/sci/ - Science & Math

>>4420645
Yes sir

Sorry sir

>implying plasma containment isn't fucking difficult

its not easy containing plasma.

the end.

>>4420645
Funding.
ITER is currently under construction.

Fusion research here in the states is ALWAYS hampered by the lack of funding.

please donate to the multi-billion dollar funding that the program needs, OP. stop being a freeloader

>>4420658
Fusion labs have to practically BEG the DOE for funding.

>>4420645
well let's see, there's the coulomb barrier and the fact we don't understand plasma physics all that well...

Yes, we are trying:
http://www.lawrencevilleplasmaphysics.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=62&am
p;Itemid=80

http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/12/australian-star-scientific-is-probably.html

>>4420645
>Fusion
Lol. Nuclear fission is where it's at. LFTR, IFR, CANDU, etc.

>>4420654
>>4420657
Plasma containment isn't all that difficult, you just use fucking magnets, it's keeping things hot enough to burn that's difficult. Hot plasmas tend to radiate x-rays and what not. Sorta hard to reflect those back into the plasma to keep the burn going.

>mfw when people don't know anything about fusion

Fusion requires quantum tunneling, not heat and pressure.

>>4420645
I would be so scared to be inside there. What if it went online and started fusioning with me inside there?

>>4420711

>>4420687
>>mfw the temperature required to get meaningful amounts of fusion is still around 10 KeV.

>>4420711
You would first need a suit that could handle the vacuum.

>>4420711
You'd die of asphyxiation before any fusion process could take place. The reactor has to be pumped down to vacuum and filled with gas at near vacuum in order to fuse.

>>4420719

>mfw temperature is not the hard part

>>4420719

>mfw we've created temperatures 1000 times hotter than the center of the sun

Polywelll > Tokamak

Fusion will always be 50 years away.

Truth is, you can't create high temperature long enough to sustain a fusion reaction.

Polywell > Tokamak

>>4420767
>>4420785
>>mfw losing too much energy from radiative cooling to continue the reaction is a huge problem

>>4420801
yeah, but what about recent research that shows that the polywell doesn't scale like bussard thought it would?

>>4420677
>Plasma containment isn't all that difficult

Back to wikipedia with you.

>fusion
>laughing whores.jpeg

Fission > Fusion

>>4420807
Shitload of polywells then? I dunno.

Does anyone know if we've at least reached "break even"?

>>4420807
link?

Anyone know of any good source that describes how the hell they plan to make a containment wall that can survive the insane neutron flux?

>2012
>not just inventing cold fusion

Come on you faggots, if they did it in Fallout without color television you can throw a bunch of iPhones in a bucket and figure this shit out

>>4420833
And then there's this jackass. Just moved onto nuclear fission in school?

>>4420851
Fission has the real chance to solve our energy needs. Fusion is impractical at today's tech, and probably at all foreseeable tech.

Again, can you describe to me what sort of material you're going to use to take the very high neutron flux, and studies that show how long it will last under that flux?

>>4420857
Seriously, this.

Even wildly optimistic 'everything goes better than expected' projections for tokamak reactors is that they'd be >2x as expensive as CURRENT fission plants. By 2030, assuming realistic cost reductions for fission, you're looking at optimistically >3-4x the cost of fission.

>>4420927
I'm still wondering what materials they have that can survive that neutron flux, and if they have any actual experiments that show its lifetime under that flux, including cost to replace, and how hazardous is this waste.

>>4420645

Sorry op but this the correct fusion method, and they're either doing it now in increments or they are about to turn it on later this year or the next.