• @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          925 days ago

          No, but some guy proved that we could use that to our advantage. If you don’t use the magnetic constrictors to compensate for the heat from the fusion expanding the vessel, you can have it enter fusion and leave fusion several times a second. Wrap the thing in copper wire coils, and you have now got your vessel in a state of flux, and producing enough power to blackout your local grid, and get lots of fines from the feds in less than 5 seconds of runtime. He obviously didn’t continue working on that particular method of generating power with a Tokomak

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              324 days ago

              Wish I could. Only reason I know about it, is that it was mentioned briefly in the Navy Nuclear Power Program training materials.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      6625 days ago

      The amusing thing is that the sun is actually quite a shit fusion reactor. It’s power per unit volume is tiny. It just makes it up in sheer volume. A solar level fusion reactor would be almost completely useless to us. Instead we need to go far beyond the sun’s output to just be viable.

      It’s like describing one of the mega mining dumper trucks as an “artificial mule”.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2625 days ago

        I think this energy density math really depends on whether only the core or the whole surface area is taken into consideration.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        424 days ago

        Arguably, the nearby sun scale fusion reactor has been fairly useful for us. Nowadays we can convert its output directly into electricity using solar cells

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          624 days ago

          I never said it wasn’t useful, just a very low efficiency reactor. Then again, if it was better, it would burn out faster, which would be bad for life on earth.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              124 days ago

              That’s part of the reason a moon base could be viable. The sun outputs a reasonable amount of helium 3, which is great for fusion reactions. Unfortunately it tends to sit at the top of our atmosphere and get blown away again. On the moon, it gets captured by the dust in collectable quantities.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      24
      edit-2
      25 days ago

      They say “artificial sun” because that’s what it is though, there’s no fusion reactions here they’re just microwaving hydrogen to millions of degrees to study the kind of thing that would happen IF somebody runs a fusion reactor for 22 minutes.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    14625 days ago

    Meanwhile in America we’re trying to make macdonalds cheaper by bundling an extra sandwich to go along with a value meal…

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1024 days ago

      America would blow up a fusion reacto, call it dangerous, elon musk has a lot of things to say about it and then it would be illegal worldwide. Have you guys heard about coal? We already fixed it, just burn coal.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          224 days ago

          That was such a culture shock when I went to the us for the first time.

          In Germany and many places in Europe do not think of burgers as sandwiches. I was so confused when I ordered a sandwich and got something like a burger.

          I expected something like this

          I expected something like this. My confusion must’ve been quite the sight, the waitress even seemed concerned. Tasted great though.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            224 days ago

            Only difference between that and a burger is a burger is usually on a roll, not slices of bread. (And a burger is always hot, but then so are some sandwiches.)

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    10925 days ago

    This is freaking awesome. Only a few years ago it was exciting to see a fusion reaction last a fraction of a second.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2224 days ago

      It is awesome. Whichever country develops it first will be remembered as the next ‘moon landing’ event forever.

    • Pumpkin Escobar
      link
      fedilink
      English
      7625 days ago

      Or the world blows up and it’s all over. I guess what I’m saying is, no downside, fire it up and let’s see what happens.

    • Sceptiksky
      link
      fedilink
      English
      524 days ago

      No tech will give you a better timeline, back on the floor please ^^ It’s a political problem before anything else, and energy production is far from being the first problem.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        324 days ago

        Scientists: invents commercial scale fusion Capitalist: hordes the almost free energy because why not? Poor people are only useful as a resource anyway.

  • Match!!
    link
    fedilink
    English
    10324 days ago

    1,337 seconds? That… that number used to mean something, but now i can’t recall what…

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    8525 days ago

    Why don’t we use “shatters world record” like the pro-China articles where they did this for 16 minutes?

    I know why.

    • @[email protected]OP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      8925 days ago

      IIRC it was expected because previous record from China was essentially a trial for this one. It all happens under ITER project so it’s not that much of a race.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        4225 days ago

        Good shit. I’d rather this be a global cooperative effort rather than a jingoistic dick-waving contest.

        • Sceptiksky
          link
          fedilink
          English
          624 days ago

          It’s several cooperative and competitives projects. Diversity is not bad for science anyway. ITER itself involve tons of countries.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      7
      edit-2
      24 days ago

      Good. The only thing that was quite remotely good about the cold war was the competition.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2125 days ago

        That’s not what this is, and even then, that competition wasn’t even good. You had two countries hoarding technological advancements for themselves, with everything having to be discovered twice.

        This is a worldwide collaboration, where each assists the others, and it’s a much better way of making progress. See ITER.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          224 days ago

          I should’ve replaced ‘quite’ with a more clear ‘remotely’ but you’re absolutely correct

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    5624 days ago

    I didn’t see any mention of the output in the article. 22MW injected, but does anyone know if the reaction was actually generating a positive output?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      7524 days ago

      No magnetic confinement fusion reactor in existence has ever generated a positive output. The current record belongs to JET, with a Q factor of 0.67. This record was set in 1997.

      The biggest reason we haven’t had a record break for a long time is money. The most favourable reaction for fusion is generally a D-T (Deuterium-Tritium) reaction. However, Tritium is incredibly expensive. So, most reactors run the much cheaper D-D reaction, which generates lower output. This is okay because current research reactors are mostly doing research on specific components of an eventual commercial reactor, and are not aiming for highest possible power output.

      The main purpose of WEST is to do research on diverter components for ITER. ITER itself is expected to reach Q ≥ 10, but won’t have any energy harvesting components. The goal is to add that to its successor, DEMO.

      Inertial confinement fusion (using lasers) has produced higher records, but they generally exclude the energy used to produce the laser from the calculation. NIF has generated 3.15MJ of fusion output by delivering 2.05MJ of energy to it with a laser, nominally a Q = 1.54. however, creating the laser that delivered the power took about 300MJ.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1024 days ago

        I wasn’t aware of that distinction about the energy for the laser to generate the heat energy within the reaction not being factored into the Q value, very interesting, thank you! Would that energy for the laser still be required in a “stable reaction” continuously, or would it be something that would “trail off”?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          6
          edit-2
          24 days ago

          Inertial confinement doesnt produce a “stable reaction” it is pulsed by it’s nature, think of it in the same way as a single cylinder internal combustion engine, periodic explosions which are harnessed to do useful work. So no the laser energy is required every single time to detonate the fuel pellet.

          NIF isnt really interested in fusion for power production, it’s a weapons research facility that occasionally puts out puff pieces to make it seem like it has civilian applications.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          524 days ago

          In my experience the community will usually distinguished between “scientific Q” and “wall plug Q” when discussing fusion power gain. Scientific is simply the ratio of power in vs power out, whereas wall plug includes all the power required to support scientific Q. Obviously the difference isn’t always clearly delineated or reported when talking to journalists…

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1524 days ago

          OK, so we should be clear there are broadly two approaches to fusion: magnetic confinement and inertial drive.

          In magnetic confinement a plasma is confined such that it can be driven to sufficient density, temperature and particle confinement time that the thermal collisions allow the fuel to fuse. This is what the OP article is talking about. This Tokamak is demonstrating technologies that if applied to a larger the experiment could probably reach a positive energy output magnetically confined plasma.

          The article you referenced discusses inertial drive experiments, where a driver is directly pushing the fuel together, like gravity in the sun, a fission bomb shockwave in a hydrogen bomb, or converging laser beams in Livermore’s case.

          Livermore’s result is exciting, but has no bearing on the various magnetic confinement approaches to fusion energy.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        124 days ago

        The input energy doesnt matter that much. Nobody is going to use 1980s laser tech to power a real reactor. As with OP, inertial confinement is interested in very small nuanced science aspects, not making a power plant.

    • Jesus
      link
      fedilink
      English
      5824 days ago

      Sounds like the goal of the test wasn’t to vet ignition power in relation to output. These people are testing the durability of system designs that can maintain a reaction after ignition.

      If this was a car, they wouldn’t be testing the fuel efficiency, they’d be testing how long they could drive before the wheels fell off.

    • Sceptiksky
      link
      fedilink
      English
      3
      edit-2
      24 days ago

      Article said 2.6GJ input, 2.6 output so 1Q, but I’m not certain it’s really the case.

      Edit: I can’t find my source back, so it’s likely false

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          2325 days ago

          We’re using graphene! Almost entirely for it’s electrical properties true, but we’re using graphene doped batteries in consumer electronics currently. We also use fusion and ITER research for a whole lot more than just power generation - plasma dynamics, just one tiny subfield concerned with physics, has applications in everything from radio transmission beam forming techniques to satellite engines to magnetodynamic modeling to the EMI shielding on your vacuum cleaner.

          • Fuck spez
            link
            fedilink
            English
            725 days ago

            I would like to subscribe for more graphene facts.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1525 days ago

          What about my racist and misogynist views I try to hide underneath my crazed and incompetent rantings about DEI? Is there room for someone like me?

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    28
    edit-2
    24 days ago

    Just one more giga joule guys …

    Pro fusion research btw just a chronic shitposter

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    2324 days ago

    Well, I’m still skeptical, but I have far more trust in France’s reporting than Chinese claims.

      • Pika
        link
        fedilink
        English
        31
        edit-2
        24 days ago

        huh, I learned a few new words today

        for others who want to know

        • Jingoism: noun

          1. Extreme Nationalism characterized by a belligerent foreign policy

          2. A bellicose patriotism; aggressive chauvinism; belligerence in international relations

        • Bellicose: adjective

          1. warlike or hostile in manner or temperment

          2. inclined to war or contention

          3. warlike in nature/aggressive;hostile

        • Chauvinism: noun

          1. Militant devotion to and glorification of one’s country; fanatical patriotism.

          2. Prejudiced belief in the superiority of one’s own gender, group, or kind.

          3. Blind and absurd devotion to a fallen leader or an obsolete cause; hence, absurdly vainglorious or exaggerated patriotism.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        623 days ago

        China had a long history of fraudulent science that they need to dig out of to gain a good reputation.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          423 days ago

          Nothing like the very highly reliable pharmaceutical “science” done in the US, amirite?

          Its not like we ever had “science” come from the US that said an extremely powerful opioid wasn’t addictive, amirite?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          323 days ago

          Do you know what “collaboration” means?

          It’s almost like they’ve got peers all over the world looking at their data!

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          323 days ago

          Because a shit ton of fraudulent science hasn’t come out of the US or Europe. Nope. No sir.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              6
              edit-2
              24 days ago

              You don’t think uncritical and nationalistic dismissal of the “enemy’s” achievements as they must be both strong and weak has a place under “aggressive or exaggerated patriotism?”

              I guess that just makes them a racist then.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                -424 days ago

                As far as I can tell by their comment history they are American, so I don’t know how is trusting France to be “nationalistic”. Or “patriotic”. Or aggressive, for that matter. Not a hint of militarisitc feeling either.

                I might be racist too, because I don’t trust what comes out of China as much as what comes from France. Or Germany. Or Switzerland. Or Japan. Or south Korea. Or Australia. Or India. Or Kenya. Yes, it must be racism.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -223 days ago

        China: Spews blatant and obvious lies about everything that does or does not cast a shadow. Heavily censors any source.

        Some guy: I don’t trust information coming from China.

        China (and shills): That’s sinophobic!!

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          323 days ago

          Yeah. Surely we can believe the anti-China stuff! Our own government wouldn’t lie to us! /s

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -223 days ago

            I never said “our” Government wouldn’t lie to us (unless you’re Chinese, in which case they definitely will). I just said that the Chinese government constantly lies, which is easily seen by anyone with eyes.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -223 days ago

        Yeah, just like all that anti-white sentiment towards the US because we elected a president who almost passes for off-white.

        Though I suppose there could be other reasons if we dig deep enough.