181–190 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would love to see "fusion Manhattan project", this planet is well overdue for new gigantic R&D projects such as Manhattan and Apollo.
Who are our modern J. Robert Oppenheimer, Enrico Fermi, Richard Feynman, Edward Teller, John Von Neumann, and Stanislaw Ulam?
Here's your most exciting paragraph > LLNL’s experiment surpassed the fusion threshold by delivering 2.05 megajoules (MJ) of energy to the target, resulting in 3.15 MJ of fusion energy output, demonstrating for the first time a most fundamental science basis for inertial fusion energy (IFE). Many advanced science and technology developments are still needed to achieve simple, affordable IFE to power homes and busines…
Edit: I'm Canadian, the question is rhetorical.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would love to see "fusion Manhattan project", this planet is well overdue for new gigantic R&D projects such as Manhattan and Apollo.
Who are our modern J. Robert Oppenheimer, Enrico Fermi, Richard Feynman, Edward Teller, John Von Neumann, and Stanislaw Ulam?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That isn’t what this would be used for. In fact, yields for the largest deployed H-bombs today I think are smaller than they once were (due to better targeting capabilities).
What do you think the US nuclear weapons research lab will use their research for? You're right that increasing the yield was a bad example from my side, but the purpose is to improve the weapons, nothing else.
[1] https://www.theregister.com/2015/01/29/charles_townes_nobel_...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Q needs to be something like 500 to 1000, not because of energy breakeven, but to produce enough energy that the shot is financially positive. The amount of fusion energy produced in this shot is worth a penny or two. (And even then, it's dubious a laser fusion scheme will be competitive with other energy sources.)
It will get there. It's just a matter of time and resources. The destination will be a milestone for humanity, so we should not give up.
It's a fusion plasma research experiment. It's not a program that is being run with the goal of creating a usable fusion energy power plant.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s only because they’re using old school flash pumped lasers, not the new solid state lasers you’d use today if you wanted to make a power plant demo.
Can solid state lasers produce the high energy needed here?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Who are our modern J. Robert Oppenheimer, Enrico Fermi, Richard Feynman, Edward Teller, John Von Neumann, and Stanislaw Ulam?
> Who are our modern J. Robert Oppenheimer, Enrico Fermi, Richard Feynman, Edward Teller, John Von Neumann, and Stanislaw Ulam? they're working on getting you to click on an ad
> LLNL’s experiment surpassed the fusion threshold by delivering 2.05 megajoules (MJ) of energy to the target, resulting in 3.15 MJ of fusion energy output, demonstrating for the first time a most fundamental science basis for inertial fusion energy (IFE) Yesterday, everyone was complaining about the 2.2:2.0 ratio, but now we're working with 3.15:2.05. With modern lasers, that'd be a total Q of 0.375 assuming 100% ef…
The Q needs to be something like 500 to 1000, not because of energy breakeven, but to produce enough energy that the shot is financially positive. The amount of fusion energy produced in this shot is worth a penny or two. (And even then, it's dubious a laser fusion scheme will be competitive with other energy sources.)
Why wouldn't a final Q of 50 be economically viable? Interest on capital costs? Other?
Let's say this all works out and over the next few decades fusion replaces all other electricity generation, and we're past the point where all the initial infrastructure costs have been paid for. How much will my electric bill be reduced?
> How much will my electric bill be reduced?