I have a question for you fusion experts. I am reading about a lot of new approaches to fusion energy by governments and companies. There is ITER of course, the Stellerator, MIT's smaller Tokamaks,Boron based fusion, shock wave approaches and others. Hopefully I am spelling and or describing them properly. I do understand there is good reason for a lot of skepticism about whether these will ultimately work. But as experts looking at these technologies do you find any of them have a glimmer of hope? Which one might, and I emphasize might, work? And why might one of these potentially work? I figured I might as well ask the experts.
Comments
NIF baby, send in your dollar bills and I will make you rich. There might be a few other things you need you to do, but hey you get the drift. The point is with all the global warming and stuff the world could end if you do create alternative energy sources, so you can get rich if you play your cards right. NIF could work but you really need to do is go get some NIF people and go to Facebook or Google, tell them that NIF could be THE energy of the future and could stop racism or whatever on top of that. Get a few billion or two for some instagram or Facebook posts about how FUSION saves the world, bash the fash and get a few big tax right offs. Gets some money and sure NIF fails in 10 years like everything else but you got the money and can feel great.
The point is NIF is the only game in town. ITER, well stay far away baby, that is not a drug you want. Sure there might be some other ways to play this game. Look the quantum computing crew they are doing well, just look at all the startups. Sure quantum computing will never work nor will Fusion but you can get rich trying. Get rich or die trying as they say, death is certain but getting rich is not, so you know what's gotta be done, so do it, you have my blessing.
Hey, do not get met wrong, I played the game with crypto and it worked out pretty well, I personally think it is all a scam but it worked for me so fusion could work for you. Stay positive, the world is a will to power and nothing else.
Ok let me be a bit more blunt, if fusion was going to work it would have worked like 40 years ago. If QC could have worked it would have worked 20 years ago. In other words this stuff will never ever work. I would look at better options photon to energy conversion, smart engines, better materials for transport over wires. I simply do not see fusion ever being something that is going to replace current energy sources. NIF is kind of argument why this stuff cannot work. We have have been looking at fusion for energy for like 60 years and all we have is something is single shot at NIF which gives any
11/19/2021 4:54 PM
I saw the moon so what is your point? Last time I checked the moon was not powered by a nuclear fusion reactor, it moves by like a pinball not a nuclear power plant.
Actually, dude, the surface temperature of the moon is indeed powered by a fusion reactor. As is all living plant life on our planet. You should have paid attention to your fifth-grade science lectures, instead of launching spitballs at that guy in the first row.
Hey dude, like no. The moon is known give off its own radiation that is why it is well know that moonlight cools things down as opposed to sunlight that heats thing up. So no the moons temperature is not controlled by a fusion reactor and the moon does not move by a fusion jet pack. It is like a pinball that is trapped in a bouncing path that repeats.
https://www.reddit.com/r/space/comments/43l25n/why_does_moonlight_seem_to_be_colder_than_the/
Why does moonlight seem to be colder than the shade??? A friend of mine did an experiment he seen on the internet and his results (as with loads of other peoples) show about 2C difference!
Nope wrong again, how about a Venus fly trap, red algae, or triffids.
Very comical. First you mistake "noon" for "moon," and then you tout some bananas idea about moonlight being "colder than shade." How about moonlight happens during the night, while shade happens during the day? All very nice parody, but I'm afraid you might find some takers among this crowd of crazies.
What makes you think it was a parody?
11/23/2021 2:12 PM
Because I don't like to believe that anyone posting on a national laboratory blog is that stupid.
You need to read more of the posts and comments.
11/23/2021 5:39 PM
A lot dumber things have been said by LANL mangers for many years. Yes you should believe people that stupid do work at an NNSA lab.
It would seem important to confirm the result, if it such a great milestone.
I have been wondering whether the impressive NIF result can be repeated.
It would seem important to confirm the result, if it such a great milestone.
11/30/2021 11:53 AM
One out of three is not great statistics.