Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

China’s ‘Artificial Sun’ achieves fusion breakthrough

en.people.cn

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 235 posts

Re: China’s ‘Artificial Sun’ achieves fusion breakthrough

#91

Post by CamperBob2 »

marshray wrote: post #30
jimmaswell wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "nuclear waste is.. nuclear waste" bit is a thoughtless, easy jab that plays on the unfounded fear of nuclear energy. Safely stored nuclear waste isn't a danger to anybody. I also don't like how the rest of the video continues to try to put nuclear in a bad light, going as far as implying it's not "clean energy".

> Safely stored nuclear waste isn't a danger to anybody. You can not claim that without a credible plan to store it until it's no longer hot, however long that takes.

Put it in Antarctica.

Re: China’s ‘Artificial Sun’ achieves fusion breakthrough

#92

Post by sonium »

kybernetikos wrote: post #84

I would love to see a huge effort towards fusion, on the same (or even greater) scale as the Manhattan project or the Apollo program. I had been disappointed in the way that fusion always seemed to be 30 years away no matter how many years went past, but I just assumed that that was because the science was hard and just the way it had to be. https://i.imgur.com/sjH5r.jpg https://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/Article…

This might sound a bit like a buzz-kill, but I don't think fusion power is necessarily competitively cheap. I think it will be comparable to nuclear power with a ~ 10 times higher capital investment to build a fusion-plant. Already now solar is said to be cheaper then nuclear. But nevertheless humanity should explore fusion since it is more or less the only significant power source not (indrectly) depending on the sun. As far as I can see the funding of fusion research is at about the same level as particle physics which definilty does not provide any other than philosophical progress.

Re: China’s ‘Artificial Sun’ achieves fusion breakthrough

#93

Post by oelmekki »

espadrine wrote: post #81
narrator wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was a reddit AMA in 2011 where a guy went to China and got stem cell treatments for his paralysis[1] and could walk now. Nobody on Reddit believed him. They basically spent the whole AMA trying to tell him it didn't happen. Then America did it 2016 and everyone was like "The Future is here and we did it first!"[2]. No, the future is already here, it's just not evenly distributed, or maybe it's already happening…

We do tend to diminish achievements from Asia historically. They discovered America first (the whole notion of "discovering" first a place where there already are people is absurd), they got printing first, they mastered gunpowder first... and yet most westerners will name Columbus, Gutenberg, and Europe.

For what it's worth, I'm in France and it's common knowledge here that China invented gunpowder. I don't think I've ever heard someone saying Europe did.

Re: China’s ‘Artificial Sun’ achieves fusion breakthrough

#94

Post by chriswarbo »

akiselev wrote: post #45
ars wrote: post #3

It's unfortunate that it's like this, but I automatically do not believe any scientific breakthroughs that come from China. There has simply been too much fraud for me to believe anything they say. http://www.sciencealert.com/80-of-the-data-in-chinese-clinic...

Do you automatically disbelieve everything coming out of Europe, the United States, or any other country that carries out scientific research or has a regulatory framework for medicine? If you don't believe in the ability of China to run a life and death regulatory agency without systemic fraud, what is your reason for trusting their journalists? It took only a few minutes to track down the original source for this c…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nullius_in_verba

Re: China’s ‘Artificial Sun’ achieves fusion breakthrough

#95

Post by Noseshine »

rjzzleep wrote: post #83
Noseshine wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should google the history of the phrase "Made in Germany" (I'm German by the way) Quote ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Made_in_Germany ): > The label was originally introduced in Britain by the Merchandise Marks Act 1887,[1] to mark foreign produce more obviously, as foreign manufactures had been falsely marking inferior goods with the marks of renowned British manufacturing companies and importing them into the…

I like to look at the discussion of wikipedia article. Note that the reference "[2]" is not pointing to oxford university press but rather to a spiegel article. The actual act can be found here [1]. "With regard to direct false indications of origin the matter is simple enough. If knives are imported marked Sheffield when they have been manufactured in Germany, it will be evident that a fraud has been committed." "Bu…

I don't really know what your point is because I don't understand the language discussion.

In any case, there is no doubt that Germany copied major parts of the industrial revolution from Britain. Or do you think they (we) developed all the same things just a bit later independently, by chance?

The point is that all people copy, in response to a specific comment about China. Yeah... and after reading your comment three more times I still don't understand what point you are trying to make? I think you are trying to say something about the intent of why "Made in Germany" was introduced, but I don't see anything about that in the linked page, just some obscure discussion about language but no larger context. It seems to me the linked page is about some obscure details.

Re: China’s ‘Artificial Sun’ achieves fusion breakthrough

#96

Post by tomw2005 »

kybernetikos wrote: post #84

I would love to see a huge effort towards fusion, on the same (or even greater) scale as the Manhattan project or the Apollo program. I had been disappointed in the way that fusion always seemed to be 30 years away no matter how many years went past, but I just assumed that that was because the science was hard and just the way it had to be. https://i.imgur.com/sjH5r.jpg https://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/Article…

My Physics of Electrical Power Generation lecturer told us pretty flatly that we should not expect or bank on fusion power in our lifetimes. He said we should concentrate on renewables (which seems to be the way most countries are going in Europe at least).

Re: China’s ‘Artificial Sun’ achieves fusion breakthrough

#97

Post by jacobush »

oelmekki wrote: post #93
espadrine wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We do tend to diminish achievements from Asia historically. They discovered America first (the whole notion of "discovering" first a place where there already are people is absurd), they got printing first, they mastered gunpowder first... and yet most westerners will name Columbus, Gutenberg, and Europe.

For what it's worth, I'm in France and it's common knowledge here that China invented gunpowder. I don't think I've ever heard someone saying Europe did.

But Europe was the first to do CANNONS on a large scale...

Re: China’s ‘Artificial Sun’ achieves fusion breakthrough

#98

Post by kbart »

kybernetikos wrote: post #84

I would love to see a huge effort towards fusion, on the same (or even greater) scale as the Manhattan project or the Apollo program. I had been disappointed in the way that fusion always seemed to be 30 years away no matter how many years went past, but I just assumed that that was because the science was hard and just the way it had to be. https://i.imgur.com/sjH5r.jpg https://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/Article…

"Massively abundant, cheap, clean energy should be one of humanity's top priorities."

Not while most of the biggest economies on Earth relies on extracting and selling resources to satisfy civilizations energy needs.

Re: China’s ‘Artificial Sun’ achieves fusion breakthrough

#99

Post by arethuza »

sonium wrote: post #92
kybernetikos wrote: post #84

I would love to see a huge effort towards fusion, on the same (or even greater) scale as the Manhattan project or the Apollo program. I had been disappointed in the way that fusion always seemed to be 30 years away no matter how many years went past, but I just assumed that that was because the science was hard and just the way it had to be. https://i.imgur.com/sjH5r.jpg https://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/Article…

This might sound a bit like a buzz-kill, but I don't think fusion power is necessarily competitively cheap. I think it will be comparable to nuclear power with a ~ 10 times higher capital investment to build a fusion-plant. Already now solar is said to be cheaper then nuclear. But nevertheless humanity should explore fusion since it is more or less the only significant power source not (indrectly) depending on the su…

I agree - always been a bit mystified when fusion power is described as "cheap", fuel isn't a big component of the cost of fission power plants so even if the fuel is low cost it won't save you that much money.

[I guess decommissioning costs might be lower but are they actually included in the costs of operating normal nuclear plants?]

Re: China’s ‘Artificial Sun’ achieves fusion breakthrough

#100

Post by seanp2k2 »

kbart wrote: post #98
kybernetikos wrote: post #84

I would love to see a huge effort towards fusion, on the same (or even greater) scale as the Manhattan project or the Apollo program. I had been disappointed in the way that fusion always seemed to be 30 years away no matter how many years went past, but I just assumed that that was because the science was hard and just the way it had to be. https://i.imgur.com/sjH5r.jpg https://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/Article…

"Massively abundant, cheap, clean energy should be one of humanity's top priorities." Not while most of the biggest economies on Earth relies on extracting and selling resources to satisfy civilizations energy needs.

And when the party coming into power wants to go back to coal and drill all of our oil reserves.
Post reply on HN