looked a bit heavy-handed, and it prompted a response from TrustMe that could have been expected. Now you're both in a position where ego overcomes good manners, and sadly this topic becomes just another FFZ casualty.

Fair enough. I think you did a good, polite, and courteous thing.

I am still not sure that the grate sight could tolerate more than one Stuart.
 

Edited by sunday
  • 3 months later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...