/sci/ - Science & Math

>>5848739
oh, right, the license extensions
i think a possible factor of that is how long it takes to get approval for a new reactor, since the NRC is again very draconian and heavily scrutinizes new reactor designs, plus there's lots of waiting periods for no reason(?) to the point where the timspan between "i want to build a reactor" to actual breaking ground is like 20 fucking years

its entirely possible that the maintenance and inspection branch of the nrc is crap, but the new approvals branch is partially insane

>>5848489
>NRC
>poor regulation
out
get out

it's probably the most draconian regulator on the face of the planet

>>5844520
>Also, no more worries of accidental parenthood!
more like
>new, less humane form of suicide! die in mere hours of unspeakable agony as you melt from the inside!

>>5844411
i see
and this is why i like the sound of MTF, because really sloppy neutron flux is actually a good thing and generates (some) of the heat energy

>>5844395
must admit, i've heard of boron-boron fusion using the plasma pinch concept but i've never heard of hydrogen boron

>>5844328
>>5844343
you might think that, but this does not scale down well, mostly because with a smaller diameter of sphere your neutron absorption drops off dramatically, until eventually you only "catch" a small fraction of them and the rest just radiate into the driver's compartment. shit efficiency AND very deadly.

>>5844331
the lead is mostly a neutron absorber, the lithium is just breed stock to get more tritium

i'm pretty sure you get like 90% neutron absorption per fusion event, possibly even more. Mind you it's all lost as heat in the lead, but the lead is the working fluid anyway so it's a pretty sweet system, as your radiation shielding is also your absorption medium. potentially great efficiencies right off the bat

>>5844293
it's also badass as fuck
>it's literally equally spaced steam-powered pistons that bang on a central sphere about ten times a second, which causes a lead/lithium implosion in the center which initiates fusion

the sound of this thing in operation must be absolutely deafening. and it's almost like a fusion internal combustion engine

>>5844268
i'm not entirely sure that's a good analogy.
maybe fishing line to contain a large bundle of springs? eventually one of them is going to SPROING out and ruin everything

>>5844251
>inertial electrostatic confinement
if you mean fusor designs and their ilk, i believe the problem there is fundamental physical limits preventing you from hitting breakeven, from summed energy losses.
i think there's a few papers floating around basically stating "the fusor concept will never work, no matter how much you dress it up"

>>5843896
he's talking about magnetized target fusion, which looks pretty promising.
however i'm willing to bet they'll lose a lot of efficiency to imperfect implosions caused by...you guessed it....turbulence

>>5843834
MCF*

turbulence
whether it's beam smoothing in IFC or chaotic plasma currents in MFC, it's always fucking turbulence

seriously, fuck it

as he mentioned, the question has been answered at tons of different sites, so he decided to have a little fun with it

it's a thing, but i don;t see it getting particularly bad until the 2050s or so
based on how things are going, we'll probably have some really solid fission baseload electricity solution by then that beats the pants off anything else in cost, and electric cars will dominate the market. both of those things obliterates co2 output

getting china to pick it up won't be difficult if it's market competitive

uh...
no, sorry.
every single nuclear detonation detector (in space and on the ground) would have detected it. also ionization doesn't really work that way in a nuclear sense

funding
and it's not coming very fast, if at all

a though occurs
if that big-ass 12 mile diameter 100,000 mile per hour monster comet ends up smacking mars next year, what will that mean for habitability?
while there will be significant dust cover from the impact, could the initial heating of the planet from ejecta end up outgassing various things like oxygen and CO2? could it significantly bulk up the atmosphere?

more importantly, could that extra atmosphere collect at the bottom of valles marineris? could the atmospheric pressure at the bottom of the canyon actually end up making habitation much easier?

TAKE ONE FOR THE TEAM, MARS!

well, i put my name in the hat

this man continuously saying "slit" with great emphasis is making me very uncomfortable

>>5589552
not very translucent troll
worst part is people like that actually exist and are actually in positions of power

>for
it might be good, some day, maybe

>against
it's a huge funding sink that could go to better things, things that would indirectly benefit fusion anyway

>>5577060
the star wars program was actually kind of cool, and was a unique peace-oriented use for nuclear weapons (a nuclear weapon was used to prime and fire the laser, it would instantly vaporize an ICBM at the top of its ascent arc, but wouldn't be able to penetrate the atmosphere.

most of the objections to star wars at the time seemed to be "Reagan made it, i hate it"

uh
there better be some kind of deployable cushion to spread the impact force over a wide area, because it SOUNDS like they jsut want to smash shit into it. based on what we know about loose pack asteroids, that's a fucking bad idea because
>>5566398