Cool Science & Technology News

Tarrou

Full Member
Joined
May 13, 2013
Messages
25,537
Location
Sydney
Yawn. We’ve been here every 12 months for the last two decades. I mean I hope it’s true but this claim is next level crying wolf at this point.
No we haven't been here before. That's the point.
 

WI_Red

Redcafes Most Rested
Joined
May 20, 2018
Messages
12,038
Location
No longer in WI
Supports
Atlanta United
No we haven't been here before. That's the point.
Where we have been for decades are scientists claiming that they have reached net energy output with fusion. If these guys/gals have done it, then that's phenomenal.
 

TheNewEra

Knows Kroos' mentality
Joined
Jan 20, 2014
Messages
8,133
Base editing: Revolutionary therapy clears girl's incurable cancer

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-63859184
It's definitely great news for rare forms of cancers, I kind of feel we're at the tipping point of major breakthroughs now with biotech and the likes of CRISPR

I really think we'll see significant medical breakthroughs in the next 2 decades.

I read a book by David Sinclair about the age of ending "why we age and why we don't have to", its absolutely nuts where we might end up by 2040-2050
 

TheNewEra

Knows Kroos' mentality
Joined
Jan 20, 2014
Messages
8,133
Where we have been for decades are scientists claiming that they have reached net energy output with fusion. If these guys/gals have done it, then that's phenomenal.
There's always been theorised approaches, but often getting funding is very hard.

the ITER project in France involves trillions of dollars, around 30 nation states and 30 years of building and testing to get a result.

So we'll see tiny results and then if successful, to scale still will take two decades but any result is huge.

I still keep an eye on ITER for Dec 2025 when the first plasma happens, but as consumers we'd still wait until the 2040s to actually see a roll out if successful.

There's of course other projects in labs looking at other approaches
 
Last edited:

Solius

¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Staff
Joined
Dec 31, 2007
Messages
86,291

Seems to be backed up a bit more than previous ones. Still a way to go though.
 

TheNewEra

Knows Kroos' mentality
Joined
Jan 20, 2014
Messages
8,133

Seems to be backed up a bit more than previous ones. Still a way to go though.
The thing is with this kind of research though is once a breakthrough happens and it yields results other people can focus on making it viable too.

So it might be 4 scientists now, but it could easily end up being 40, then 400 working on the problem.

There'll also be energy companies chucking big money around for the rights to that kind of research
 

cyberman

Full Member
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
37,331
Can’t wait until the GOP demonise this and all progress comes to a crawl.
 

Revan

Assumptionman
Joined
Dec 19, 2011
Messages
49,419
Location
London
This seems to be a bit different to the previous breakthrough. To be fair, every previous breakthrough looked like it could be the one, but this really seems to be the one. First time ever it reaches parity, in fact, it produces 20% more energy than it needs.

Always thought that if there is a solution for the climate change, it is going to be technological. I hope this proves correct and in a couple of decades, the world has moved from fossil energy (or more likely, it has become carbon neutral).
 

Brophs

The One and Only
Joined
Nov 28, 2006
Messages
50,275
Gillette will have something to say about the name they’ve chosen for the process, though.
 

Buster15

Go on Didier
Joined
Aug 28, 2018
Messages
13,297
Location
Bristol
Supports
Bristol Rovers
This seems to be a bit different to the previous breakthrough. To be fair, every previous breakthrough looked like it could be the one, but this really seems to be the one. First time ever it reaches parity, in fact, it produces 20% more energy than it needs.

Always thought that if there is a solution for the climate change, it is going to be technological. I hope this proves correct and in a couple of decades, the world has moved from fossil energy (or more likely, it has become carbon neutral).
To me, the biggest thing I take from this is that it at last proves that the process of positive output Nuclear Fusion is possible. Yes we knew that it should be possible. But for the first time, it has been proven. And proven by a reasonable margin.
There is a number of programmes going on across the world with massive budgets.
And so I have been confident that it would happen sooner.

But as they are saying, commercial Nuclear Fusion power is still some way off. But hopefully in my lifetime.

EDIT. The world needed a piece of good news and this certainly seems good news.
 

Cheimoon

Made of cheese
Scout
Joined
Jun 22, 2020
Messages
14,325
Location
Canada
Supports
no-one in particular
EDIT. The world needed a piece of good news and this certainly seems good news.
My wife is about as a pessimstic as it gets about climate change, and she sees this is as something super positive that might really turn things around once it becomes practically operable in, say, 30 years.

So yeah, second that!
 

4bars

Full Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2016
Messages
4,650
Supports
Barcelona
As the old saying says, fusion energy is always 20 years in the future, no matter what year are you reading this
 

TwoSheds

More sheds (and tiles) than you, probably
Joined
Feb 12, 2014
Messages
12,739
It's certainly an accounting win, I'm not entirely convinced by it given that they didn't factor in the losses in the lasers so it didn't actually produce any net power. Perhaps the control of the plasma is the real achievement here I don't know, but it seems like a very technical win.

Oh and for the people thinking the GOP will be against this, it's very unlikely I think. The technology will be big, centralised and profits privatised. Right up their street I would think compared to solar or wind power which is much more simple technology and can be deployed in a more democratic manner.
 

WI_Red

Redcafes Most Rested
Joined
May 20, 2018
Messages
12,038
Location
No longer in WI
Supports
Atlanta United
It's certainly an accounting win, I'm not entirely convinced by it given that they didn't factor in the losses in the lasers so it didn't actually produce any net power. Perhaps the control of the plasma is the real achievement here I don't know, but it seems like a very technical win.

Oh and for the people thinking the GOP will be against this, it's very unlikely I think. The technology will be big, centralised and profits privatised. Right up their street I would think compared to solar or wind power which is much more simple technology and can be deployed in a more democratic manner.
You are discounting the oil and coal industries pumping in millions, to both sides.
 

Buster15

Go on Didier
Joined
Aug 28, 2018
Messages
13,297
Location
Bristol
Supports
Bristol Rovers
As the old saying says, fusion energy is always 20 years in the future, no matter what year are you reading this
Yes. But on this occasion, it really might well be just 20 years away.
 

Bobcat

Full Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2014
Messages
6,365
Location
Behind the curtains, leering at the neighbors

Seems to be backed up a bit more than previous ones. Still a way to go though.
This is really exciting news.

One thing i have read though is that "it will take decades to make this commercialy viable". What does that mean really? Does it mean its challenging to build on a large scale because of the technological infrastructure or does it simply mean its so expensive its not profitable?
 

golden_blunder

Site admin. Manchester United fan
Staff
Joined
Jun 1, 2000
Messages
119,443
Location
Dublin, Ireland
I can’t help but think we are not smart enough to manage a nuclear fusion project at scale. Will the end be us blowing up our own planet!
 

Counterfactual

Full Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2019
Messages
3,289
Location
Mobil Avenue station
I'm working through my understanding of this. The breakthrough was that they put in ~2MJ of energy to the target and generated ~2.5MJ of fusion energy output. "It's the first time an experiment resulted in a meaningful gain of energy."

But, "the positive energy gain reported ignores the 500MJ of energy that was put into the lasers themselves."

So powering up the lasers took 500MJ, then the lasers pointed 2MJ at the target which generated 2.5MJ of energy? So they'd need to sustain and/or scale up the reaction to "repay" the cost of the laser energy, and even more so to actually produce net energy? Presumably they can use the energy from the reaction itself to sustain and scale up and that's possible because they achieved "ignition"?

It's an incredible achievement, to harness the power of the stars themselves.
 

Buster15

Go on Didier
Joined
Aug 28, 2018
Messages
13,297
Location
Bristol
Supports
Bristol Rovers
This is really exciting news.

One thing i have read though is that "it will take decades to make this commercialy viable". What does that mean really? Does it mean its challenging to build on a large scale because of the technological infrastructure or does it simply mean its so expensive its not profitable?
This was just one experiment among a number of experiments. Effectively a proof of concept. And the result was that the concept was proven.
But it is very important to understand that a huge amount of data was needed to determine how much energy was put in and the net amount that was output.

But importantly, it was a scientific experiment.
There are a number of other programmes underway around the world using differing methods to this one to create the right conditions to force 2 positively charged Hydrogen Protons to overcome the repulsive electromagnetic force to be held together by the strong nuclear force such that a heavier Helium (3) atom is created. The tiny amount of mass that is given off results in the energy output. This requires incredibly high temperatures and pressures.

To create a commercially viable nuclear fusion power station, those incredibly high temperatures and pressures need to be sustained for very long periods of time. Not just a few fractions of a second.
That is the biggest challenge which has yet to be developed.
 

Buster15

Go on Didier
Joined
Aug 28, 2018
Messages
13,297
Location
Bristol
Supports
Bristol Rovers
I'm working through my understanding of this. The breakthrough was that they put in ~2MJ of energy to the target and generated ~2.5MJ of fusion energy output. "It's the first time an experiment resulted in a meaningful gain of energy."

But, "the positive energy gain reported ignores the 500MJ of energy that was put into the lasers themselves."

So powering up the lasers took 500MJ, then the lasers pointed 2MJ at the target which generated 2.5MJ of energy? So they'd need to sustain and/or scale up the reaction to "repay" the cost of the laser energy, and even more so to actually produce net energy? Presumably they can use the energy from the reaction itself to sustain and scale up and that's possible because they achieved "ignition"?

It's an incredible achievement, to harness the power of the stars themselves.
Exactly that.
But here on earth, they have to achieve significantly higher temperatures and pressures than those in the core of stars. And because the stars burn, they don't have to cool the equipment such that the materials we are using don't melt or burn away in a fraction of a second. That is by far and away the biggest difficulty.
 

Bobcat

Full Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2014
Messages
6,365
Location
Behind the curtains, leering at the neighbors
This was just one experiment among a number of experiments. Effectively a proof of concept. And the result was that the concept was proven.
But it is very important to understand that a huge amount of data was needed to determine how much energy was put in and the net amount that was output.

But importantly, it was a scientific experiment.
There are a number of other programmes underway around the world using differing methods to this one to create the right conditions to force 2 positively charged Hydrogen Protons to overcome the repulsive electromagnetic force to be held together by the strong nuclear force such that a heavier Helium (3) atom is created. The tiny amount of mass that is given off results in the energy output. This requires incredibly high temperatures and pressures.

To create a commercially viable nuclear fusion power station, those incredibly high temperatures and pressures need to be sustained for very long periods of time. Not just a few fractions of a second.
That is the biggest challenge which has yet to be developed.
Thank you very much
 

4bars

Full Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2016
Messages
4,650
Supports
Barcelona
Yes. But on this occasion, it really might well be just 20 years away.
Im not diminishing what they accomplished. Im sure is a big leap, and is an incredible feat but there are so many other factors, materials, how to sustain plasma floating permanently (i mean, the current tresshold is counted in mimuts and seconds) and so on

To be honest, im quite certain that i ill not see fusion energy at commercial level and im 42

I can only say, see you in 20 years
 

Buster15

Go on Didier
Joined
Aug 28, 2018
Messages
13,297
Location
Bristol
Supports
Bristol Rovers
Im not diminishing what they accomplished. Im sure is a big leap, and is an incredible feat but there are so many other factors, materials, how to sustain plasma floating permanently (i mean, the current tresshold is counted in mimuts and seconds) and so on

To be honest, im quite certain that i ill not see fusion energy at commercial level and im 42

I can only say, see you in 20 years
By which time I could be 92 if I am still alive then.
 

Counterfactual

Full Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2019
Messages
3,289
Location
Mobil Avenue station
Im not diminishing what they accomplished. Im sure is a big leap, and is an incredible feat but there are so many other factors, materials, how to sustain plasma floating permanently (i mean, the current tresshold is counted in mimuts and seconds) and so on

To be honest, im quite certain that i ill not see fusion energy at commercial level and im 42

I can only say, see you in 20 years
But that's how magnetic confinement works, right, not inertial confinement? I could be hopelessly wrong...