MIT students are part of the large team that achieved fusion ignition for the first time in a laboratory.
https://scitechdaily.com/mit-contributes-to-success-of-historic-fusion-ignition-experiment/amp/
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts you viewed tbe most last 30 days
-
LGBT intolerance problem at Sandia? I was just checking glassdoor.com and noticed several comments suggesting intolerance to LGBT at Sandia...
-
So did you SSVSP and why? Give details.
-
“Raise a concern, get blackballed then lose your job and benefits…” “…instead of raising your concerns just leverage on your skills and go t...
12 comments:
Hell yes. NIF is how fusion is done, how fusion works and how fusion will work.
Any chance that some of those MIT students took some notes on the record breaking shot that would reveal how to repeat the feat?
HaHaHaHaHa1 Nice one! NIF is how fusion will never be done. NIF is how weapon secondaries are done.
“Controlled” sorta-kinda implies that it can repeated. Thus far it hasn’t been.
HaHaHaHaHa1 Nice one! NIF is how fusion will never be done. NIF is how weapon secondaries are done.
9/19/2022 5:21 PM
Excuse me but unless you are an MIT student you do not have much to add. These are the smartest students on the planet and they just got the first fusion shot. That should be celebrated not derided.
Oh BS. So no one but MIT students knows anything about the subject? And you've measured the "smartness" of MIT students against those of other major US universities and foreign as well, and they're better by objective (i.e, scientific) measurement? Ha.
Oh BS. So no one but MIT students knows anything about the subject? And you've measured the "smartness" of MIT students against those of other major US universities and foreign as well, and they're better by objective (i.e, scientific) measurement? Ha.
9/21/2022 7:56 PM
It is an objective fact that MIT students are the best or amongst the very best in the world. Of course the argument still
holds for students from Harvard, Caltech and Princeton. I just find it sort of funny that your have people with only a bs from Cal Poly and and MS in from UC Davis saying how NIF totally does not work and so on when they actually know very little about it just from reading some of the inane comments made about NIF on this blog. You can say what you want but NIF has achieved many of its goals and will likely complete many more if not all the attended goals. NIF is considered a success by scientific community. In your mind NIF will always be a failure no matter what is done because you simply do not like this line of work or you have some personal with NIF. One thing is clear is that you really do not know what NIF was designed to do, what the goals where and the implications for a variety of applied or basic science. I think the blog is nice way to discuss NIF including the current status to reproduce the Aug shot
and new directions but you just throw out "NIF is bad" without any real argumentation to back it up.
NIF [sic] has thus far taken 5x longer to produce 1/10 the stated output at 10x the proposed cost. While it may be a popular playground for physicists, it is an abject failure as an energy source. Despite all the misdirection it has never been a good bet, and should never have been funded.
Despite all of you naysayers, NIF has achieved its goal -- keeping the doors open at Livermore.
I'll bet that many more UC Davis than MIT students have contributed to NIF.
I'll bet that many more UC Davis than MIT students have contributed to NIF.
9/23/2022 3:21 PM
Quality is better than quantity.
"NIF [sic] has thus far taken 5x longer to produce 1/10 the stated output at 10x the proposed cost. While it may be a popular playground for physicists, it is an abject failure as an energy source. Despite all the misdirection it has never been a good bet, and should never have been funded.
9/22/2022 8:00 AM"
I am sensing some bitterness on your part.
Post a Comment