3 ms·
The ironic thing about all of this hype is that fusion isn't even inherently capable of maintaining a self-sustaining reaction! Unlike fission, which is a chain
by af3d 2y ago
The ironic thing about all of this hype is that fusion isn't even inherently capable of maintaining a self-sustaining reaction! Unlike fission, which is a chain-reaction process, fusion requires *huge* amounts of energy every single ignition cycle. Once the reactants fuse, that is it, time for the next cycle. The only way to "get fusion for free" is to have it occur in the middle of a massive object such as our Sun, as in that case the immense pressure is continuous and thus the reaction as well. But much like quantum-computing and other such fantasies which only serve to attract research and venture-capital funds. My advice? Don't donate a penny to these "causes". They are the NFT's of scientific research....
- pfdietz 2y agoThere are good reasons to be skeptical of fusion, but the argument you give isn't one of them.
- af3d 2y agoI would think "not capable of producing a net-positive yield" a pretty compelling reason. The field has been researched for more than half a century and yet to date we still have zero evidence this is even achievable. The limiting factor always comes down to sustaining the pressures and temperatures required to get the reaction to occur. Color me cynical, but I just don't see it. Perhaps you could provide some actual experimental results which support your specious allusions to my misunderstanding of the current state of the art?
- pfdietz 2y agoIt's not a reason, it's just your assertion. You didn't back it up. There is no physical reason to believe your assertion is true. Consider that someone could have (and many did) make the same argument about reusable launch vehicles. Then SpaceX put an end to that. You need to burrow more deeply to get to the real objections. They have to do with details of economics and engineering. Your facile approach doesn't cut it.
- af3d 2y agoSorry, the onus here is on you to provide a single shred of evidence to support the dubious claim that the technology is merely hindered by "details of economics and engineering". Fact: fusion reactions are not self-sustaining. Fact: we have never even come close to break-even. Fact: fusion research is a huge industry which attracts BILLIONS of dollars of funding every year (and hence there is little, if any, motivation for researchers to stop proselytizing fusion power). Your turn...