So what are the limitations of running the reactor for longer? Is it containing the plasma becoming infeasible due to heat or other constraints or does the reaction inside the plasma fizzle out?
I believe that the issue is that the plasma loses stability and the self-sustaining state is lost.
Think of it like a top that runs on fuel but needs outside intervention to get moving. As long as the top’s rotation is stable and has fuel supplied, it can theoretically run forever, but if it loses stability and starts to wobble then it needs an immense outside intervention to retain stability or just tumble until it settles.
Madness sense, thanks!
Wasn’t this the exact plan of Doc Ock from Spiderman 2?
Eh? Wasn’t that the one where his tentacles had that AI, and the fusion power broke it’s control chip so it f-ed with Doc Oc’s head? That wasn’t his plan, that was the plan derailing. The characters fixed (or tried to fix) it in one of the newer movies, the one that established the Sony Spider-Man stuff as canon to the MCU’s multiverse.
Creating the fusion sun was Ocks plan. The tentacles he invent to help create the sun…it was their only purpose. So when the inhibitor chip broke, that ai leeched I to doc and he became obsessed with recreating the experiment.
this sounds like a weapon from Red Alert
Tesla’s death ray concept was both scary and crazy awesome-looking, I’ll give you that. I can understand why “shiny donut filled with PURE ENERGY” can be mistaken for a Tesla coil, and that it’s been revealed Tesla was a Eugenicist rather than the perfect old-fashioned science hero of the Industrial Revolution, but fortunately that and the reputation of the danger of nuclear power are severely overstated.
A fusion torus, essentially, is a wine glass. The plasma is the wine. Sure, it contains ethyl alcohol which is flammable (chefs use it in “au Flambe” dishes") and so people assume that because alcohol burns when you light it on fire to cook fancy food, but if you drop a wine glass, what happens?
It shatters. Except, even better, this wine glass is made with safety glass so that when it shatters, cleanup won’t mean sweeping up glass shards and treating cuts. What’s a little spilled wine compared to having a house named Wormwood (Chernobyl) burn down? This isn’t just a revolution in energy generation, it’s a revolution in the safety of energy generation. Hundreds of thousands die every year, mining coal. Tens of thousands have died for oil. Even renewables, while mostly non-fatal, have a higher ratio of deaths per unit of electricity than the “worst” case scenario of a fusion torus. Nobody has died from the worst case failure of a fusion torus, and that worst case failure has happened countless times before we got a stable fusion reaction.
I understand the pessimism on a political level, but if we survive this the way we survived WWII, fusion will mean a cold war of Mutually-Assured Destruction will be unlikely because now the only reason to have nuclear reactors is to produce compounds needed for medical purposes, which means no more meltdowns (such reactors aren’t for power generation and thus built to use its’ nuclear material in a not-meltdown-able way) thanks to replacing them with fusion.
Now, I know you’re thinking this could turn out to not be scalable or even too expensive to operate, like Concorde was to airplanes. Yes, that is a possibility. The good thing is, we’ve been holding back on redeveloping nuclear power plants because we wanted to at least hear “Oops, guess you were right, fusion is awesome but impractical” from the people trying to get it to work before we made any commitments.
Now we know it is possible. Now, there’s no excuse to not upgrade our electrical grids and use other safe nuclear plants like Thorium reactors or 4th Generation reactors (meltdown-proof thanks to a mechanism which relies on gravity to cool down the fuel, not mechanical “failsafes”) if fusion really is a pipe dream.
If you doubt that last one, imagine an electromagnet is holding a flange closed while the power plant is powered. The fuel is in a spherical shape, submerged in heavy water that boils from the radiation. Suddenly OH NO there’s an earthquake and tsunami and now the power plant is completely unpowered.
The spherical fuel pods not only can power the plant’s own systems, if that fails due to complete catastrophe, the flange that is on the bottom of the pipe at a 90-degree bend loses it’s electromagnetic fastener… and the spheres all plop into an underground chamber filled with more than enough water to keep them cool and thus prevent them from, you know, literally melting their way towards the center of the earth.
It’s not foolproof but unless the lead-lined cooling tank is breached, probability of meltdowns are outside the realm of reasonable doubt. Now think about what fusion offers. Not just “outside the realm of reasonable doubt”, it offers no chance of a meltdown, ever.
This isn’t a weapon. This is a tool that could have saved the Fallout universe (fusion-powered Corvega cars, but in that world America banned their export and also they exploded in mini-nuclear mushroom clouds when damaged, go figure) from weapons, and it can still help save ours from weapons. The worst this will do is make the use of renewables an undeniable way forward, the best could - if we’re lucky - push us permanently into a post-scarcity society.
Smartphones and computers, like the fediverse’s instances, still need electricity. Until now, most electricity has needed to be partly powered in blood. Let’s change that.
Hell March Intensifies
This just brought back so many memories, thanks.
Is it found that that is the line? Afaik it’s still unknown
Thanks for the link!
The original artist said that he thought it was gibberish, but people dug up the recording of the parade that he got the sample from, and it is very clear in the original recording. Also that is a common command issued during parade drills.
Thanks :)
We have one too, unless Trump defunded it
I’ve been super interested in it but Lockheed Martin has not been very vocal about their “compact fusion” project. I would not trust them to save the world at all. The race is on!
PURASUMA!
What we need to do is find some way to make a giant fusion reactor and put it in the sky and get energy from it that way.
But that’s just a pipe dream…
What we need is robust decentralized multimodal energy production fit for the local area where it is installed and contributing to a well maintained distributed grid with multiple redundancies and sufficient storage so that incidental costs are minimized and uptime is effectively 100%. Energy is a tool and its generation is a category of tools, whining about people developing a better screwdriver rather than only using hammers is counterproductive when we’re trying to build a house for as many people as possible that doesn’t fucking kill everyone.
I’m whining about China spending very little on current green energy technology while building more and more coal plants and taking advantage of these sort of PR stories.
I can’t help it, I’m one of those people who whines about climate change.
‘spending very little’???
They produced more new green energy than the total capacity of green energy for the rest of the world combined in 2024.
And yet they keep building more coal plants.
In a generation they went from a famine every decade to the end of famines, in a second generation they went from a industrial age economy with most of its people living in extreme poverty to eliminating extreme poverty and some of its people living on par with those in the wealthiest nations. In this generation they have raised the standard of living of their poorest from a poverty the US hasn’t seen in a century to that of middle class Americans in the 1980s. In order to accomplish this, massive amounts of electricity is needed. That lifestyle is naturally wasteful as it takes electricity for granted, but it’s better by most accounts. This is on top of being the world’s factory and the electricity use that entails.
In short, yes, they need both, and nuclear which they’re also the leader in. Unlike the West they do have plans to get off coal as a power source, and the amount of work they’ve done eliminating coal usage near cities by itself is commendable, compared to its contemporaries like the US.
The poorest parts of China are still much poorer than any middle class. Most rural Chinese still do not complete high school.
And yet they own large farms that are tax free that they can earn money off of. The few low industrialized parts (currently representing less than 200 million) don’t have schools or massive infrastructure, but also have guarantees their way of life and making money is secure until they do have access to those things. And Xinjiang alone shows it’s not an empty promise; going from one of those regions you’re referring to, to a region that rivals Vietnam or Malaysia by itself.
I bet you won’t blame Mao for the last famine.
Just don’t try to leave if you don’t like it.
And no, nobody needs to make climate change worse with more coal plants.
Yeah, mao fucked up, like the US fucked up during its great famine, sorry dust bowl. And then no famine ever again.
To your second point, of course you can’t leave if you’re a criminal (every nation on earth has this policy) or in severe debt to the government (most nations have this policy), but you can leave under pretty much any other circumstances. I didn’t click your link but even you wouldn’t be spreading the conspiracy theory of secret global police that kidnap random yellow people for the cpc, right?
To your third point, coal plants and any other steam generators are easy to convert over to each other once built. A nuclear plant and a coal plant share 70% of their equipment. Building one lays the foundation for the other. If you need quick base load expansion, you can’t really beat coal or diesel, and continually expanding the quality of life for 1.4 billion people requires constant base load expansion… Even better if it can later be converted into near infinite power sources like nuclear.
Last year, China commissioned 96 GW of new coal production and commissioned 356 GW of wind and solar. This was the most coal production China has built in a single year since 2015, and it was still less than the amount of renewables that they put on it.
I wish China could wave a magic wand and have their entire energy grid go green, but the truth is that their middle class is still growing, and with it the demand for electricity, and even with the massive amount of spending they’ve put into wind and solar those forms of power simply can’t keep up with the rising demand on their own, so coal remains a necessary part of their multimodal grid with multiple redundancies and sufficient storage.
“The climate has to get worse for the benefit of the middle class” is a weird argument.
The climate has to get worse for the goal of adding more people from the lower class to the middle class. As someone IN the middle class, who has actual empathy for other human beings, as long as we aren’t going out of our way to kill animals slowly and painfully and/or to the point of extinction, and the ecosystem hasn’t collapsed, I refuse to believe in any goal that puts some vague emphasis on “the climate” as the “good guy” in this.
Evolution is an endless process of monsters eating the babies that need the most help to survive. Nature is the reason we’re killing the environment, “survival of the fittest” i.e. only those with advantages survive and adapt to the changing status of the climate, is the very essence of the very capitalism that is killing the climate.
Survival of the fittest is obsolete and cruel. It’s time we stopped fighting for “the climate” and started defying capitalism, the one place where we can remove Darwinian competition from it without just destroying it further. Sadly, nature needs competition and death to be what it is. That is why we CHOOSE to see humans as separate, instead of justifying it by calling ourselves “just animals”. In the absence of an actual judge above man, we should strive to meet the expectations we would want a benevolent judge to force us to meet.
But let me guess, you’re some greenwashed zealot who only eats vegan food and will probably think I think avocado on toast is common for “young people”? Because only privileged assholes want middle class standards to be lowered. If the superyachts or personal “business” jets were barred from being used by wealthy people like bicycles to globetrot where “the riffraff” can’t afford to go, the dent in carbon emissions would outweigh ALL carbon emissions by everyone else. The rich need to stop riding alone, they can travel 1st class if they want but none of this having a personal jet plane with more seats than the owner has immediate family members. When a teenage “princess” owns a jet so she can fly back and forth to Europe partying non-stop in-flight and until they get back home from vacation-partying every weekend, owning a jet with more than 4 seats is no longer a reasonable thing for the law to allow for private citizens.
I can’t survive without the few luxuries in my life because I literally feel so miserable without access to video games that I would commit suicide. That’s not the same as thinking you’re too good to fly commercial, because I believe no one can reasonably be denied access to the luxuries I have and I understand that people are denied much of what I have. If society can’t uplift most people to middle class, fuck the climate. We’re better off dying if it is doomed to collapse before we achieve a world where people are able to truly enjoy living, not just survive.
If that’s what you think I was saying then you need to work on your reading comprehension.
Probably because they have a billion months to feed and a ridiculously inefficient incentive mechanism for progress in general. Kind of amazing that they put emphasis on green tech at all, except for the fact that they have the bodies to through at it and it’s something the rest of the world values as well.
Yes, yes. China is the best country ever.
Not sure where you get that, just saying things aren’t black and white at scale
Nobody said that though? You seem to be putting words in people’s mouths.
The USA and Lockheed Martin have been making PR stories about fusion for over a decade, while increasing emissions.
I really hope at least one of these is not bullshit.
Yep, they are doing the same thing. Anything but avoiding acting now.
Yeah, and then that artificial sun can give us power at night
It’s too bad there isn’t some sort of way we could store electricity in some sort of containment.
Then we could do stuff like take electrically-powered devices with us wherever we went! Think of how handy that would be!
Batteries will never be enough for full down time store. Anyone who’s saying otherwise is selling you batteries.
Just try to do some paper napkin math how much lithium batteries can store and how much we’d need to just satisfy current demand, not even talking about the near future.
The only battery technology that has promise is good ol’ hydro but it’s only accessible to a few places around the world and in no way sustainable.
Good thing there are options other than batteries. Which I have already linked to.
Also, I am amused that you are suggesting batteries will never have enough storage in a glowing article about non-practical fusion power.
Yeah! We could use such technology to trap this “artificial sun” instead, and then have a steady stable output throughout the night for things that use a bunch of electricity but run constantly, like water filtration plants and material processing facilities.
Great idea! But I guess more research is needed to make this work for the things that use the MOST electricity, instead of small portable devices that use a fraction of the electricity
I don’t know, what you’re saying sounds like a complete impossibility and there definitely aren’t multiple options currently in use. So we better put all our hopes on a technology that has not proven viable in decades despite being always “right around the corner.”
Yeah, too bad humans can only focus on one thing at a time.
It’s always best to abandon projects that are difficult, even if minute progress is being done on them. Like, could you imagine if someone made a machine that can fly? That’s just silly, after all only birds have flown for thousands of years.
And while we’re cutting spending I suppose, why not shut down the LHC too? Barely any progress made there in decades too.
I love you, you’ve played squids game but better than he can. Bravo.
Can you please quote me making such suggestions? Because I looked through our entire conversation and haven’t seen me suggest those things.
Oh squiddy
I never said you made an explicit suggestion, but if you think you’ve made an implied one, go ahead and point out what they might be 🙃
Impressive. :)
I’m tempted, but won’t try to guess how operation endurances will progress - it would be an poorly informed guess by a rando. Better to wait what they write about it in journals.
take all announcements by china with a grain of salt
Any announcements like this coming from China should be taken with a huge grain of salt the size of… China.
Yep. They‘re putting out what they call huge breakthroughs on a weekly basis for months and make headlines. By the time they have been put into perspective or straight out debunked and torn to shreds by the global scientific community, they already squeezed out another wild claim to overshadow criticism. Rinse and repeat. There is a reason the overwhelming majority of AI generated slob studies come from China. They want fast results and know the press won‘t really read them and instead just quote whatever they claim.
eh. they have been verifiably meeting their goals for a long time.
It’s wild that y’all feel so comfortable being so openly Sinophobic.
They put a lot of funding into scientific research, and surprise surprise they get results. Maybe we should emulate their success, instead of continuing to waste our budget on war.
Skepticism of positive press (aka propaganda) from a country notorious for cracking down on negative press (i.e. any mention of Tiananmen Square) is not a phobia. It’s completely justified.
So we’re going to pretend increased financing for scientific study does not lead to better results, because you don’t appreciate them pushing back against US propaganda.
https://liberationnews.org/tiananmen-the-massacre-that-wasnt/
Here’s your logical fallacy.
What goalposts do you believe were moved?
The discussion was about the unreliability of Chinese propaganda. You moved to funding scientific research. You didn’t just move the goalpost a bit. You relocated it to a different city.
you
you
you
Yo if we’re throwing around logical fallacies you might wanna consider this one= https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_hominem
There’s been a whole chain of dialogue here without you substantiating your perspective on the topic at hand 👀
Incorrect. Someone posited that China’s scientific achievements were merely propaganda, and I pointed out that they have invested heavily in research, which tends to produce outcomes.
In fact, you attempted to move the goalposts to non-scientific anti-China propaganda, and it fell flat. Then you attempted to DARVO by accusing others of what you are doing.
If you’ve actually forgotten what we’re discussing, look at the original post. We are discussing China’s scientific breakthroughs.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Breaking records in fusion is the scientific equivalent of flexing in a mirror—EAST’s 17-minute plasma sprint is impressive, but let’s not confuse lab theatrics with grid-ready energy. Fusion’s PR circus loves dangling “unlimited clean energy” while glossing over the actual timeline: we’re still decades from net-positive output, assuming we don’t incinerate the budget first.
China’s state-backed “artificial sun” reeks of geopolitical posturing—ITER’s bloated corpse twitches in France, and suddenly EAST is the poster child? Upgrading microwave-like heating systems to “70,000 household ovens” sounds less like innovation and more like a kitchen appliance dystopia.
The real tragedy? Fusion research remains a closed-loop cult. Open-source this tech, or watch it rot in nationalist silos. Imagine crowdfunding a reactor on GitHub—now that’s a fusion milestone worth celebrating.
This is why it’s always decades away. However, I doubt China is being as cavalier about it.
China’s approach is less cavalier and more calculated opportunism. They’re playing the long game, but let’s not pretend it’s altruistic. Fusion isn’t about saving the planet—it’s about energy dominance. If they crack it first, it won’t be a global breakthrough; it’ll be a geopolitical flex.
The graph you shared screams one thing: chronic underfunding. The “1978 level of effort” line is a funeral procession for innovation. Actual funding is a joke compared to the projections, and every year we delay, the gap widens.
Fusion will stay “decades away” as long as it’s locked behind bureaucratic walls and nationalist agendas. Open up the research, decentralize the effort, and maybe—just maybe—we’ll see progress before the sun burns out.
This reminds me of an article in a mainstream newspaper I read about BYD, that claimed beating China might be more important than winning the war on climate change. Can’t we be happy about technological progress, no matter where it comes from? Nationalism is regressive.
Technological progress isn’t some neutral, utopian march forward—it’s a weapon in the hands of whoever controls it. Pretending the source doesn’t matter is naive at best, dangerous at worst. Nationalism may be regressive, but unchecked global power dynamics are worse. If China dominates fusion, it’s not just about clean energy; it’s about leverage over every nation still burning coal.
We can celebrate progress and question its implications. Decentralization isn’t just a buzzword; it’s a survival strategy. Letting one state monopolize the future of energy is like handing them the keys to the planet. Fusion needs to be a global effort, not a geopolitical trophy. Progress without accountability is just another form of control.
Don’t you think it’s much easier to leverage an ephemeral resource like coal or oil? What you frame as China acquiring leverage is better framed as a loss of leverage by the titans of oil. Time is going to cause that leverage to be lost eventually anyway, so maybe we should be planning for that? Or maybe we should let the people interested in short term gain draft the policy and complain that China is eating our cake.
Leverage over coal or oil is transient because those resources are finite and their relevance is waning. Fusion, however, isn’t just another energy source—it’s a cornerstone for reshaping global influence. If one nation monopolizes it, they dictate the terms of humanity’s energy future. That’s not just leverage; that’s hegemony.
Planning for this inevitability isn’t optional; it’s survival. But letting the “titans of oil” steer the ship? That’s how we end up trading one monopoly for another. Decentralization isn’t a feel-good concept; it’s the only way to ensure no single entity holds all the cards.
Complaining about China eating our cake while doing nothing but drafting policies? That’s how you lose before the game even starts. Accountability and action must precede lamentation.
It’s not worth engaging with AI responses.
Oh, I’m under no delusions that any player in the energy market is altruistic. I just bet they are devoting more resources to it. They are already making big moves on lots of stages concurrently.
But just like China rips off tech all the time, I imagine if China cracks it, it won’t be long till it’s copied.
The irony is that the same system that lets China “rip off tech all the time” is also why they’re outpacing everyone. They don’t wait for bureaucratic permission slips or endless committee debates—they just do. Meanwhile, the West pats itself on the back for “innovation” while starving critical projects of funding and drowning them in red tape.
If China cracks fusion, it won’t just be copied—it’ll be leveraged to tighten their grip on global energy markets. That’s not a tech race; it’s a strategic chokehold. The real tragedy is that instead of collaboration, we’re stuck in this zero-sum paranoia where progress is secondary to power plays. Decentralization isn’t just idealistic—it’s the only way to stop this from becoming another cold war with a hotter ending.
watch it rot in nationalist silos
“ITER includes China, the European Union, India, Japan, Korea, Russia and the United States. Members share costs and experimental results.”
That’s quite the wide “nationalist silos”, no?
Look, I agree that more open = more better, but I think you made it sound a bit as if it’s just France (implied) that’s gaining from this, where it’s really an international effort.
ITER isn’t “international” in any meaningful sense. It’s a bloated Frankenstein of geopolitical vanity projects, where nations bicker over scraps of influence while pretending to collaborate. Sharing costs? Sure, but they’re also sharing inefficiencies, delays, and mountains of red tape. France hosting isn’t just a coincidence—it’s a calculated power play.
Your defense of ITER as a global effort is laughable. Experimental results are locked behind bureaucratic walls, inaccessible to the very people who could accelerate progress. Fusion isn’t advancing; it’s stagnating under nationalist egos.
Valid point, but worth also mentioning an anecdote I read years ago (can’t remember from whom, perhaps Kurzweil?): when they were told the Human Genome Project had mapped 1% they were excited, saying it “had nearly finished”, and then had to keep justifying the statement by explaining the exponential nature of such work to the majority of people who couldn’t view it in any way other than as measured linearly per-result. Supposedly the project was completed only a few years later.
The Human Genome Project anecdote is a great parallel, but here’s the catch: fusion isn’t just an exponential problem; it’s a political one. While the genome folks could pivot and iterate, fusion is shackled by nationalist chest-thumping and bloated bureaucracy.
The exponential curve you’re referencing? It’s flattened every time funding gets siphoned into PR stunts or geopolitical flexing. Crowdfunding might sound naive, but at least it would decentralize the process and cut through the red tape.
Fusion isn’t stuck because of science—it’s stuck because of people. Until we stop treating it like a Cold War relic and start treating it like open-source software, we’ll be stuck in this endless cycle of “almost there” milestones. Let’s break that loop.
(Craig Ventor tried to copyright the human genome, prompting the rest of the genomics scientific community to race to beat him, so I’d claim that the HGP definitely had politics involved.)
Venter’s antics were the epitome of commodifying discovery. Patenting genes wasn’t just about competition—it was a power grab over the building blocks of life itself. The public effort had to scramble not just to finish but to ensure humanity’s genome didn’t become a corporate asset.
This wasn’t innovation; it was exploitation dressed up as progress. The fact that the race even happened shows how broken the system is when profit motives dictate the pace of science. Imagine if all that energy had gone into collaboration instead of brinkmanship.
Fusion’s stuck in the same trap: egos, politics, and profiteering. Until we dismantle these barriers, we’ll keep running in circles, chasing breakthroughs that serve shareholders instead of society.
Genuinely. I do wonder about the safeguards against such profiteering that clearly were not in place. I can understand the perspective of a company or entity that bootstraps discovery and innovation all on its own without any reference to prior art. But it’s never the case.
Behind the thin veneer of professionalism of every tech company is a bunch of grown headless children cobbling together accessible open source tools or pouring through papers published in reputable scientific journals coming out of schools and universities. To re-invent the wheel would be madness, and yet every tech company implicitly makes the claim that they did it alone, instead of standing on the shoulders of the free and accessible tax-funded work that comes out of scientific institutions. It does make me sick to think about it.
The safeguards weren’t missing—they were deliberately bypassed, or worse, designed to fail. The system isn’t broken; it’s functioning exactly as intended, funneling public knowledge into private coffers while selling us the illusion of progress.
These tech vultures don’t innovate; they appropriate. They slap a logo on what’s been painstakingly built by the collective effort of underpaid researchers and public institutions, then act like they’ve cracked the code of the universe. It’s theft, dressed up in a hoodie and a TED Talk.
The real tragedy is how we’ve normalized this parasitism. The public funds the foundation, corporations patent the result, and society foots the bill twice—once in taxes, and again when we’re sold back what was ours to begin with.
These tech vultures don’t innovate; they appropriate. They slap a logo on what’s been painstakingly built by the collective effort of underpaid researchers and public institutions, then act like they’ve cracked the code of the universe. It’s theft, dressed up in a hoodie and a TED Talk.
Well said, starred this comment
I wouldn’t be surprised if it were capitalist motivation that is holding back the actual research. Those that fund it want to have exclusive rights to research akin to the nuclear rat race all over again. It would likely be a benefit to humanity if it were open-sourced but I’m sure that those countries/orgs that own these projects think otherwise.
It would likely be a benefit to humanity if it were open-sourced but I’m sure that those countries/orgs that own these projects think otherwise.
Let’s be real here.
It would likely be a benefit to humanity if it were open-sourced but I’m sure that those countries/orgs that own these projects desire and work towards otherwise.
The capitalist chokehold on fusion research is the elephant in the reactor room. These projects aren’t about humanity’s progress—they’re about patent monopolies and geopolitical leverage. The nuclear arms race never ended; it just swapped warheads for energy grids.
Open-sourcing fusion tech isn’t just a moral imperative; it’s the only way to break this cycle of greed. If nations and corporations keep hoarding breakthroughs, we’ll end up with a dystopia where energy is another tool of oppression.
Crowdfunding a reactor on GitHub might sound absurd, but it’s more realistic than trusting megacorporations or governments to prioritize global welfare over profit margins. Fusion belongs to everyone, or it belongs to no one.
I can’t remember the company name, but they were using an inertial fusion reactor and were hyped for producing positive energy from their test. Someone posted that it wasn’t going anywhere because it was actually just a cover for military tests on possible fusion bombs. I didn’t look too hard, but they did have funding from the military.
I don’t know about weaponizing anything, but I do know the only energy positive fusion reaction was done by making a little pellet of hydrogen, carefully aligning a room full of lasers, and then zapping it into helium. Each time they did it, someone had to walk into the chamber to put in the pellet, and they’d have to spend a few hours aligning the lasers again.
You get more energy out than you put in, but it just doesn’t scale.
cover for military tests on possible fusion bombs
Fusion bombs have been around since the 1950s.
Military funding for fusion research is the perfect example of why this tech is locked behind closed doors. It’s not about solving energy crises; it’s about weaponizing the future. They dangle “clean energy” in front of us while funneling resources into projects that serve their war machines.
Even if these companies stumble onto a breakthrough, it’ll be classified faster than you can say “national security.” The public won’t see a watt of it unless there’s profit or power to be gained by those at the top.
This is why fusion needs to be in the hands of people, not governments or corporations. Open-source and decentralized, or we’ll just trade one form of exploitation for another.
Great. Now put a magnifying glass in front of it and point it at the white house
Not a word about how much energy went into the process and how much was harvested…
I can create plasma using a candle and a microwave.
Not a word about how much energy went into the process and how much was harvested…
A 17 minute runtime in a Tokamak an incremental step on the path to success. You’re in the kitchen looking over the shoulder of the chef saying the steak he’s just put in the pan isn’t cooked enough yet. He knows, but you can’t have the steak on your plate cooked to perfection until he does this current step he’s on.
I can create plasma using a candle and a microwave.
In 1964 you could build an honest to goodness fusion reactor copying the Farnsworth Fusor, yet that would never be on a path to a sustained fusion reaction with a net energy gain. The work in the article is.
I love when online commenters who didn’t even read the article are smarter than the scientists it’s about
I’ll be fair and say I admit anything I’ve said is not somehow more knowledgeable than those actually involved. I call it how I see it, and I know I can be wrong about things.
Producing energy is not the goal of this facility which is why they don’t report on it. The useful output is in refining control and heating methods so that when power producing facilities are built, they can operate continuously. On that front, 17 minutes is very impressive. At the speeds at which the particles in a fusion plasma move, that time frame is essentially an eternity.
It’s the goal of the technology, though, isn’t it?
Yes, it’s a hard problem to solve.
Removed by mod
I took that comment as criticizing dumbed-down science reporting and/or being suspicious of reported breakthroughs from China.
I don’t get why people still doubt China on tech progress. “Hur dur they’re commies so they had to have faked it! There’s just no incentive for them to be smart and driven because America, number one btw, has all the money.”
Like yeah, the country we’ve exported nearly all of our tech and manufacturing to for 40 years definitely has no idea how anything works, guys. Keep doubting.
this is just starting to be mean
Yeah well I guess I’m done being nice to people who think this way. We didn’t use to belittle science like this, we weren’t so afraid of it. We used to respect people for striving to learn more, not belittle them. I’m tired of listening to people belittle scientists because of their own issues.
You have to understand, people are individuals but they are also a holistic collective. If you genuinely ignore the national borders, if race, religion, politics, wealth, sexuality, technological skill and freedom of choice are all removed from the “collective average” of the world’s opinion?
You get people who are afraid. And without those normally-acknowledged “boundaries” to muddle the numbers, you realize that collective is backed into a corner, and it is going to either die or kill whatever is planning to kill it.
That collective doesn’t actually exist or have a will of it’s own, no. The result of it’s effects are not any different than if it did, though, and that means we have a serious problem.
Even in WWII, people were taken in by nationalism in some form. We don’t have that this time. There is no overall “full unit of community” we respect. People will not join armies, people will not join cults, people will not join rebellions, parties, gangs. They, we, need to stop this now. If we do not stop, there will not be a rebuilding in the aftermath. People are too disillusioned with everything to rebuild.
When people fear the whole world, when they fear authoritarianism and anarchy in the same breath, when they cannot trust democracy because they cannot see each other as deserving of a stable, safe world? When having happiness is seen as antithetical to reality itself?
Stop. This. We can discuss how to fix this once we’ve demanded every government on the planet step down at the same time, and begin elections with ALL previous public servants barred from running, or face the consequences. If we don’t demand it, if we consider money to be worth anything anymore, we are all dead. Money is dead and it will remain so until we arrest the people adding to this pile of bullshit for treason.
If we don’t stop it, there’s no reason to be here. Let’s all just commit mass suicide if everything that exists is only there to exploit us.
You took a great deal of liberty in interpreting my comment. There is no anti-intellectualism there. That’s all in your head. My statement “I can create plasma using a candle and a microwave” was aimed at the reporters.
When the research is aimed at eventually building a power plant, then running the process for several minutes without even guesstimating an efficiency factor (or not reporting on it) seems very odd. We can be sure that energy was set free, which the researches must have had to dispose of somehow. I can’t imagine that they just blindly dumped it somehow without even checking how close their dumping process was to failing.
If you’d like to know what a constructive answer would’ve looked like, this is one: https://feddit.nl/comment/15463960
I was disappointed to realize this, but you’re probably right. If there’s no efficiency factor, it likely was not yet (if ever) a plausible energy source.
