…!..
bbc.com/news/science-environment-63950962
It won`t be all over by Christmas, but…hopeful. 
Maybe there will be a clean plentiful energy source in the future.
If we don`t make the planet uninhabitable first
They was talking about this on the TV last night, they reckon they can get about 20% more energy out than is put in and that really is a game changer
Cue the conspiracy theorists telling us it’s all a big hoax 
tachograph:
Cue the conspiracy theorists telling us it’s all a big hoax
Is there a need for a 21st century rule?
“Entropy increases” is a basic rule.
“Nonsense increases in direct proportion to the amount of good knowledge available”…?
“Nonsense increases as the square of the ease of sharing it”…?
…needs further research…
(always useful when wanting money for spouting guff*)
*and occasionally for good stuff
Oppenheimer wasn’t referring to fossil fuels with the words death and destroyer of worlds.
No one made the thermonuclear fusion bomb because it’s supposedly cleaner and less destructive than fission.
Carryfast:
Oppenheimer wasn’t referring to fossil fuels with the words death and destroyer of worlds.
No one made the thermonuclear fusion bomb because it’s supposedly cleaner and less destructive than fission.
No one makes bombs that are less destructive…
Thank you for the insight.
Any and all forms of energy can be used for good or evil.
A more powerful form of energy has the potential to do more of either.
Fossil fuels are currently degrading the Earth as a place for us to live comfortably.
We need cleaner fuels, and hopefully fusion will be a tool to use, if we don`t go past the tipping point first.
It would be fantastic for the worlds future energy needs , I wonder how long it will take for a commercial implementation of one.
lancpudn:
It would be fantastic for the worlds future energy needs , I wonder how long it will take for a commercial implementation of one.
At least partly it`ll depend on how much effort (money!) is put in.
Now there has been a proper proof of concept exercise, then maybe commercial interests will invest to be the first? Maybe National Govs will invest?
Plenty of time for us to go past the tipping point before anything commercially useful is even on the horizon, Im afraid. It is very hopeful stuff, but it isnt the seventh cavalry riding to our rescue.
Franglais:
Carryfast:
Oppenheimer wasn’t referring to fossil fuels with the words death and destroyer of worlds.
No one made the thermonuclear fusion bomb because it’s supposedly cleaner and less destructive than fission.No one makes bombs that are less destructive…
Thank you for the insight.Any and all forms of energy can be used for good or evil.
A more powerful form of energy has the potential to do more of either.Fossil fuels are currently degrading the Earth as a place for us to live comfortably.
We need cleaner fuels, and hopefully fusion will be a tool to use, if we don`t go past the tipping point first.
As I said irrational anti fossil fuel zealots to the point of pushing a lethal unaffordable option v what is basically just burning long dead vegetation.
A nuclear disaster resulting from civil use and its results are very similar to the results of a nuclear weapon if not the same.There are no real fossil fuel based WMDs in that regard for a reason.
While the difference between civil v military use of nuclear energy is a blurred, impossible to distinguish, line
My daughter is reading Physics at Canterbury.
As a “Brainiac” she points out that “Further Developments” in Nuclear Fusion as an “Infrastructure” - won’t happen all the while Electric Power is as expensive as it is…
“Containment” of the reaction - continues to plague nuclear engineers with problems, just one of which is “Powering the Containment Device”.
New materials are being developed that could alter that perspective, but it is a long and slow road ahead nonetheless.
The article points out that although “more energy was gotten out than was put in” for the first time (“The Breakthrough”) - but if you include the powering of the containment vessels - the whole experiement continues to run at a loss in power in/power out terms.
“if only we had some bread, some bacon, and some eggs - we could have a bacon and egg sandwich!”
“If only we had cheap electric power for a brand new nuclear facility, and some new materials developed that are perfect INSULATORS - we could have fusion power in our lifetimes on a commercia, almost free basis…”
As it stands, there’s no such thing as a “Magnetic Insulator” - merely a “conductive getaround”.
There’s also no such thing as a “Manufactured Solid that can contain a temperature of over a million degrees celcius” - all materials known are PLASMA at this temperature, which of course - isn’t solid, but can act as “Solid” - in the same way one cannot fly through the center of the sun, even at the speed of light…
It would be like “Juggling Smoke” to try and keep it all together…
Containment of Antimatter - is even more difficult, as even a few atoms of the active ingredient - colliding with the sides of the “normal” matter containment vessel - would detonate in the form of E=MC2 where you won’t need a pound of fissile material to create a nuclear blast - a piece about the size of a grain of sand will do!
1> Cheap Electric 2>New Materials >3 Achieve Containment >The Holy Grail of Physics >Save Humanity from the future destruction of the Earth (by leaving it!)
You’re on a south sea island, a typhoon is coming… Do you (1) Bury yourself under the single palm tree (2) Swim for it (3) Build a boat from that palm tree, and leave whilst you still can!
A group of countries are investing in the biggest tokamak ever to be built. It’s on a site near Marseille. Last time I looked 2025 was the firing up date
It’s a massive piece of construction.
Franglais:
Carryfast:
Oppenheimer wasn’t referring to fossil fuels with the words death and destroyer of worlds.
No one made the thermonuclear fusion bomb because it’s supposedly cleaner and less destructive than fission.No one makes bombs that are less destructive… Neutron Bombs - kill people, but leave buildings mainly intact.
Thank you for the insight.Any and all forms of energy can be used for good or evil. Evil can only be committed by sentient beings. If you kick someone of a cliff, “Gravity” didn’t kill them - YOU did.
A more powerful form of energy has the potential to do more of either. The ultimate killing power - is to send a force initiated by one person that can kill everyone, and cannot be stopped by even EVERY person. I’d suggest the fictional character “Dr Soran” who depicts this role perfectly as “Mad Scientist with a Mission”.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V8PKyEfF9HA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V8PKyEfF9HA
“Wot if one could extinguish rather than create - nuclear fusion?”Fossil fuels are currently degrading the Earth as a place for us to live comfortably.
We need cleaner fuels, and hopefully fusion will be a tool to use, if we don`t go past the tipping point first.
Not true. Nature achieves a re-balance by more green growth to compensate for the extra CO2 in the atmosphere, thus bringing back the equilibrium. That is the way it always has been for Aeons!
“Climate Change” is a natrual process that people can prepare for, rather than treat it as a “Man-Made Process” that we can somehow “Prevent” out of Godless Hubris…
The time to give up fossil fuels is AFTER we’ve developed fusion power, not burned our boats when the next stage of survival is “Getting off this damned island before it’s too late!”
The whole “Green Agenda” is like “Bringing back Logan’s Run-style Death at 30 - until we’ve cured Cancer”…
The Greensters think they can kill more of one side of politics than the other though, despite evidence already in sight that it is the Right of politics that is calling BS on the entire “Official Narrative” we’re currently moving through…
Carryfast:
Oppenheimer wasn’t referring to fossil fuels with the words death and destroyer of worlds.
No one made the thermonuclear fusion bomb because it’s supposedly cleaner and less destructive than fission.
Don’t forget also that the correct quote from the Hindu scripture is “I AM become Death, destroyer of Worlds” rather than “I HAVE become Death”…
Doesn’t that mean that in this concept “Death” is a newly created deity (Polytheist doctrin here, remember…) that is the first deity capable of destroying an entire planet? This would also mean that any lesser, mere “God of War” or “God of Destruction” - presumably doesn’t go that far?
(Stick this one on R4 “Thought for Today”…) 
^^ I believe that you refer to Shiva?
Winseer:
Carryfast:
Oppenheimer wasn’t referring to fossil fuels with the words death and destroyer of worlds.
No one made the thermonuclear fusion bomb because it’s supposedly cleaner and less destructive than fission.Don’t forget also that the correct quote from the Hindu scripture is “I AM become Death, destroyer of Worlds” rather than “I HAVE become Death”…
Doesn’t that mean that in this concept “Death” is a newly created deity (Polytheist doctrin here, remember…) that is the first deity capable of destroying an entire planet? This would also mean that any lesser, mere “God of War” or “God of Destruction” - presumably doesn’t go that far?
(Stick this one on R4 “Thought for Today”…)
The point is that even any honest scientists who work with nuclear energy will tell you it’s nasty dangerous stuff that is the antithesis of life.Including those at Harwell and Shrivenham who told my Dad that it’s a caged rabid tiger that they are working with.But you can’t see it or know it’s there until it’s already too late, when he was working on fire safety equipment there.
Unlike burning long dead plants.
the maoster:
^^ I believe that you refer to Shiva?
Has Shiva “become death” and is no longer Shiva then, or has Shiva merely added a weapons level? 
मैं संसारों का नाश करने वाला बन गया हूँ
Obvious, innit.
Translating a word “telephone” from one language to another may be easy.
Translating “God” or “world” is more likely to be an interpretation. as different cultures may understand those concepts very differently.
“If a lion could speak, we could not understand him.”
Wittgenstein.
OwenMoney:
https://www.iter.orgA group of countries are investing in the biggest tokamak ever to be built. It’s on a site near Marseille. Last time I looked 2025 was the firing up date
It’s a massive piece of construction.
I certainly didn`t realise that was going on. Huge.
And since this is TNUK,
104 KILOMETRES
The heaviest components of the ITER machine will be shipped to the nearest Mediterranean port and then transported along 104 kilometres of specially modified road known as the ITER Itinerary. The dimensions of these components are impressive: the heaviest will weigh nearly 900 tons including the transport vehicle; the largest will be approximately four storeys—or 10.6 metres—high. Some will measure 9 metres across; others 33 metres long
Will they check for low bridges first?
Franglais:
OwenMoney:
https://www.iter.orgA group of countries are investing in the biggest tokamak ever to be built. It’s on a site near Marseille. Last time I looked 2025 was the firing up date
It’s a massive piece of construction.I certainly didn`t realise that was going on. Huge.
And since this is TNUK,104 KILOMETRES
The heaviest components of the ITER machine will be shipped to the nearest Mediterranean port and then transported along 104 kilometres of specially modified road known as the ITER Itinerary. The dimensions of these components are impressive: the heaviest will weigh nearly 900 tons including the transport vehicle; the largest will be approximately four storeys—or 10.6 metres—high. Some will measure 9 metres across; others 33 metres longWill they check for low bridges first?
Never mind the bridges, what about the trailer configurations? 900 tons. Better call our resident trailer configuration expert.
Franglais:
मैं संसारों का नाश करने वाला बन गया हूँ
Obvious, innit.
Translating a word “telephone” from one language to another may be easy.
Translating “God” or “world” is more likely to be an interpretation. as different cultures may understand those concepts very differently.“If a lion could speak, we could not understand him.”
Wittgenstein.
I’m going to hand you that argument on a plate!
Well played. 
You win the “Philosopher of the week” award.
Perhaps my next comment should stick to something I’m better at myself, such as “Chemistry”…
“That statue looks like it could do with a good wipe-down with a mild acid to clean off all that Cu(CO3)2 layer…” 