A giant donut-shaped machine just proved a near-limitless clean power source is possible

[lexluthermiester]

Didnt anyone see the movie Chain Reaction? They solved all the problems with fusion, but the government had other plans, like bury it all.

That was a movie about "Cold Fusion". Total science fiction.

 

[Steevo]

That was a movie about "Cold Fusion". Total science fiction.

Still a good flick that readied a lot of people for the idea that the government is a puppet of big business.

Also considering helium becomes a superfluid at extreme cold without any appreciable increase in density or any way to overcome the strong or weak nuclear forces it’s a movie plot for sure.

Harnessing gravity should be the next human achievement, and depending on which person on Joe Rogan you believe we (the government) has or aliens have and are watching us, or maybe the Chinese or Russians.

 

[Shrek]

Harnessing gravity should be the next human achievement

• If the Sun were chemically powered, it would last thousands of years
• If the Sun were gravitationally powered, it would last millions of years
• If the Sun were nuclear powered, it would last billions of years.

Now a black hole is more efficient than nuclear, but I doubt we will harness them.

 

[lexluthermiester]

If the Sun were gravitationally powered, it would last millions of years

Wait, what?

Now a black hole is more efficient than nuclear

In what way?

 

[Shrek]

Nuclear power converts a few percent of the mass to energy, a black hole can convert significantly more.

Before people knew about nuclear power, they calculated the life of the Sun

• if chemically powered
• if gravitationally powered (by collapse)

I think it may have been Lord Kelvin who calculated the millions of years and so realized there needed to be a longer lasting source.

 

[DeathtoGnomes]

That was a movie about "Cold Fusion". Total science fiction.

Maybe I missed it, but I only saw the generalization of fusion, no hot, cold or otherwise. Feel free to correct me and tell me what the difference is between whats being discussed and "cold fusion".

 

[ExcuseMeWtf]

Nuclear power converts a few percent of the mass to energy, a black hole can convert significantly more.

Before people knew about nuclear power, they calculated the life of the Sun

• if chemically powered
• if gravitationally powered (by collapse)

I think it may have been Lord Kelvin who calculated the millions of years and so realized there needed to be a longer lasting source.

You mean this?

Energy from a Black Hole | Science Mission Directorate

There are plenty of Black Holesthat gobble energy. Now astronomers have spotted one in a distant galaxy that's giving some of its energy back.

science.nasa.gov

Or this?

How we could harness the energy of a black hole

Though the engineering is beyond us now, the Penrose process could theoretically allow us to extract energy from black holes.

www.sciencefocus.com

I tried to find what you are refering to with regard to the NIF experiment. Have you got a link?

Cookie Absent

 

[R-T-B]

Fusion generates radiation just like Fission, not as long lived as our current design use reactors, but the same nonetheless.

I mean that's literally not the same.

Sand has a relatively pretty high level of radiation but I don't fear going to the beach. So do bananas and yet I eat them. What matters is half lifes and quantities.

“Furthermore, fusion does not produce highly radioactive, long lived nuclear waste. “Fusion produces only low level radioactive waste — more than fission does — but this low level waste does not pose any serious danger,” said González de Vicente. Contaminated items, such as protective clothing, cleaning supplies and even medical tubes or swabs, are short lived, low level radioactive waste that can be safely handled with basic precautions.”

They are likely talking about tritium. That stuff is hardly dangerous like fissile byproducts. You can basically treat it in a wastewater plant. I mean technically if you drank it raw I guess you could get radiation poisoning, but I find that unlikely. It's hardly the same. Heck, even if it was similar, Tritiums half life is like 12 years. I could intentionally poison a well with the stuff (though it would take a LOT of it) and you could drink from it again in less than a century. You're lucky to hit the first half life in a century on many fissile byproducts.

and depending on which person on Joe Rogan you believe

Ah. I see where you went wrong now.

 

[the54thvoid]

• If the Sun were chemically powered, it would last thousands of years
• If the Sun were gravitationally powered, it would last millions of years
• If the Sun were nuclear powered, it would last billions of years.

Now a black hole is more efficient than nuclear, but I doubt we will harness them.

All stars are formed under gravitational pressure which exerts the force required to fuse atoms. A star is only nuclear because of the associated stellar mass (and associated gravitational force). As the life cycle progresses and the material is converted (ultimately to Iron), the explosive energy of fusion can no longer push out against the gravitational collapse. Star dies, either catastrophically, or by shedding it's shell and becoming a brown dwarf.

But the nuclear reaction of a star is powered by gravity--without gravity, there can be no 'natural' fusion. Human fusion cannot replicate the gravity, therefore it has to simulate pressure in other ways (heat/directed energy).

 

[Jacky_BEL]

They are likely talking about tritium. That stuff is hardly dangerous like fissile byproducts. You can basically treat it in a wastewater plant. I mean technically if you drank it raw I guess you could get radiation poisoning, but I find that unlikely. It's hardly the same. Heck, even if it was similar, Tritiums half life is like 12 years. I could intentionally poison a well with the stuff (though it would take a LOT of it) and you could drink from it again in less than a century. You're lucky to hit the first half life in a century on many fissile byproducts.

Tritium, a misunderstood nuclide:

The hazards of tritium – revisited

 

[R-T-B]

Tritium, a misunderstood nuclide:

The hazards of tritium – revisited

You aren't seriously comparing it to fissile byproducts I hope?

 

[r9]

Old game, they test such for more than 25 years.
Keep on claiming to get closer every now and then.

Yeah they will be closing by half distance till eternity.
The hard truth is that nothing meaningful with practical application been invented in the last 50 years we are just tweaking the shit out of existing tech.

 

[Shrek]

Quantum computing is new

 

[R-T-B]

The hard truth is that nothing meaningful with practical application been invented in the last 50 years we are just tweaking the shit out of existing tech.

Are we living in the same timeframe? Because I cannot agree with that at all.

 

[r9]

Are we living in the same timeframe? Because I cannot agree with that at all.

Gender fluidity and Covid doesn't count.

Quantum computing is new

I said practical. Quantum computers are useless toys for the well funded scientists.

 

[Jacky_BEL]

You aren't seriously comparing it to fissile byproducts I hope?

Nope, I am not comparing, but tritium is far from being the percieved harmless product .

it comes in the form of water, and if it is ingested it basicly can go anywhere and do damage.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Maybe I missed it, but I only saw the generalization of fusion, no hot, cold or otherwise.

Did you see a reactor enclosed in a huge temperature shielded pressure vessel? Cold Fusion. Watch it again.

 

[Shrek]

I said practical. Quantum computers are useless toys for the well funded scientists.

Quantum cryptography is already commercial.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Nope, I am not comparing, but tritium is far from being the percieved harmless product .

it comes in the form of water, and if it is ingested it basicly can go anywhere and do damage.

Myth. Tritium is harmless unless exposure is in large amounts(greater than 1% by volume). Reactors can not produce such large volumes of tritium and even then chances of exposure are minimal.

Human Health and the Biological Effects of Tritium in Drinking Water: Prudent Policy Through Science – Addressing the ODWAC New Recommendation - PMC

Tritium is a radioactive form of hydrogen and is a by-product of energy production in Canadian Deuterium Uranium (CANDU) reactors. The release of this radioisotope into the environment is carefully managed at CANDU facilities in order to minimize ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[Steevo]

I mean that's literally not the same.

Sand has a relatively pretty high level of radiation but I don't fear going to the beach. So do bananas and yet I eat them. What matters is half lifes and quantities.


They are likely talking about tritium. That stuff is hardly dangerous like fissile byproducts. You can basically treat it in a wastewater plant. I mean technically if you drank it raw I guess you could get radiation poisoning, but I find that unlikely. It's hardly the same. Heck, even if it was similar, Tritiums half life is like 12 years. I could intentionally poison a well with the stuff (though it would take a LOT of it) and you could drink from it again in less than a century. You're lucky to hit the first half life in a century on many fissile byproducts.


Ah. I see where you went wrong now.

Dur hur.

the waste after use of breeder reactors is about 92 years of slightly above average background radiation, less than some beaches, less than being aboard the space station (where does that neutron radiation come from again… oh yeah, the giant fusion sphere in the sky) Fusion won’t be possible on applicable scale in 50 years, but fission is, and it can be made idiot proof and almost 100% efficient with no waste. We are in the midst of a energy revolution that is doing almost nothing to change out total carbon emissions, just move them to unregulated countries. Wouldn’t it be better to charge EVs with clean fission power and heat homes with it too before we kill ourselves and planet waiting to harness Fusion?

But Joe Rogan and dur hur……

https://www.euro-fusion.org/faq/top-twenty-faq/does-fusion-give-off-radiation/

The same radiation after neutron bombardment as spent fissile products when used completely. Imagine that…

 

[Shrek]

but fission is, and it can be made idiot proof and almost 100% efficient with no waste.

No waste?

 

[R-T-B]

92 years

I rest my case.

I'm not anti-fission by any means but the comparisons you are making are patently false. Tritiums half life is ~12.5 years for comparison with a similar radioactivity. Are they both manageable? Sure I suppose but one is clearly far worse than the other.

But Joe Rogan and dur hur……

Hey, I'm providing figures, you're the one who brought Joe into this like he's some kind of source...

where does that neutron radiation come from again… oh yeah, the giant fusion sphere in the sky

And it's not exactly insignificant either. We'd all be dead of cancer at quite an early age were it not for the protective shield of our planet. The space station is not somewhere you want to spend a decade in.

Wouldn’t it be better to charge EVs with clean fission power and heat homes with it too before we kill ourselves and planet waiting to harness Fusion?

Why not both? You seem to think these ideas are incompatible. They are not.

The same radiation after neutron bombardment as spent fissile products when used completely. Imagine that…

Your source doesn't actually say this, btw.

 

[Steevo]

“The neutron bombardment also affects the vessel itself, and so once the plant is decommissioned the site will be radioactive. However the radioactive products are short lived (50-100 years).”

same time frame as the minuscule amount of fission waste.

Joe isn’t a source, some of his guests are that have spoken about everything from UFOs to Area 51 and government tech.

 

[DeathtoGnomes]

Did you see a reactor enclosed in a huge temperature shielded pressure vessel? Cold Fusion. Watch it again.

sorry was referring to the thread not the movie there. Yea that much I knew about the movie.

 

[Jacky_BEL]

Myth. Tritium is harmless unless exposure is in large amounts(greater than 1% by volume). Reactors can not produce such large volumes of tritium and even then chances of exposure are minimal.

Human Health and the Biological Effects of Tritium in Drinking Water: Prudent Policy Through Science – Addressing the ODWAC New Recommendation - PMC

Tritium is a radioactive form of hydrogen and is a by-product of energy production in Canadian Deuterium Uranium (CANDU) reactors. The release of this radioisotope into the environment is carefully managed at CANDU facilities in order to minimize ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Nuclear fission powerplants may not produce large quantities of tritium.
Nuclear fuel processing plants on the other hand do discharge large amounts in the air and in the sea , which may be a bigger health risk than what the nuclear industry wants us to believe.

Now nuclear fusion plants , that is a whole other story , being that tritium is half of the fuel in the reactor.
So theoretically , in a future large reactor there is going to be a large amount of tritium , that could pose a severe threat if there is a mishap.
The irony is that in order to sustain a fusion cycle , there needs to be a fission of Lithium to extract tritium fuel , because there is so little tritium available right now.

This is al becoming so complicated that one can no longer compare it to the "simple" proces happening on the sun.
Nuclear hydrogen fusion on the sun doesn't create neutrons for example. It creates neutrino , positron and gamma rays.
The net reaction on the sun is : 4 normal hydrogen atoms gives 1 normal helium atom.

More on the tritium subject , I found this very interesting reading material , like for instance ( p22 , 5.4 Tritium Handling and Leakage ) and (p28 , 5.8 Sources of Tritium ).

Tritium