The US National Ignition Facility has achieved even higher energy yields since breaking even for the first time in 2022, but a practical fusion reactor is still a long way off
That’s because your comment is on a post that is literally one of the sources you’d get. More efficiency, overcoming total input, making it a generator, etc are all ancillary.
I am not saying nothing will never work, I am saying nothing that is currently being used, trialed, tested, presently or in the past, and the foreseeable future, will not work. That is a far cry from what you are accusing me of saying. I suggest you and a few others should read more critically and with less emotion when you disagree and you might not make such a gross misinterpretation of what was written.
This reads kind of like Derrida, or JB Peterson, where it almost seems like the goal is to deliberately avoid communicating in a way that is clear. To paraphrase, “You all misinterpret what I say, not because I’m bad at communication but because you all are.” If one person misunderstands or misinterprets, maybe that’s on them. If everyone does, it’s more likely that it’s on you.
Why will a tokamak never work, exactly? We’ve been running fusion experiments in them for 60 years and have a pretty good idea that we can make one big enough to produce power. We’re just baby stepping through the work so we don’t build a $30 billion dollar power plant that’s missing a design element.
K-DEMO, JT-60, DEMO, CFETR, STEP, and the US DoE’s planned reactor suggest a high level of confidence that the science is already there. It’s just an engineering problem, much like the nuclear bomb in 1935.
Oh ye master of nuclear material engineering, please share what you know so that multiple countries with teams of experts don’t spend billions of dollars for a complete failure. (I worked for an ITER subcontractor numbnuts)
Asking for a citation gets downvoted? Wow, that is scary. Am I in the midst of a bunch of Luddites?
That’s because your comment is on a post that is literally one of the sources you’d get. More efficiency, overcoming total input, making it a generator, etc are all ancillary.
I mean … the article is literally what it’s about.
You’re being downvoted because you’re being a cynical contrarian.
Asking For A citation is not being cynical.
You Don’t know the difference between cynical and skeptical.
Saying nothing will ever work ever and nothing is ever good is not being skeptical.
The article you’re commenting on is the citation, you’re being cynical and acting in bad faith.
People disagree with you, I’d wager if you used a little more tact you might have more reasonable discussion.
I am not saying nothing will never work, I am saying nothing that is currently being used, trialed, tested, presently or in the past, and the foreseeable future, will not work. That is a far cry from what you are accusing me of saying. I suggest you and a few others should read more critically and with less emotion when you disagree and you might not make such a gross misinterpretation of what was written.
Sure sounds like never.
Which part of the word ALMOST is where you lost your way?
Ah right, you left open the possibility that maybe in a billion years it might work. You sure got us. Fuck off.
Emotional little guy aren’t you?
This reads kind of like Derrida, or JB Peterson, where it almost seems like the goal is to deliberately avoid communicating in a way that is clear. To paraphrase, “You all misinterpret what I say, not because I’m bad at communication but because you all are.” If one person misunderstands or misinterprets, maybe that’s on them. If everyone does, it’s more likely that it’s on you.
Another failure at reading without emotion. No wonder people think fission is a sure thing.
This article is about fusion, not fission.
And I believe we’ve reached the point where everyone can recognize that Philo is arguing in bad faith.
“And it is almost a certainty not to be ever in the lifetime of man.”
Let’s just sliiiiide those goalposts a few hundred more feet huh?
And how long do you think man is gonna last the way things are going?
Why will a tokamak never work, exactly? We’ve been running fusion experiments in them for 60 years and have a pretty good idea that we can make one big enough to produce power. We’re just baby stepping through the work so we don’t build a $30 billion dollar power plant that’s missing a design element.
K-DEMO, JT-60, DEMO, CFETR, STEP, and the US DoE’s planned reactor suggest a high level of confidence that the science is already there. It’s just an engineering problem, much like the nuclear bomb in 1935.
Oh ye master of nuclear material engineering, please share what you know so that multiple countries with teams of experts don’t spend billions of dollars for a complete failure. (I worked for an ITER subcontractor numbnuts)
you just disqualified yourself from further conversation. (I’ll let you figure out why.)