Fusion Reactor Works!!! *

[Jimmy Higgins]

* - well, when we say works....

[quote='Star in a Jar' Fusion Reactor Works and Promises Infinite Energy]In a study published in the latest edition of the journal Nature Communications, researchers confirmed that Germany's Wendelstein 7-X (W7-X) fusion energy device is on track and working as planned. The space-age system, known as a stellerator, generated its first batch of hydrogen plasma when it was first fired up earlier this year. The new tests basically give scientists the green light to proceed to the next stage of the process.[/quote]The next stage would be a few stages away from "It works!!!"

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Excellent, the power of the sun in the palm of our hands.

 

[Malintent]

The first time I ever heard the term "star in a jar" it was in reference to a jar of water, subjected to a finely tuned sound frequency that created a standing wave within the jar that created cavitation. The result was a tiny bubble inside the jar being formed, and then crashing together with such force as to produce light, and then reforming, etc... at the speed of the frequency of the wave generating sound.
The issue with making any use of it was that any attempt to utilize the energy emitting from the bubble disrupts the wave and stops the output.

this seems different...

 

[skepticalbip]

The first time I ever heard the term "star in a jar" it was in reference to a jar of water, subjected to a finely tuned sound frequency that created a standing wave within the jar that created cavitation. The result was a tiny bubble inside the jar being formed, and then crashing together with such force as to produce light, and then reforming, etc... at the speed of the frequency of the wave generating sound.
The issue with making any use of it was that any attempt to utilize the energy emitting from the bubble disrupts the wave and stops the output.

this seems different...

It is different. This is about a controlled fusion reaction - the Sun (a star) is powered by fusion so the allusion, "star in a jar".

But articles like this one are frustrating. They make it sound like something really revolutionary, like there has never been controlled fusion before. Labs have been designing and using similar devices (TOKOMAKs) for something like fifty years now to generate controlled fusion. The problem that hasn't yet been overcome is to generate sustained fusion with above unity usable power output. That article doesn't mention whether or not this design has accomplished this.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The first time I ever heard the term "star in a jar" it was in reference to a jar of water, subjected to a finely tuned sound frequency that created a standing wave within the jar that created cavitation. The result was a tiny bubble inside the jar being formed, and then crashing together with such force as to produce light, and then reforming, etc... at the speed of the frequency of the wave generating sound.
The issue with making any use of it was that any attempt to utilize the energy emitting from the bubble disrupts the wave and stops the output.

this seems different...

It is different. This is about a controlled fusion reaction - the Sun (a star) is powered by fusion so the allusion, "star in a jar".

But articles like this one are frustrating. They make it sound like something really revolutionary, like there has never been controlled fusion before. Labs have been designing and using similar devices (TOKOMAKs) for something like fifty years now to generate controlled fusion. The problem that hasn't yet been overcome is to generate sustained fusion with above unity usable power output. That article doesn't mention whether or not this design has accomplished this.

Fusion power is probably about 50 years away.

It was about 50 years away 30 years ago and will be about 50 years away in another 30 years. Fusion energy is consistent!

 

[skepticalbip]

It is different. This is about a controlled fusion reaction - the Sun (a star) is powered by fusion so the allusion, "star in a jar".

But articles like this one are frustrating. They make it sound like something really revolutionary, like there has never been controlled fusion before. Labs have been designing and using similar devices (TOKOMAKs) for something like fifty years now to generate controlled fusion. The problem that hasn't yet been overcome is to generate sustained fusion with above unity usable power output. That article doesn't mention whether or not this design has accomplished this.

Fusion power is probably about 50 years away.

It was about 50 years away 30 years ago and will be about 50 years away in another 30 years. Fusion energy is consistent!

Yup, fusion power has been only twenty to thirty years away for about fifty years now and still is. This ITER approach is so far only decreasing the negative gap between power in and power out but is costing many billions of dollars by building larger and larger TOKAMAK like machines. The latest one is several stories high.

But there is new hope on the horizon. DARPA is funding research by Lockheed's Skunk Works on a radically new approach of a compact fusion reactor design, nothing like the TOKAMAKs. Since both DARPA and the Skunk Works seem to have a track record of doing the unimaginable, maybe this will be producing excess usable power in "only another twenty or thirty years."

 

[bilby]

Fusion power is probably about 50 years away.

It was about 50 years away 30 years ago and will be about 50 years away in another 30 years. Fusion energy is consistent!

Yup, fusion power has been only twenty to thirty years away for about fifty years now and still is. This ITER approach is so far only decreasing the negative gap between power in and power out but is costing many billions of dollars by building larger and larger TOKAMAK like machines. The latest one is several stories high.

But there is new hope on the horizon. DARPA is funding research by Lockheed's Skunk Works on a radically new approach of a compact fusion reactor design, nothing like the TOKAMAKs. Since both DARPA and the Skunk Works seem to have a track record of doing the unimaginable, maybe this will be producing excess usable power in "only another twenty or thirty years."

Well DARPA has always taken the approach that if you want to come up with a few good ideas, you need to thoroughly test a LOT of ideas, most of which will turn out to be total pants.

They do the unimaginable, but only because they try lots of things, most of which turn out to be not only unimaginable but also impossible, and are then dropped. It is not reasonable to be confident of success at the beginning of this process - there is a selection bias at work, as we only hear of the successful results, while the more numerous failures are quietly discarded.

 

[fromderinside]

You should be reading Commerce Business Daily http://www.cbd-net.com/

ARPA had been renamed and reassigned to DoD as DARPA in '73 when I interviewed with them for a research position. Woo woo, and how many other woos wouldn't be strong enough to describe the cloaks I was attempting to put on. Tversky was really big back then when I was playing with conjoint measurement as a Workload estimation tool.

Bit of trivia: J.C. R. Licklider my all time neuroscience idol had been head of ARPA in the sixties after he left IBM, after he left Wiener's group MIT which included Shannon and a few other notables.

 

[Jayjay]

Fusion has been demonstrated to work with hydrogen bombs. If all else fails we can just detonate one and put some water tanks and a few wind turbines 50 miles out. Easy peasy.

 

[bilby]

Fusion has been demonstrated to work with hydrogen bombs. If all else fails we can just detonate one and put some water tanks and a few wind turbines 50 miles out. Easy peasy.

The idea of using H-bombs as fusion power sources isn't new - it was suggested in the 1950s that you could set one off underground, then use the heat to run a power station. Basically it's just the same as geothermal power, except that you use a fusion bomb to heat rocks wherever you want to put the plant, rather than having to find a pre-existing hotspot.

In principle there's no insurmountable engineering or cost barrier to doing this; but it's not permitted under various treaties that ban underground testing of nuclear weapons.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Fusion has been demonstrated to work with hydrogen bombs. If all else fails we can just detonate one and put some water tanks and a few wind turbines 50 miles out. Easy peasy.

The idea of using H-bombs as fusion power sources isn't new - it was suggested in the 1950s that you could set one off underground, then use the heat to run a power station. Basically it's just the same as geothermal power, except that you use a fusion bomb to heat rocks wherever you want to put the plant, rather than having to find a pre-existing hotspot.

In principle there's no insurmountable engineering or cost barrier to doing this; but it's not permitted under various treaties that ban underground testing of nuclear weapons.

But this wouldn't be testing.

 

[bilby]

The idea of using H-bombs as fusion power sources isn't new - it was suggested in the 1950s that you could set one off underground, then use the heat to run a power station. Basically it's just the same as geothermal power, except that you use a fusion bomb to heat rocks wherever you want to put the plant, rather than having to find a pre-existing hotspot.

In principle there's no insurmountable engineering or cost barrier to doing this; but it's not permitted under various treaties that ban underground testing of nuclear weapons.

But this wouldn't be testing.

Just because testing is not the primary purpose of a nuclear explosion, that does not mean that such an explosion is not testing.

According to the CTBT, all nuclear explosions are prohibited: "The Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) is a multilateral treaty that bans all nuclear explosions, for both civilian and military purposes, in all environments." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comprehensive_Nuclear-Test-Ban_Treaty

While it is not actually binding: "States that need to take further action for the treaty to enter into force: China, Egypt, India, Iran, Israel, North Korea, Pakistan, United States", it is considered very poor form in the international community to ignore this treaty; The French were careful to complete their testing at Muraroa Atoll before the CTBT was opened for signature in 1996, and only three nations have carried out explosions in contravention of the terms of the treaty since - Pakistan, India, and North Korea.

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CdtAFIl2jhc[/YOUTUBE]