It’s almost as if fusion is a significantly more difficult problem to solve than powered flight
Comment on France runs fusion reactor for record 22 minutes
DarkCloud@lemmy.world 3 days agoYeah, and we measured them to the purpose of flight… Not wingspan, or how soft the wheels were.
So maybe we should measure technology that’s about generating power by…
I’ll let you fill in the blank.
glimse@lemmy.world 3 days ago
SkybreakerEngineer@lemmy.world 3 days ago
Yes, but you’re asking how much cargo it can take while we’re barely off the ground. Research reactors aren’t set up to generate power, they’re instrumented to see if stuff is even working.
Evil_incarnate@lemm.ee 3 days ago
Not equivalent. Let’s measure the aircraft performance by its ability to carry passengers between capital cities.
It’s baby steps and we need to encourage more investment. Not dismiss the Wright brothers for being unable to fly from New York to London after ten years of development.
NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 3 days ago
A fusion reactor has already output more power than its inputs 3 years ago. Running a reactor for an extended period of time is still a useful exercise as you need to ensure they can handle operation for long enough to actually be a useful power source.
DarkCloud@lemmy.world 3 days ago
Generating massive amounts of heat and harvesting that and converting it to power are two (or three) different problems.
NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 3 days ago
Agreed. But just to go along with the flight analogy proposed earlier, it took hundreds of years from Da Vinci’s flying machine designs to get to one that actually worked.
DarkCloud@lemmy.world 3 days ago
In 1932, Walton produced the first man-made fission by using protons from the accelerator to split lithium into alpha particles.[5]
We’ve been at this for coming up to 100 years too.
Let me know when they actually generate power. I don’t want another article about a guy jumping off the eifle tower in a bird suit. A successful flight should be measured by the success of the flight.
Power generators should be measured by the power generated.
0 watts. Franz Reichelt went splat on the pavement having proven nothing.
America, the UK, France, Japan, and no doubt other places have been toying with fusion “power” for 90 years… We’ve created heat and not much else as far as I can tell.
TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 3 days ago
I’ll let you fill in the blank
Code switch for: “I don’t have a point so why don’t you make it for me”
DarkCloud@lemmy.world 3 days ago
Verified electrical output, the answer is verified electrical power generated.
…as in we should measure lower generation experiments by how much power they generated.
Isn’t that obvious?
hamsterkill@lemmy.sdf.org 3 days ago
They weren’t trying to generate electricity in this experiment. They were trying to sustain a reaction. As you said in another comment, they are different problems.
Converting heat to electricity is a problem we already understand pretty well since we’ve been doing it basically the same way since the first power plant fired up. Sustaining a fusion reaction is a problem we’ve barely started figuring out.
DarkCloud@lemmy.world 3 days ago
I don’t think we do have a means of converting this heat energy into electrical energy right now. With nuclear we put radioactive rods into heavy water to create steam and drive turbines…
What’s the plan for these fusion reactors? You can’t dump them into water, nor can you dump water into them… I don’t believe we have a means of converting the energy currently.
cubism_pitta@lemmy.world 3 days ago
LLNL has achieved positive power output with their experiments. llnl.gov/…/shot-ages-fusion-ignition-breakthrough…
No fusion reactor today is actually going to generate power in the useful sense.
These are more about understanding how Fusion works so that a reactor that is purpose built to generate power can be developed in the future.
Unlike the movies real development is the culmination of MANY small steps.
Today we are holding reactions for 20 minutes. 20 years ago getting a reaction to self sustain in the first place seemed impossible.
DarkCloud@lemmy.world 3 days ago
Predicted fusion energy and energy actually harvested and converted to usable electricity are not the same thing. Your article is about “fusion energy” not experimentally verified electrical output.
tburkhol@lemmy.world 3 days ago
If you’re not sure how the fire works, it seems kind of stupid to build a turbine for it.
grue@lemmy.world 3 days ago
Leaving the arguments up to this point aside, your comment on its own doesn’t make much sense. The beauty of of a steam turbine electrical generator is that you don’t have to care how the heat gets generated. You can swap it out with any heat source, from burning fossil fuels, to geothermal, to nuclear, to whatever else and it works just fine as long as the rate of heat output is correctly calibrated for the size of the boiler.
Llewellyn@lemm.ee 3 days ago
We were absolutely not sure how fire really works when we used it in caves eons ago.