http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-1194169/Set-controls-heart-Sun.html
It would be nice to see that reactor come online, even if it's just to tell the Middle East, Oil companies, et al. to go to Hell.
British Fusion reactor in the works...
- Thread starter msbae
- Start date
It would be nice to see that reactor come online, even if it's just to tell the Middle East, Oil companies, et al. to go to Hell.
Then there's polywell, funded by the U.S. Navy, which has passed every test so far but hasn't yet gotten the funding to build a full-sized model, which would be about 5 feet in diameter and cost around $200 million. Instead, the lab has recently gotten another $10 million or so to keep the lab running and build yet another scaled-down (30 cm dia.) test model, while proof of over-unity requires the 5-foot version. This type of fusion reactor, if proved to work, can also be configured as a spacecraft engine, not to mention being cheaper to build and operate than other types of proposed fusion reactors that may or may not ever work.
Polywell forum
Polywell forum
What nonsense.
The daily Mail is cut/pasting what ever drivel is fed to them like most uncritical populist rags.
As i explained earlier it will never work.
Thanks you Chardman for your invitation to TNZ.
I saw your masterbation post in TNZ.
I don't think I will be going back there soon.
The above fusion promise passage has been found every day in some publication or other for the last 50 years.Same old promises to keep the money flowing in.
ITER is a self sustaining white elephant juggarnaut.
Yes LCARS you are correct again.Robert Bussard was brave to say that the tokomak was a bad idea and only started to keep the usa inthe fusion race and admitted it was unworkable.Ever.
The polywell concept is affordable,small,compact and yet the morons in office will not cough up the measaly 200 million for proof of concept prototype yet can waste trillions on greedy theiving bankers.
Uh, no you didn't. You made some unsubstantiated claims. Never backed up a single assertion with a link.
Care to post a link to this post of mine? Just to refresh my memory? 'Cause I certainly don't remember posting in any masturbation thread. At least, not anytime in the last year or so. And if you went that far back in my posting history, well, I suggest you up your OCD meds.
Again the unsubstantiated claim.
But using your "magical science cost overrun estimation ratio" from the Mars Mission thread, wouldn't the actual cost of this proof of concept actually run closer to $888bn?
No.it would be about $1 billion.You seem to require a calculator.
As regards your masterbation post it seems i got your name mixed up with shatmandu which is very similar to chardman in sound.
I looked very quickly and to had avert my gaze and this might explain why chardman was remembered instead of shatmandu.
However you do seem to post sexually orientated posts so i was not to far of the mark.I see you had a post about G.A.Y's.
http://www.trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=96315&highlight=chardman
This is the post.
Backing with a link does not prove anything as then you could say the link is invalid or not peer reviewed.Thus when i assert something i do so only from my confidence in the broad spectrum of knowledge that exists.
Ah, so neither valid, nor peer reviewed, but just more unsubstantiated rumblings from an individual with a proven track record of academic fail in the fields of genetics, paleontology, weather control, computer science, and countless others.
You've failed more in just a little over two months than most people could manage in a year or more.
G.A.Y's? What the hell is that an acronym for? And did you mean for it to be plural or possessive?
I had a lecture about Fusion once, and the guy said that the tiles inside the reactor could, possibly, be made from old uranium rods. You see, the particles in the reactor go so fast that on impact they will smash existing atoms. If there's no atom, there's nothing to continue on radiation. It's almost a year ago but I'm positive this is what he said. Can any of you back me up on this?
Before you start yelling *it can't be, the guy was a moron blabla*... He's the head of the Dutch fusion organisation FOM, so I'm pretty sure he knows what he's talking about...
Before you start yelling *it can't be, the guy was a moron blabla*... He's the head of the Dutch fusion organisation FOM, so I'm pretty sure he knows what he's talking about...
Plecostomus
Commodore
FOM is also the sound it'll make when it blows up.
Kidding aside there is the idea of breaking down fission wastes in the plasma-stream.
First we got to build a working power plant then we can play around with it.
For the record, the internals will get as radioactive as a fission reactor and there will be neutron and gamma-ray leakage.
But the payoff is worth it, lots of thermal energy to convert to electrical power!
I can supply plentiful links but I feel you should look for this information yourself.In this way the information would not be biased in favour of me
if I were to supply it.
One physicist has after examining ITER said that the nonstatic confined plasma draws energy from the magnetic field coils making it non uniform hence leading to kinks and fizzle out of fusion reaction.
It does not matter how strong you make the field. any SLIGHT non uniformity will lead to kinks.
imagine a wet bar of soap.
imagine trying to balance a pencil on to it's point.
You do realize a plasma moving within a magnetic field interacts with it?
You see, that's not how debates work. Each side tries to present information to backup it's arguments and refute the information presented by the other side. Just saying "my arguments are valid" is not enough. You might as well just say "na uh". And then we could save alot of time and say " ya hu".
Noknowes-
Out of curiosity, do you have scientific training? You sound so certain on the point that it could never work. Just to have everything out in the open, my husband is a scientist (materials science and engineering, lots of laser and nano work) and we talk a lot about physics and whatnot.
My understanding has been that all we really need for a breakthrough is something that will contain something that is 4 million degrees kelvin, be it magnetic or laser in nature.
O course, as mentioned, the best solution would be to strip-mine the moon for He3 as we don't need to get it nearly as hot as hydrogen.
Even still, I think it's something that will be possible, no real knowing when, but I certainly don't understand someone simply stating that it is "impossible" without really explaining why. You seem to be basing your notion that it is impossible on the fact that it can't be done today, which seems a rather circular argument. Of course there's a lot of figuring out to do before we can pull it off, but to say it's impossible is, to be frank, bad science. What you need to remember is that it is theoretically possible, therefore the emotion invested in so vehemently denying its possibility simply doesn't made sense.
Sounds like you guys have been over the issue in another thread I'm unaware of, so I accept some of the vitriol here may relate to that.
Out of curiosity, do you have scientific training? You sound so certain on the point that it could never work. Just to have everything out in the open, my husband is a scientist (materials science and engineering, lots of laser and nano work) and we talk a lot about physics and whatnot.
My understanding has been that all we really need for a breakthrough is something that will contain something that is 4 million degrees kelvin, be it magnetic or laser in nature.
O course, as mentioned, the best solution would be to strip-mine the moon for He3 as we don't need to get it nearly as hot as hydrogen.
Even still, I think it's something that will be possible, no real knowing when, but I certainly don't understand someone simply stating that it is "impossible" without really explaining why. You seem to be basing your notion that it is impossible on the fact that it can't be done today, which seems a rather circular argument. Of course there's a lot of figuring out to do before we can pull it off, but to say it's impossible is, to be frank, bad science. What you need to remember is that it is theoretically possible, therefore the emotion invested in so vehemently denying its possibility simply doesn't made sense.
Sounds like you guys have been over the issue in another thread I'm unaware of, so I accept some of the vitriol here may relate to that.
Plecostomus
Commodore
My guess is he has some kind of interest in petrol futures or is a tool of the oil companies.
The oil companies spent billions if not trillions to ensure that nuclear fission energy would never become a viable option in the country they are most assuredly not above programming a few talking heads to poo-poo fusion.
Of course I could be wrong and he could be a graduate student with advanced physics degrees and possessing insight the rest of us don't have...
Being a Man Of Technical Learning I know we have a long way to go to get practical fusion energy going. But most of us here will see it in our lifetimes... The first handful of prototype plants anyway.
Took nuclear fission 50 years to get to the point that it is at today. If we weren't hounded by anti-fission wankers we'd have small plug-and-play liquid-metal-cooled direct thermal-to-electrical power plants everywhere. Nuclear photocell batteries powering electric trucks. Things of that nature.
But remember folks, the talking box on the wall says Nuclear Anything can and will explode at any time and kill us all with it's invisible rays of death.
The oil companies spent billions if not trillions to ensure that nuclear fission energy would never become a viable option in the country they are most assuredly not above programming a few talking heads to poo-poo fusion.
Of course I could be wrong and he could be a graduate student with advanced physics degrees and possessing insight the rest of us don't have...
Being a Man Of Technical Learning I know we have a long way to go to get practical fusion energy going. But most of us here will see it in our lifetimes... The first handful of prototype plants anyway.
Took nuclear fission 50 years to get to the point that it is at today. If we weren't hounded by anti-fission wankers we'd have small plug-and-play liquid-metal-cooled direct thermal-to-electrical power plants everywhere. Nuclear photocell batteries powering electric trucks. Things of that nature.
But remember folks, the talking box on the wall says Nuclear Anything can and will explode at any time and kill us all with it's invisible rays of death.
Not quite the way I'd put it but, that does convey what I was going to say in my retort.
