![fusion[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/ashPyrW.jpg "fusion[1].jpg")
So everyone is busy discussing the memedrive but what happened to this?
Any news on the lockheed fusion reactor? Will it ever come true? Do fusion reactors violate any laws of physics like the memedrive does?
While travelling in our solar system quickly would be great I think the short-term implications of basically free energy would be a lot bigger.
>>7650177
I'd be interested in learning how they designed that.
>>7650177
Don't post such explicit pornography Anon.
>>7650177
>>Any news on the lockheed fusion reactor?
nope, lockheed doesn't seem to serious.
>>Do fusion reactors violate any laws of physics like the memedrive does?
go outside and look at the sky when it's not cloudy. You will either see one or dozens of fusion reactors.
>>While travelling in our solar system quickly would be great
fusion can do this too.
>>7650177
>Do fusion reactors violate physics
No. Fusion is totally legit, in fact we've had fusion reactors for a while but they're not practical for energy production they're just used for experiments. Making a practical one is the goal.
I was thinking recently that these colliders, it seems it like the big budget thing people won't sparew any expense on.
If thats the case wouldn't buidling a large collider or fusion test chamber in space be better since you don't have to worry about gravitational forces ,
given crazy particles emitted by some distant starts could fuck it up. But don't we already take precautions in building these things ?
>>7650356
>>If thats the case wouldn't buidling a large collider or fusion test chamber in space be better since you don't have to worry about gravitational forces
no. the effect of gravity on magnetical confined and inertial confined fusion is basically nothing. Fusion reactors are filled with almost nothing, almost nothing doesn't weigh much.
Same with particle accelerators. In fact it is extremely difficult to even detect the effect of gravity on particle beams in large colliders
>>7650300
The key and invention with this Stellerator (I think its the Wendelstein 7x) is it's arrangement.
to be more precise, the plasma inside forms a moebius strip instead of a "perfect" toroid.
in theory, this would make it possible to maintain the plasma for about a minute.
for what I know, the plasma could only be contained for a few seconds. even in reactors with considerably more energy input.
not a scientist tho, I read it somewhere and I think it checks out.
any geek here to prove or disprove my claim?
>>7650449
forgot the related pic
>>7650451
Brilliant, look up USS Eldrige and the philadelphia experiment.
Then tell me that a mobius mag field is for electricity generation....
>>7650300
https://youtu.be/lyqt6u5_sHA
See this video from the Max Planck Society itself, which shows the device with increasing levels of complexity : plasma -> coils -> chamber -> cooling system -> supporting structure -> diagnostic instruments -> ect. It's pretty informative.
tl;dw : supercomputers and god-tier German engineering
>>7650177
>dat internal magnetic confinement systemz
>>7651324
holy fuck that video
>>7650328
>live in the city
>go out at night
>see no fusion reactors
light pollution should be a crime desu
>>7651324
Jesus fucking christ, what kind of material do they use for the diverters and the wall armor? They are "in direct contact with the plasma", which "has a temperature of over 100 million degrees" (direct quotes from the video).
I'm no material scientist, but the intuitive answer would be that no known material could possibly withstand this temperature without melting or vaporizing, even if the duration of the contact is only around a minute.
Is the answer that the wall armor isn't actually in direct contact with the plasma due to the strength and direction of the magnetic field?
>>7652402
Well, there are a couple possibilities.
Either
>the material in question is ablative and does vaporize gradually by design
or
>the material is (radiatively or convectively) cooled, creating a thermal boundary layer within the gas/plasma and bringing the surface temp to within acceptable levels
Both of these are how it's done on reentry heat shields (most capsules in the former case and Shuttle/Buran/X-37 in the latter).
>>7651324
suppose something breaks inside?
impossible to fix?
>>7651142
It is. Germany has Wendelstein 7-X. It's a stellarator which is also for energy generation. American ones ain't, but the the of reactor is not explicitly for military use. The German one is for fusion research.
>>7652430
Absolutely! Every time an internal component breaks, the reactor must be completely disassembled and rebuilt. It's why fusion research is taking so long.
>>7652472
are you being sarcastic
>>7652473
No. At a certain level of complexity, ease of access must necessarily give way to superior functionality. When a surgeon describes breaking open a rib cage to access the heart, or literally hammering a knee joint into a femur, is he being sarcastic?
>>7652338
I see a big round fusion reactor at night though. But sometimes it's not there its rarely round.
>>7650364
0.999999...=1
Little bit is still sometin
Cekm9 son
Peace out
>>7652477
You'd think they could just make it a bit bigger, so people could climb around on the inside, no?
>>7652479
that's a fusion reactor mirror lol.
>>7652402
pic related
>>7652430
>>7652485
>>7652472
well ITER is going to have a crazy robot manipulator that snakes inside the the reactor to fix things.
>>7651324
what kind of roughing vacuum pumps do they use on these things?
Why is donut the shape they have chosen for fusion energy reactors?
Shouldn't it be a sphere like the stars that make natural fusion?
Or does the donut shape make it easier to extract the energy?
>>7652520
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hairy_ball_theorem
Why you can't use spheres for rotation a plasma was the first application of the hairy ball theorem my prof. gave us.
A torus is the most straightforward shape where all the magnetic field lines can close en themselves.
You can have "spherical tokamaks" though (pic is Euratom's Mega Ampere Spherical Tokamak), but in the end, the plasma still rotates in a torus-like shape.
>>7652402
>They are "in direct contact with the plasma"
no, the plasma is in a vacuum chamber. if the plasma touched the wall, it would quench the plasma and the wall would melt
>>7652598
the divertors are in direct contact with the plasma idiot:
https://www.iter.org/mach/divertor
>>7652614
the divertor isnt the first wall. the divertor is for thermalized ions and helium ash that needs removal, not hot fusion plasma. idiot.
>>7651142
are you being sarcastic?
Yes, OP. The sun violates the laws of physics. In fact, fusion occuring in the sun is a leading challenging counterargument to the big bang theory and evidence for the existence of God. It is literally a physics miracle.
>>7652527
Lol
>>7650364
Except the fact that gravity does matter at accelerators
http://home.cern/about/updates/2012/06/full-moon-pulls-lhc-its-protons
But going to space wouldn't help shit in this situation anyway.
>>7652527
"Can't comb a coconut" is probably my favorite mathematical maxim.
>>7652527
That pic kinda reminds me of Star Wars desu.
>>7650177
Ah yes the Wendelstein X7 is due for a startup this November.
Hold on to your asses!
>>7652402
If there did exist a material that could withstand that kind of temperature and pressure, would it be possible to build a fusion reactor without any magnetic fields or lasers?
>>7653764
no. the plasma would quench if it touched the wall. even if you had a material in contact, it would have to be the same temp as the plasma edge, which isnt possible, but if it were, youd have far too much radiation power loss. it would never ignite.
Every month /sci/ jumps on a new fusion bandwagon. First it was tokamaks and ITER, then it was that horrendous pile of shit General Fusion, then it was Lockheed Martin's revival of the magnetic mirror, and now it's W7-x. Nobody ever knows anything about them, but as soon as /sci/ latches on to a different design (I don't say new, because they're all 50+ years old), all the previously hyped designs are now shit, and the newest one is the only saving grace for fusion. It would be nice if it were at all possible to have anything more than a surface-deep discussion of fusion, but /sci/ is and always will be full of popsci spergs with no actual scientific knowledge, apart from what they covered on Bill Nye the Science Guy, or the youtube video they watched on quantum spookiness. Get your shit together /sci/
>>7653818
If you know so much about it, start discussing then.
