this post was submitted on 21 Jan 2025
463 points (100.0% liked)

Science

3909 readers
40 users here now

General discussions about "science" itself

Be sure to also check out these other Fediverse science communities:

https://lemmy.ml/c/science

https://beehaw.org/c/science

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 81 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Tony Stark was able to build this in a cave!

[–] [email protected] 49 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 25 points 2 months ago

We're not Tony Stark, sir.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 months ago

Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Yeah, but Hawk could ride those pipes way better.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 76 points 2 months ago (4 children)

That is one technology that I don't care if China steals secrets to make it happen faster.

[–] [email protected] 91 points 2 months ago

No need!

The data gathered by EAST will support the development of other reactors, both in China and internationally. China is part of the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) program, which involves dozens of countries, including the U.S., U.K. Japan, South Korea and Russia.

[–] [email protected] 42 points 2 months ago (1 children)

If we were a smarter society, we’d end our stupid cold war with them and cooperate.

[–] [email protected] 54 points 2 months ago (6 children)

If they were a more humane society, we likely would.

[–] [email protected] 48 points 2 months ago (3 children)

More humane like Nazi-America, or more humane like Warcrimes-Russia? Description unclear, please clarify.

[–] [email protected] 38 points 2 months ago

More humane like the best of us wish to be and the majority of us never will be

[–] [email protected] 22 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (4 children)

More humane as in respecting human rights I suppose

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 months ago (10 children)

To clarify, what you're doing is "what-aboutism". Asking China to be more humane is not a comment on anything but China being more humane.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] [email protected] 19 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Yeah more humane like Israel… America has been installing dictators all around the world for decades what are you talking about? You think America cares about humanity? You cant even birth a child without a $10,000+ bill.

America cares about moneyyyyy and nothing more

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 months ago

We topple democratically-elected leaders because it suits our economic plans. People downvoting the above comment don't know shit about history. And that's because our schools don't accurately teach it.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 months ago

Post-scarcity society def scares capitalists.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 months ago (1 children)

im pretty sure almost unilaterally, every country would like the solution to near infinite energy regardless. its extremely vital if as a species, ever want to start a colony outside of earth.

the only people against it would be those in the pocket of other forms of energy monetary wise.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 65 points 2 months ago (3 children)

While neat, this is not self-sustaining


it's taking more energy to power it than you're getting out of it. (You can build a fusion device on your garage if you're so inclined, though obviously this is much neater than that!)

One viewpoint is that we'll never get clean energy from these devices, not because they won't work, but because you get a lot of neutrons out of these devices. And what do we do with neutrons? We either bash them into lead and heat stuff up (boring and not a lot of energy), or we use them to breed fissile material, which is a lot more energetically favorable. So basically, the economically sound thing to do is to use your fusion reactor to power your relatively conventional fission reactor. Which is still way better than fossil fuels IMHO, so that's something.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 2 months ago (19 children)

It seems like it's probably too late.

Even if we crack fusion power today, I can't see it being deployed cheaply enough and quickly enough to compete with solar/wind+batteries. By the time we could get production fusion plants up and ready to feed power into the grid, it'd be 2050 and nobody would be interested in buying electricity from it.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 2 months ago

Even in a world already powered 100% by renewables, fusion is attractive for high energy applications. For a current example see training of LLMs. However there are Industries with immense power requirements like Aluminium smelting that could use fusion power as well.

So far humans have found applications for all energy they were able to produce.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 months ago (9 children)

Fusion would provide orders of magnitude more power than solar. There's a limit on how much we can practically get from solar, fusion would allow us to exceed that.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 months ago (1 children)

What I would like fusion to do is power space ships

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 months ago (6 children)

I think if we figure out nuclear fusion there will be induced demand for energy, in applications that were previously infeasible: desalination via distillation instead of reverse osmosis, direct capture of CO2 from the atmosphere, large scale water transport, ice and snowmaking, indoor farming, synthesized organic compounds for things like carbon sequestration or fossil fuel replacement or even food, etc.

Geoengineering might not be feasible today, but if energy becomes really cheap we might see something different.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (15 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 months ago

Helion has an interesting take on fusion reactors that generate power using electro magnetism and Copenhagen Atomics are trying to create Thorium reactors. I hope they will work better than the boiling they use in tocamac reactors

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 29 points 2 months ago (1 children)

what an incredible achievement. rome wasn't built in a day and real.science takes time and effort. so much effort by these scientists!

[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 months ago (2 children)

I'm so used to hearing that this technology is 10 years away, or whatever the old adage was, that i can't believe we've been seeing actual progress on this front in the last few years. Maybe it will actually happen eventually!

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 months ago

Well, there's been incremental progress all along. I remember reading about milliseconds being a big accomplishment at some point.

Also, it's pretty heavily dependent on the exact plasma in question. One hot enough to do lots of fusion will probably be different, so this isn't the finish line. Relevant XKCD.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 26 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Someone needs to bash these scicomm journalists over the head until they stop using the words "artificial sun"

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 months ago

Also, where's the study? Is it even peer reviewed?

[–] [email protected] 25 points 2 months ago (4 children)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

Living in the UK I suspect you have the same problem we have. Plenty of people capable of doing all the impressive shit China is doing (science, infastructure, whatever) and all of them being starved of funding as all the money dissapears into gigantic blackholes of backroom deals where huge amounts of money are spent on vague things that never seem to materialize or even be adequately explained; but whatever they are they sure do generate enormous profits for the cronies of whoevers currently in power.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 19 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Forget artificial suns, let me tell you right now how to make an artificial moon:

  1. Be a robot.
  2. Pull down pants.
  3. Bend over.
  4. Point robo-crack towards recipient
  5. Artificial Moon.
[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 months ago (5 children)

I'm studying Physics at the moment and Prof. gave us a printout of a textbook last week stating that the internal of the sun generates approximately 150 W / m³ on average. That's about as much as a compost pile, so, not very much. The sun only generates enormous amounts of power because it's so huge. In other words, reproducing fusion on Earth might actually not be very efficient.

[–] [email protected] 31 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Found this article

https://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2012/04/17/3478276.htm

And it looks like it's saying that the energy produced by nuclear fusion (which happens in the relatively small core) divided by the entire mass of the sun, gives you that low number.

Terrestrial fusion power plants are aiming to be sun cores, so that all the hydrogen they put in gets fused, and not just a few atoms here and there.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Why do people assume that scientists don’t sanity check themselves? Genuine question, no offense to the OC here.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 months ago

"guys, I know we've been working on this for decades, but I've been going over this first-year textbook, and I have some bad news..."

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 months ago

Cause maybe they assume scientists are hyping things up like VCs for AI.

In a dishonest world, the honest would be mistrusted more.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

I'm pretty sure the reason for that is that the sun is actually mostly not hot enough to do nuclear fusion, but has to instead rely on quantum tunnelling. This makes the fusion rate much, much lower. Now while this is good, because otherwise, the sun would burn up far too quickly and kill all of us, it also explains the low power, or energy per time.

Source: Doing my master's in cosmology.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 months ago

Look up the etymology of the word "sophomore".

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Yeah that is not how that works

The sun is enormous, yeah, but fusion only really happens at the core. A very tiny fraction of the sun is doing the fusion, the rest jlgets heated up, makes gravity and such, bit doesn't really do anything of interest energy wise.

Fusion creates a shit tonne more energy than 150w/cm3. Heck, you've never seen what a nuke does

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Can't wait for my Trumper boss to bring this up at work again as "Did you hear China secretly replaced the sun?"

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 months ago

I'm noticing in these comments that the tech bros that want to solve climate change by magical technological advances instead of using what we have had an interesting effect: some people on the other side have grown tired of the real technological advances that would actually help.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 months ago

Meh, net gain is the point, long cycles well be useful for production. Useful, eventually. Cart before the horse, otherwise.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 months ago

Good job scientists!

load more comments
view more: next ›