[HN Gopher] Fusion and Magic
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Fusion and Magic
        
       Author : curmudgeon22
       Score  : 42 points
       Date   : 2021-06-30 16:34 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.laphamsquarterly.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.laphamsquarterly.org)
        
       | Animats wrote:
       | Lockheed's Skunk Works is still plugging away on fusion, on their
       | own money.[1] They don't talk about it much. But they're hiring
       | for that project, so it continues.
       | 
       | [1] https://lockheedmartin.com/en-us/products/compact-
       | fusion.htm...
        
       | alexgmcm wrote:
       | For anyone interested in the current state of the art of plasma
       | physics and fusion technology I strongly recommend the book "The
       | Future of Fusion Energy" by Jason Parisi and Justin Ball.[1]
       | 
       | [1] https://www.amazon.com/Future-Fusion-Energy-Jason-
       | Parisi/dp/...
        
       | mikewarot wrote:
       | It wouldn't surprise me to learn that all the UAP/UFO incidents
       | were just advanced US craft, powered by some form of fusion.
       | 
       | Fusion requires very strong superconductors. Those can be made
       | from plastic, according to some old patents. The critical
       | temperature of this material far exceeds the decomposition point
       | of the plastic, 1000 degrees K.
       | 
       | If you put all the pieces together, you should be able to pull
       | off Boron 11 fusion in a manner similar to the Polywell, and
       | extract most of the energy directly as high voltage DC.
       | 
       | You could then use that high voltage DC to power a field effect
       | lifter.
       | 
       | That's my guess at the how fusion could be magic. Extrapolated
       | from spending way too much time surfing the web.
       | 
       | One day I want my own personal Megawatt box powered by this
       | technology. It should be about the size of a 2 drawer filing
       | cabinet with a small display for setting the output parameters,
       | and a set of 480, 220, 110, 12 volt, and USB-C outputs.
        
         | Animats wrote:
         | _It wouldn 't surprise me to learn that all the UAP/UFO
         | incidents were just advanced US craft, powered by some form of
         | fusion._
         | 
         | Triangular aircraft zipping around U.S. Navy vessels may have
         | been things like this.[1]
         | 
         | [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPGDAZyQ44k
        
           | mikewarot wrote:
           | I couldn't do that, I'd lose it in the sky, even if I was
           | flying it.
        
             | Animats wrote:
             | Whoever's flying that thing is very good. They seem to be
             | using an ordinary Futaba R/C plane controller. The tiny
             | aircraft pulls out of power dives and goes to straight and
             | level at low altitude, screaming past the observers at over
             | 450 MPH several times without any problems.
             | 
             | That little delta-winged thing with a German/Austrian jet
             | engine has better performance than some reported UFOs.
             | Here's the engine.[1] That's a 2017 model. Costs US$3,390.
             | 
             | [1] https://www.ultimate-jets.net/collections/behotec-
             | turbines/p...
        
         | throwaway77384 wrote:
         | > Those can be made from plastic, according to some old patents
         | 
         | Citation needed
         | 
         | > If you put all the pieces together, you should be able to
         | pull off Boron 11 fusion in a manner similar to the Polywell
         | 
         | Citation needed
         | 
         | > and extract most of the energy directly as high voltage DC.
         | 
         | Citation needed
         | 
         | > You could then use that high voltage DC to power a field
         | effect lifter.
         | 
         | Citation needed
         | 
         | > One day I want my own personal Megawatt box powered by this
         | technology. It should be about the size of a 2 drawer filing
         | cabinet with a small display for setting the output parameters,
         | and a set of 480, 220, 110, 12 volt, and USB-C outputs.
         | 
         | Imagine just handing everyone a Megawatt of energy, to do with
         | as they please. We'd be living in a very different world.
         | 
         | However, for any of the above to be believable, there have to
         | be some reputable sources to look at, no? Why is no one working
         | on this and why isn't there more news of this, when this can
         | just be done by 'putting all the pieces together'?
         | 
         | I am just as enthusiastic as the next guy about progress, but
         | these extraordinary statements require extraordinary evidence
         | IMO
        
           | mikewarot wrote:
           | Plastic superconductor -
           | https://patents.google.com/patent/US5777292A/en       https:/
           | /patents.google.com/patent/US6804105B2/en?inventor=Kevin+P.+S
           | hambrook
           | 
           | Polywell - Fuses Boron 11
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polywell
           | 
           | Extract energy directly
           | https://www.helionenergy.com/our-technology/
           | 
           | There are MANY working on fusion, see page 26 of this:
           | https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML2102/ML21026A315.pdf
           | 
           | Field Effect Lifter - Dedicated Lifters Homepage (2006)
           | http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/liftbldr.htm
           | 
           | It was late night, and I didn't feel like pulling all the
           | links together for a some speculation.
        
             | zopa wrote:
             | Those patents aren't for superconductors. They claim "a
             | material with a conductivity in excess of 10^6 S/cm."
             | That's not too far off from copper at around 6*10^5 S/cm.
             | Pretty good for a polymer if it works I imagine, but not
             | superconducting.
             | 
             | Just because someone names their company "ROOM TEMPERATURE
             | SUPERCONDUCTORS," doesn't mean they've made a fundamental
             | physics breakthrough.
        
       | PicassoCTs wrote:
       | Human nature does not change, not even at gun-point. This is what
       | technology is, to change the world around us, so our brittle
       | little society does not break down and we within it. Technology
       | is the anti-thesis to ideology that believes one can
       | fundamentally alter human nature. But due to our exponential
       | insatiable nature, all technology in the end would become
       | exponentially powerful. Handing out WMD-Gadgets to glorified
       | monkeys at the end of the curve. No flying cars due to 9/11.
       | 
       | Philosophy aside, i was always fascinated by the ability to
       | produce plasma with lasers - if need be in midair.
       | 
       | I added that to a game i develop, were the basic containment
       | field for fusion is "augmented" on the fly, by printing plasma-
       | circuitry into the outer layers and running currents through
       | that. Its just scifi, in reality the interior of a reactor is to
       | chaotic and unstable for such things, but its fun to imagine.
       | Like printing a coil shaped laser lightning rod.
       | 
       | https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/news/fet-open-laser...
        
       | bullen wrote:
       | You still need a real keyboard and monitor to be productive
       | (Steve mostly increased consumption) and the best solar panel and
       | battery will always be the tree (the best fusion reactor is the
       | sun).
       | 
       | All the inventions that enabled the final medium; the 3D MMO,
       | where invented in the 70's (personal computer and TCP) and 90's
       | (HTTP and OpenGL).
       | 
       | Refinements to both have now peaked, the Jetson Nano (10W) as
       | client with OpenGL ES 3 that has VAO and the Atom 8-core (25W) as
       | server with 1Gb/s fiber home hosting.
       | 
       | Enjoy this while it lasts, and please; make something open that
       | others can use to make something!
       | 
       | Also stop chasing infinite growth, instead settle on the peak.
       | 
       | Finally; own what you do!
        
       | puchatek wrote:
       | This is very beautiful written. I haven't finished it yet but i
       | already made a mental note to check it more by the author just
       | for the prose alone.
        
         | lallysingh wrote:
         | I couldn't stand it. No structure, just more words until it was
         | done.
        
       | thenoblesunfish wrote:
       | Great stuff, but it's important to realize that even with all the
       | amazing work being done, _fusion will almost certainly not be
       | available fast enough to save us from climate change_. It 's a
       | phenomenal longer-term prospect, but in the next couple of
       | decades we need to look to other technologies (fission being the
       | obvious point of discussion) and building political will to take
       | meaningful action.
        
         | mchusma wrote:
         | While I certainly agree fission is great, I think fusion is a
         | great thing to work on if you are concerned about climate
         | change. Specifically, it's the type of thing that would likely
         | enable cheap carbon removal.
        
           | NortySpock wrote:
           | How is a complicated fusion reactor going to be cheaper than
           | solar panels, wind turbines, and batteries?
           | 
           | I think fusion reactors are only going to make sense farther
           | out in the solar system, like Mars, Ceres, and beyond.
        
         | WorldMaker wrote:
         | Solar and Wind have recently hit economies of scale that they
         | are already outperforming many past fission plants in year-
         | over-year growth, power output, etc. Solar is fun because it's
         | the cheapest "fusion" system possible, just using some of the
         | waste fusion from the big ball in the sky. It is a sort of
         | "fusion magic".
         | 
         | There's a lot of hope that solar and wind installations outpace
         | a lot of other energy investments and do offer us a road
         | towards "saving us" from climate change. (Though how dirty we
         | generate power is still only one part of the climate change
         | problem, we still need a lot more solutions to carbon capture
         | the dirt we've already emitted.)
        
         | GoodJokes wrote:
         | You definitely sound like an expert with italics like "save us
         | from climate change."
        
       | GoodJokes wrote:
       | This is a cool thread because now I found all the people who can
       | tell the future on it. How useful!
        
       | ncmncm wrote:
       | There will never be so much as a single erg of commercially
       | competitive power generated by Tokamak fusion. The only way to
       | understand the current state of government-backed fusion research
       | is purely as a way to keep hot-neutron physicists and contractors
       | employed between weapons projects.
       | 
       | Other approaches may be useful for, e.g., spacecraft propulsion,
       | but Tokamak is burning up the budget. It will need to be
       | jettisoned before we can get much progress on the others.
       | 
       | But right now, every cent that diverted into fusion from building
       | out solar, wind, and storage for them pushes us closer to
       | imminent worldwide disaster.
        
         | alexgmcm wrote:
         | > as a way to keep hot-neutron physicists and contractors
         | employed between weapons projects.
         | 
         | This far more true of ICF than MCF (i.e. tokamak) approaches.
         | 
         | With the excellent results from MAST, it seems the spherical
         | tokamak approach could allow for a much smaller tokamak to
         | built than previously thought - given the size of the tokamak
         | is strongly related to the capital costs (which are the biggest
         | economic hurdle by far) this is great news for economic fusion
         | power.
         | 
         | With the plans for STEP (UK), the US Pilot Plant (in design,
         | seems it will follow similar route to STEP) and the CFETR
         | (China) and the planned experiments at ITER - I suspect
         | economic fusion will be outright proven by 2040 and perhaps
         | even delivering commercial power to the grid by 2050.
         | 
         | Fusion doesn't have the same fundamental physical limits that
         | solar and wind do. That said, I think this sort of zero-sum
         | approach to science is what is going to lead us to imminent
         | worldwide disaster.
         | 
         | In the Manhattan Project they pursued both the Fat Man and
         | Little Boy designs simultaneously despite the cost - this needs
         | to be our approach with the energy crisis, we can't afford to
         | try and pick winners, the cost of failing to do so is far
         | higher than the cost of funding multiple avenues.
        
           | ncmncm wrote:
           | We already know the outcome of Tokamak fusion research:
           | _certainly nothing for, at minimum, decades_. Even if it
           | could be made to work, it would take decades more to build
           | out reactors, at conservatively a $100-billion apiece. We
           | certainly won 't be building dozens of $100-billion reactors
           | until after the first one works long enough to prove itself.
           | 
           | All this time, solar, wind and storage costs will continue on
           | down. Fusion will certainly never be cheaper than fission,
           | which today costs more _just to operate_ than building out
           | new solar. So power from fusion reactors would always be the
           | most expensive alternative. There can never be an
           | economically rational choice to build a terrestrial Tokamak
           | fusion plant.
           | 
           | Meanwhile, we already know the _far and away_ cheapest
           | sources of electric power ever: solar and wind. They start
           | producing immediately. The $100 billion for the first fusion
           | plant, _someday_ , would buy a great deal of solar and wind
           | _today_ , and more all the time, displacing carbon sources
           | _immediately_. Thus, every cent diverted from those to fusion
           | brings the disaster ever closer.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-07-01 23:02 UTC)