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

Fusion energy breakthrough by Livermore Lab

ft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 833 posts

Re: Fusion energy breakthrough by Livermore Lab

#341

Post by intrasight »

boc wrote: post #251

It’s insane how much cynicism I’m seeing here. I know people who are nuclear scientists at LLNL - if they’re excited about this then it’s a big deal. The experiment actually created more energy than expected and damaged the sensors. This website is seriously infested with reflexive contrarians and it’s a not healthy.

> The experiment actually created more energy than expected and damaged the sensors.

Who else in their minds eye see smoke and sparks in the experimental facility and control room, and scientists and engineer wooping with joy ;)

Re: Fusion energy breakthrough by Livermore Lab

#342

Post by OkayPhysicist »

atemerev wrote: post #217
VaxWithSex wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only if you use the notoriously dangerous breeder reactors – otherwise there isn't enough fuel.

Breeder reactors are not "notoriously dangerous", they are just a little too expensive to justify their construction when the uranium is cheap (like it is now). Also, there are proliferation risks. However, these are not engineering problems nor scientific problems, breeder reactors are production-ready and safe.

I've never really gotten the "proliferation risk" in the context of US power production (or China, Russia, or even France, for that matter). We're talking about existing nuclear powers, they already have the capacity to make nuclear weapons. If they wanted more they would make more, for the simple reason that having nuclear weapons is table stakes for being a serious player in geopolitics.

Re: Fusion energy breakthrough by Livermore Lab

#343

Post by twblalock »

boc wrote: post #251

It’s insane how much cynicism I’m seeing here. I know people who are nuclear scientists at LLNL - if they’re excited about this then it’s a big deal. The experiment actually created more energy than expected and damaged the sensors. This website is seriously infested with reflexive contrarians and it’s a not healthy.

> This website is seriously infested with reflexive contrarians and it’s a not healthy.

The initial flood of comments is always like that, because they are low-effort dismissals. The first 5 comments on every story could probably be auto-flagged.

The better stuff usually rises to the top eventually.

Re: Fusion energy breakthrough by Livermore Lab

#344

Post by Moissanite »

govg wrote: post #328
spoils19 wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

The average HN reader who is probably a generic software engineer in their 20s/30s will know more about nuclear fusion than scientists at LLNL?

Listen man, remembering the names of all these JavaScript frameworks is hard!

Re: Fusion energy breakthrough by Livermore Lab

#345

Post by PicassoCTs »

atty wrote: post #275
boc wrote: post #251

It’s insane how much cynicism I’m seeing here. I know people who are nuclear scientists at LLNL - if they’re excited about this then it’s a big deal. The experiment actually created more energy than expected and damaged the sensors. This website is seriously infested with reflexive contrarians and it’s a not healthy.

I agree with the spirit of your comment, and I am extremely excited by these results. However, I think the history of fusion has showed us that the cynics have had a much better track record than the fusion optimists, haha. My very uninformed opinion (nuclear physicist by training, but not specialized in fusion, lasers, or plasma physics) is that we’re still 20 years (haha) away from fusion energy making its way into…

Also this assumes we get 20 years and the science budget will not be eaten by emerging endless crisis and wars.

Re: Fusion energy breakthrough by Livermore Lab

#346

Post by tsimionescu »

jeffbee wrote: post #11

I guess I don't really get it. Nobody doubts that you can get a tremendous output of energy from a fusion bomb with modest inputs. This thing they've ignited is a tiny fusion weapon without a fission blanket and with a huge, inconvenient optical primary. I mean I'm all for science but I don't see the road from this to civilian fusion power as people generally understand the term.

There isn't any, not for ICF. These labs are part of the DOE's thermonuclear weapon research programs, not energy research.

It is possible though that they could also use this for some fundamental research into how fusion works as a process.

Re: Fusion energy breakthrough by Livermore Lab

#347

Post by JimtheCoder »

govg wrote: post #328
spoils19 wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

The average HN reader who is probably a generic software engineer in their 20s/30s will know more about nuclear fusion than scientists at LLNL?

They think they do, but don't...I think that's the point that's trying to be made here

Re: Fusion energy breakthrough by Livermore Lab

#348

Post by TigeriusKirk »

spoils19 wrote: post #285
rogerkirkness wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The older I get the more I think it's just counter signaling that one is smarter than whoever did this work, which is almost certainly not the case.

Quoted post unavailable.

In my experience the average HN reader is slightly above the general population average.

Re: Fusion energy breakthrough by Livermore Lab

#349

Post by tunesmith »

hannob wrote: post #227

Usual caveat about all fusion "got more energy out than we put in" stories: https://backreaction.blogspot.com/2021/10/how-close-is-nucle... From a quick skimming it seems only one of the experts quoted here even mentions that (Tony Roulstone). (Update: i wrote this comment in response to another story and the comment got moved here, so it lost a bit of context https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33958678&ref=upstrac…

So... Q-plasma is above 1 for the first time, which is a huge deal.

Q-total is still below 1, but some of that can be improved through already-known laser efficiency advancements, and also by pushing Q-plasma higher.

I think pushing Q-plasma above 1 is the big gate though, isn't it? I mean, partly psychologically. Showing that it's actually technically possible.

Re: Fusion energy breakthrough by Livermore Lab

#350

Post by yummypaint »

spoils19 wrote: post #285
rogerkirkness wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The older I get the more I think it's just counter signaling that one is smarter than whoever did this work, which is almost certainly not the case.

Quoted post unavailable.

I know for a fact that many people who worked on this are also on HN. You should know that scientists see posters on this site mostly as representatives of the software engineering world. Seeing this kind of sneering attitude so frequently on display here is pretty embarrassing and casts the whole profession in a poor light.
Post reply on HN