Help | Contact Us
NukeWorker.com
NukeWorker Menu Fusion vs Fission  

Author Topic: Fusion vs Fission  (Read 192687 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline HydroDave63

  • Retired
  • *
  • Posts: 6295
  • Karma: 6629
Re: Fusion vs Fission
« Reply #150 on: Jul 28, 2011, 05:14 »
We better not give up fusion.  We have given up our space program, let the accelerator go to Europe, what is left of any technological innovation here?  

Why, mandatory apple slices instead of fries in the Happy Meal , we have most of the world's social networking sites and Snooki got a neck brace last episode. What could be better, I ask you!?!

On-topic: Personally I'm glad the Euros built the Completely Erroneous Ridiculous Numbers (CERN) project. Let them waste tens of billions on a gizmo while they keep making WAGs about what they even look for: "From previous work, the Higgs boson was thought to have a mass somewhere between 114 and 185GeV (gigaelectronvolts) – one GeV is roughly equivalent to the mass of a proton, a subatomic particle found in atomic nuclei. The Atlas team reported a Higgs-like bump in their data between 120 and 140GeV. In a later session, the CMS group announced two bumps in the same region."  So, rather than the good old days when chumps like Fermi , Lawrence and Einstein had to have the math that worked on positron energies, neutron thermalization etc. BEFORE they cut metal, vs. these Gen Y wannabes that want to build it, run to for a year, and then declare success. It's like me nailing a big ol sheet of paper in the backyard, shooting it a box of .22s , find a clump of coincidental holes, circling it with a Sharpie, and awarding myself the Olympic Gold Medal in Triathalon!

If you want fusion, then look at the SPAWAR LENR experiments. Lightning giving off positron annhilation gammas, without a fancy accelerator or 192 lasers. We were closer to fusion with the Farnsworth Fusor, than with the Tokamak. Meanwhile, we spend billions supporting the orbiting treehouse Irrelevant Soviet Subsidy (ISS), and SPAWAR lives on table scraps. That's the outrage!
« Last Edit: Jul 28, 2011, 05:44 by HydroDave63 »

Offline Gamma Glue

  • Light User
  • **
  • Posts: 39
  • Karma: 8
  • Gender: Male
  • If you're not first, you're last!
Re: Fusion vs Fission
« Reply #151 on: Jul 28, 2011, 09:14 »
Wow. So much hate and sarcasm.... I'm overloaded.

I thought the purpose of CERN was to find the HIGGS boson that theory and math already proved should be there. If they don't find it then it's back to the drawing board since the higgs boson is supposed to be the particle that determines the mass of other particles.
What I liked about the ISS was that the US bought a $1 million toilet from Russia to use on the space station... kinda defeats the purpose of international ownership and sharing of technologies if you ask me. I say they spend the money on Bigelow Aerospace and their private space stations. (They already have two unmanned ones in orbit for testing)
http://bigelowaerospace.com/
They use old forgotten NASA technology, that works better and is cheaper to make.

Quote
We were closer to fusion with the Farnsworth Fusor, than with the Tokamak.

Since the WB type reactors from EMC2 are based on the Farnsworth Fusor, I would have to agree.
« Last Edit: Jul 28, 2011, 12:33 by Gamma Glue »

Offline Higgs

  • SRO
  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 1942
  • Karma: 1284
  • Gender: Male
  • Life has a melody...
Re: Fusion vs Fission
« Reply #152 on: Jul 28, 2011, 11:49 »
As my username implies, I am very much interested in the particle world, and I was saddened when Clinton killed the super conducting super collider and I am saddened that NASA is pretty much defunct. I agree, we should be pursuing new technologies and pushing human understanding of the universe to the edge.

America has chosen to take the path of entitlement, laziness and thoughtlessness. We have decided to leave it to other to innovate.

Sad.

Justin
"How feeble is the mindset to accept defenselessness. How unnatural. How cheap. How cowardly. How pathetic.” - Ted Nugent

Offline Starkist

  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 1220
  • Karma: 166
Re: Fusion vs Fission
« Reply #153 on: Jul 28, 2011, 12:16 »
We better not give up fusion.  We have given up our space program, let the accelerator go to Europe, what is left of any technological innovation here? 

Unfortunately, "US of Americans" (sic) are more interested in ipads and angry birds then nuclear power. Hopefully we can turn our economy to developing worthwhile technology instead of ways to make us fatter and lazier....

Offline Gamma Glue

  • Light User
  • **
  • Posts: 39
  • Karma: 8
  • Gender: Male
  • If you're not first, you're last!
Re: Fusion vs Fission
« Reply #154 on: Jul 28, 2011, 12:50 »


Higgs field video.

Content1

  • Guest
Re: Fusion vs Fission
« Reply #155 on: Jul 29, 2011, 08:28 »
Thank for the video.  If we find these particles, is there a way to harness this knowledge to do things we cannot do now?

Content1

  • Guest
Re: Fusion vs Fission
« Reply #156 on: Jul 29, 2011, 08:35 »
Unfortunately, "US of Americans" (sic) are more interested in ipads and angry birds then nuclear power. Hopefully we can turn our economy to developing worthwhile technology instead of ways to make us fatter and lazier....

     I hope you are speaking for yourself.  There are plenty of American still doing things, striving to do better, sharing knowledge and creating new things.  We just have a government that rewards the people you described above.  We can always come back to our senses and run this country life our forefathers did.  When we as a nation go bankrupt, what rises out of the chaos will be the hard workers bringing us back to our place in the world.

Offline Starkist

  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 1220
  • Karma: 166
Re: Fusion vs Fission
« Reply #157 on: Jul 29, 2011, 11:05 »
     I hope you are speaking for yourself.  There are plenty of American still doing things, striving to do better, sharing knowledge and creating new things.  We just have a government that rewards the people you described above.  We can always come back to our senses and run this country life our forefathers did.  When we as a nation go bankrupt, what rises out of the chaos will be the hard workers bringing us back to our place in the world.


Uh no. We are in the Ipod, facebook, and Youtube generation. We drop billions a year into social networking, if nuclear fusion research had a quarter of the funding those things did, Im sure we'd have reactors by now. You have a GM account, start a polysci thread. This is a fusion chat, not politics anyway.



Thank for the video.  If we find these particles, is there a way to harness this knowledge to do things we cannot do now?

Proof of theoretical concepts? Um... yes?



relax cochise...

Offline HydroDave63

  • Retired
  • *
  • Posts: 6295
  • Karma: 6629
Re: Fusion vs Fission
« Reply #158 on: Jul 29, 2011, 11:28 »


Higgs field video.

Higgs bosons: the cosmic packing peanuts that are wedged between James Clerk Maxwell's "luminiferous corpuscles of ether".

and for you Michelson-Morley fans out there....

"The special theory of relativity owes its origins to Maxwell's equations of the electromagnetic field."

    * Albert Einstein, as quoted in New Scientist, Vol. 130 (1991), p. 49

thenuttyneutron

  • Guest
Re: Fusion vs Fission
« Reply #159 on: Jul 30, 2011, 02:13 »
Higgs bosons: the cosmic packing peanuts that are wedged between James Clerk Maxwell's "luminiferous corpuscles of ether".

and for you Michelson-Morley fans out there....

"The special theory of relativity owes its origins to Maxwell's equations of the electromagnetic field."

    * Albert Einstein, as quoted in New Scientist, Vol. 130 (1991), p. 49


The physics allusion of the periodic table

The math is beyond me (maybe I could have understood it before the knowledge decayed away), but it does fit with the particles that we have seen in high energy experiments.  We just have not seen them all.  

Mendeleev came up with the periodic table of elements and it explained the chemical nature of the elements.  He even predicted elemental properties of stuff that had not even been discovered yet.  Probe deeper and you get the chart of the nuclides which explains the nuclear properties of the many different isotopes.  Probe even deeper and you may get the "An Exceptional Theory of Everything".  I want this theory tested some more to see if it can hold up to some rigorous experiments.

I would also rank Maxwell up at the top of my list of greatest scientists ever.  Maxwell, Faraday, Fermi and Tesla would all rank above Einstein IMHO.  Maxwell indirectly gave me my job.  Maxwell had a theory that was debunked and that will never diminish his other scientific work.
« Last Edit: Jul 30, 2011, 02:20 by Nutty Neutron »

Offline Gamma Glue

  • Light User
  • **
  • Posts: 39
  • Karma: 8
  • Gender: Male
  • If you're not first, you're last!
Re: Fusion vs Fission
« Reply #160 on: Aug 02, 2011, 06:21 »
Thank for the video.  If we find these particles, is there a way to harness this knowledge to do things we cannot do now?

They could also find a Higgs Singlet in their search for the Boson. Read about it http://news.discovery.com/space/could-higgs-go-back-in-time-kill-its-grandfather-110316.html. Finding the Higgs boson will prove current theories and lead us to understanding more about the world around us. Not sure what everyday use it will be...

Back on topic of Fusion vs Fission, I've read some about a traveling wave reactor. Is that a worth while idea?

Offline Starkist

  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 1220
  • Karma: 166
Re: Fusion vs Fission
« Reply #161 on: Aug 03, 2011, 02:14 »
They could also find a Higgs Singlet in their search for the Boson. Read about it http://news.discovery.com/space/could-higgs-go-back-in-time-kill-its-grandfather-110316.html. Finding the Higgs boson will prove current theories and lead us to understanding more about the world around us. Not sure what everyday use it will be...

Back on topic of Fusion vs Fission, I've read some about a traveling wave reactor. Is that a worth while idea?


is that the reactor bill gates is funding?

Offline RDTroja

  • Site Heretic
  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4015
  • Karma: 4558
  • Gender: Male
  • I knew I got into IT for a reason!
Re: Fusion vs Fission
« Reply #162 on: Aug 03, 2011, 09:16 »
They could also find a Higgs Singlet in their search for the Boson. Read about it http://news.discovery.com/space/could-higgs-go-back-in-time-kill-its-grandfather-110316.html. Finding the Higgs boson will prove current theories and lead us to understanding more about the world around us. Not sure what everyday use it will be...

Back on topic of Fusion vs Fission, I've read some about a traveling wave reactor. Is that a worth while idea?

Impossible... George Harrison and Roy Orbison are both dead. Oh... wait... that was the Traveling Wilburys... never mind.
"I won't eat anything that has intelligent life, but I'd gladly eat a network executive or a politician."

                                  -Marty Feldman

"Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to understand that it bears a very close resemblance to the first."
                                  -Ronald Reagan

I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: 'O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous.' And God granted it.

                                  - Voltaire

Offline Gamma Glue

  • Light User
  • **
  • Posts: 39
  • Karma: 8
  • Gender: Male
  • If you're not first, you're last!
Re: Fusion vs Fission
« Reply #163 on: Aug 05, 2011, 03:58 »

is that the reactor bill gates is funding?

Yes.

Content1

  • Guest
Re: Fusion vs Fission - new problems
« Reply #164 on: Sep 10, 2011, 04:09 »
Fusion is in kind a a plateau.  When you start to collapse the sample the lasers get out of focus as the target is compressed and the reaction is not as efficient.  We need a way to move them in as the sample is compressed.   At higher laser powers to get the higher yields, the optics imperfection slowly destroy the optics preventing the high yield.  We have come far, but it seems we have far to go.

Offline GLW

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 5494
  • Karma: 2523
  • caveo proditor,...
Re: Fusion vs Fission - new problems
« Reply #165 on: Sep 10, 2011, 08:02 »
Fusion is in kind a a plateau.....

Has been,....

For pret' near 60 years,...

Ah well,...

been there, dun that,... the doormat to hell does not read "welcome", the doormat to hell reads "it's just business"

Offline HydroDave63

  • Retired
  • *
  • Posts: 6295
  • Karma: 6629
Re: Fusion vs Fission - new problems
« Reply #166 on: Sep 10, 2011, 09:43 »
Fusion is in kind a a plateau.  When you start to collapse the sample the lasers get out of focus as the target is compressed and the reaction is not as efficient.  We need a way to move them in as the sample is compressed.   At higher laser powers to get the higher yields, the optics imperfection slowly destroy the optics preventing the high yield.  We have come far, but it seems we have far to go.

When using an incorrect process, that is usually the result. Good scientists would back up and rework the theory before the next experiments. Alchemists, political hack pseudo-scientists (such as  Trofim Lysenko) and snake-oil salesmen would just keep adding whistles and bells.

And whatever happened to the Fusion Happy Dance of 2010??? :

Like in the movie, "Evan Almighty" when we are successful this year I will do the "Dance" and dedicate it to the naysayers like yourself.   We are so close and I am there, you are not to know or base an opinion.  I suppose you think the Moon Landing were done in a studio too.
« Last Edit: Sep 10, 2011, 09:44 by HydroDave63 »

Offline Rennhack

  • Forum Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 9015
  • Karma: 4683
  • Gender: Male
Re: Fusion vs Fission
« Reply #167 on: Sep 10, 2011, 02:00 »
Fusion is in kind a a plateau.  ....  We have come far, but it seems we have far to go.

Um...  We told you so.

Offline thenukeman

  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 1939
  • Karma: 1964
  • Elements Rule Battle , Elementis Regamus Proleium
Re: Fusion vs Fission
« Reply #168 on: Sep 10, 2011, 09:47 »
Let's Defund Fusion Now!!! Make Matter -Anti Matter reactors!!!!

 It is time to go for real power!! If I remember right, a piece of U235  that is eqivalent in size to a piece of coal has about 3 million times its power, fusion material, about 12 million times and Anti-matter is about 1.2 billion times.  


Time to go for the gold!! 1.2 billion times power and little waste.   Shut down the fusion, wind, solar, research and go antimatter.  Be like going to  the moon have it  done end of this decade.   Beginning of the 60's Kennedy  set the moon as a goal and we acheived it. Real energy independence would be antimatter.
« Last Edit: Sep 10, 2011, 10:01 by thenukeman »

Content1

  • Guest
Re: Fusion vs Fission
« Reply #169 on: Sep 11, 2011, 04:15 »
Um...  We told you so.

I have invested a lot of time into fusion.  I will be disappointed if it ultimately fails not because it is a job to me.  We know it works on the Sun.  Making a working piece of the Sun is not so easy.  We should all hope it works someday, we can't build more nukes, Democrats want to shutdown coal, and oil is out the roof in price, solar has failed like the 1/2 billion spent on that "green energy" company that went bankrupt, wind kills migrating bird and doesn't blow enough to work without massive government subsidies, and it takes more energy to produce the ethanol from corn then we derive from its use.   Fusion we can destroy the Hydrogen to make helium that will have little impact on the Earth.  Helium will float away.  We have 6.5 billion on the Earth and growing.  We are destined for tragedy of starvation and lack of water unless we can achieve a balance somehow.

Offline thenukeman

  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 1939
  • Karma: 1964
  • Elements Rule Battle , Elementis Regamus Proleium
Re: Fusion vs Fission
« Reply #170 on: Sep 11, 2011, 11:25 »
Karma to you Content for coming to reality on Fusion and the difficulties in sustaining it.  I hope like you that it will come to reality soon. Right now it does not seem like a reality in the near future.

thenuttyneutron

  • Guest
Re: Fusion vs Fission
« Reply #171 on: Sep 11, 2011, 04:40 »
I have invested a lot of time into fusion.  I will be disappointed if it ultimately fails not because it is a job to me.  We know it works on the Sun.  Making a working piece of the Sun is not so easy.  We should all hope it works someday, we can't build more nukes, Democrats want to shutdown coal, and oil is out the roof in price, solar has failed like the 1/2 billion spent on that "green energy" company that went bankrupt, wind kills migrating bird and doesn't blow enough to work without massive government subsidies, and it takes more energy to produce the ethanol from corn then we derive from its use.   Fusion we can destroy the Hydrogen to make helium that will have little impact on the Earth.  Helium will float away.  We have 6.5 billion on the Earth and growing.  We are destined for tragedy of starvation and lack of water unless we can achieve a balance somehow.

Using the proven technology of fission and breeder reactor technology using more advanced fuel cycles, we could buy time to allow a better technology to replace it. 

Maybe on day we will have fusion.  We need energy now if we want to keep our progress going and I see nothing better than fission with today's technology.  I just want to move past Light Water Reactors and go with safer designs.

Offline Marlin

  • Forum Staff
  • *
  • Posts: 17506
  • Karma: 5147
  • Gender: Male
  • Stop Global Whining!!!
Re: Fusion vs Fission
« Reply #172 on: Sep 12, 2011, 11:12 »
The Brits seem to think we are on the right track with laser compression.

The UK has formally joined forces with a US laser lab in a bid to develop clean energy from nuclear fusion.

Unlike fission plants, the process uses lasers to compress atomic nuclei until they join, releasing energy.

The National Ignition Facility (Nif) in the US is drawing closer to producing a surplus of energy from the idea.

The UK company AWE and the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory have now joined with Nif to help make laser fusion a viable commercial energy source.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-14842720

Offline HydroDave63

  • Retired
  • *
  • Posts: 6295
  • Karma: 6629
Re: Fusion vs Fission
« Reply #173 on: Sep 12, 2011, 12:01 »
The Brits seem to think we are on the right track with laser compression.

The UK has formally joined forces with a US laser lab in a bid to develop clean energy from nuclear fusion.

Unlike fission plants, the process uses lasers to compress atomic nuclei until they join, releasing energy.

The National Ignition Facility (Nif) in the US is drawing closer to producing a surplus of energy from the idea.

The UK company AWE and the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory have now joined with Nif to help make laser fusion a viable commercial energy source.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-14842720

Since the Internet is forever....

I'll wager a steak dinner that the Brit AWE experiments fail to acheive break-even as well.

Sonofusion
, as shown by RPI,can be demonstrated on a small scale using lower tech. The point being that even sonofusion uses lower input energy and exploits already existing EM phenomena on a small-scale. Another example is a lightning bolt, as cited earlier. There is no massive magnetic confinement, just a huge density of ionization and plasma that facilitates fusion during the ground-cloud charge motion. Trying to force fusion with higher and higher input energies won't work for the same reason that the first fissioning of uranium was at low-energy and using tabletop equipment  The best thermal neutron for U-235 doesnt come from CERN or a tokamak, but rather a pokey 0.025 eV neutron.

Tesla, Maxwell and Farnsworth together in a lab could have gotten us LENR fusion by now.  The key isn't the laser, it is truly understanding what an electron is or is not.

Chimera

  • Guest
Re: Fusion vs Fission
« Reply #174 on: Sep 12, 2011, 03:15 »
We know it works on the Sun.  Making a working piece of the Sun is not so easy.

Actually, the scientists that study the sun keep getting amazed by what they are discovering.  This trail of "not knowing" goes all the way back to early neutrino experiments and is as new as the stars they've discovered that they claim shouldn't exist (see Astronomy picture of the day last week).  I'm of the personal opinion that, while they may have a working hypothesis for what the sun does, they really don't know enough yet to make fusion work here in a laboratory.

 


NukeWorker ™ is a registered trademark of NukeWorker.com ™, LLC © 1996-2024 All rights reserved.
All material on this Web Site, including text, photographs, graphics, code and/or software, are protected by international copyright/trademark laws and treaties. Unauthorized use is not permitted. You may not modify, copy, reproduce, republish, upload, post, transmit or distribute, in any manner, the material on this web site or any portion of it. Doing so will result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the law.
Privacy Statement | Terms of Use | Code of Conduct | Spam Policy | Advertising Info | Contact Us | Forum Rules | Password Problem?