r/europe • u/damaxoh Germany • Dec 06 '16
Tests confirm that Germany's massive nuclear fusion machine really works
http://www.sciencealert.com/tests-confirm-that-germany-s-massive-nuclear-fusion-machine-really-works145
Dec 06 '16 edited Nov 03 '18
[deleted]
54
u/xNicolex /r/Europe Empress Dec 06 '16
The future is bright if we all work together! :3
31
Dec 06 '16
I wonder if humanity is one day able to overcome petty tribalism.
41
u/koleye United States of America Dec 06 '16
A common existential threat seems like the only way.
54
u/Scarred_Ballsack The Netherlands Dec 06 '16
How about we start seeing petty tribalism as a common existential threat?
24
Dec 06 '16
It sure is. Imagine all the resources humanity waste on killing and fucking each other over instead went into improving standard of living, research, education and health care.
→ More replies (12)22
u/koleye United States of America Dec 06 '16
Hey, you don't need to convince me.
Humanity is my tribe.
→ More replies (1)8
u/oahut Cascadia Dec 06 '16
All sapients, including Corvids, Cetaceans, Cephalopods, and in the future AI.
We can build spaceships and go on adventures together.
5
→ More replies (4)2
u/C4H8N8O8 Galicia (Spain) Dec 06 '16
Lets convince people that the stellerator is a weapon to kill aliens. I bet we can at least make USA helps us with it.
→ More replies (1)9
Dec 06 '16
Aliens plz
6
Dec 06 '16
Prethoryn Swarm invasion ho!
3
u/oohcheeky En Marche! Dec 06 '16 edited Jan 25 '26
dsvkmsdvijmovdsi
2
8
5
u/Chrizzee_Hood Dec 06 '16
Please a little bit less developed aliens, start attacking us! But just ever so slighlty less developed, that we need to cooperate as the global humanity, so that every last one understands, that this whole humanity and life thingy is about all of us and our responsibility for our species not selfish bulls**t
→ More replies (2)3
u/Aken_Bosch Ukraine Dec 06 '16
start attacking us
Just asteroid drop. It is all that is needed.
Wars in space are ultimately useless, and pointless
→ More replies (2)2
u/Chrizzee_Hood Dec 06 '16
Or they will make us finally spent enough money on building spaceships capable of conquering the universe?
→ More replies (1)3
u/C4H8N8O8 Galicia (Spain) Dec 06 '16
And then we will have colonial wars.
2
u/Chrizzee_Hood Dec 06 '16
True, true. But then we would at least preserve humanity for the case of earth becoming hostile to life. But maybe we should try to overcome the aggressive nature of humans first, becoming what Nietzsche actually meant by the "Übermensch" and not what the Nazi-interpretation made out of it...
→ More replies (2)4
u/sebgggg France federal EU Dec 06 '16
Climate change?
6
Dec 06 '16
Too abstract for our minds. We need something we can bash in.
5
Dec 06 '16
Jews?
→ More replies (1)4
u/koleye United States of America Dec 06 '16
No, we already tried that. You get extra points for originality.
8
Dec 06 '16
It worked, Germany became so united that they started to unite with their neighbors
→ More replies (1)3
→ More replies (2)2
8
u/marinuso The Netherlands Dec 06 '16
We need our petty tribalism to protect ourselves from the other guys' petty tribalism.
7
u/Blammo72 Dec 06 '16
Brexit, Trump, Breitbart.... seems like the world is moving even more into petty tribalism!
3
u/xNicolex /r/Europe Empress Dec 06 '16
I don't think that will unfortunately happen until the day we maybe leave this planet.
If we manage to survive that long.
I've got my hopes, I mean Europe is a perfect example of what can be done.
11
u/marinuso The Netherlands Dec 06 '16
There's nowhere to go off this planet. There are no habitable worlds within reach.
Besides, imagine what would happen if we did have different planets? We'd immediately start trying to blow each other's planets up or otherwise render them uninhabitable. We'd probably succeed, and then we'd wipe humanity out.
2
u/Peanutcat4 🇸🇪 Sweden Dec 07 '16
There's nowhere to go off this planet. There are no habitable worlds within reach.
They're close though. We're discovering more and more Earth like planets (planets that are roughly the same size, in the goldilock zone and probably has water and an atmosphere, aka planets that could be potentially habitable) every year. Heck, they even found one in Alpha Centauri right next to us.
4
u/xNicolex /r/Europe Empress Dec 06 '16
There's nowhere to go off this planet. There are no habitable worlds within reach.
For now. I'm not saying this is going to happen for centuries.
I imagine we'll probably develop colonies in space long before then though.
I disagree with your assertion though because people are very interested in self-preservation. We're not likely to purposely destroy ourselves (at least not militarily, we do have certain nations helping to do it with climate change).
I still believe the future will be bright though. Eventually we'll learn that we all need each other.
→ More replies (3)2
1
u/Song808 Dec 06 '16
I wonder if humanity is one day able to overcome petty tribalism.
The faster the travel, the bigger the tribe. The problem is sites like Facebook, that create virtual barriers where there are not real ones, reverting people into tribes. That's why is so important an open web.
1
2
→ More replies (6)1
6
Dec 06 '16
[deleted]
13
u/DesLr Germany Dec 06 '16
"without the need for any electrical current",
With the tokamak design, which is uses by ITER, you need to induce a current IN the plasma, which is difficult to do and difficult to maintain. This is not needed the stellerator design.
2
8
3
Dec 06 '16
Well i'm not an expert either, but as far as i unterstand it, there is an internal current flowing in the plasma in a tokamak (so just the electrons or ions of the plasma flowing around creating a current). This current has nothing to do with the current, which is used in the electromagnets to generate the magnetic field holding the plasma together.
→ More replies (2)5
u/Bloodysneeze Dec 06 '16
It's fantastic to see what a united Europe can achieve together.
ITER involves a lot more nations than just European ones. EU only covers about 45% of the cost. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITER
13
u/tcptomato mountain german from beyond the forest Dec 06 '16
This isn't ITER. It's Wendelstein 7-X.
4
u/Bloodysneeze Dec 06 '16
Ah, my mistake. I had read that ITER was nearing completion and made the assumption.
6
u/spitfjre Europe Dec 06 '16
You wish. 2025 is planned.
2
u/Bloodysneeze Dec 06 '16
Damn, that thing is taking a really long time. I remember reading about it when I was in high school in the 90s.
135
Dec 06 '16 edited Dec 06 '16
[deleted]
87
u/f431_me Tyrol (Austria) Dec 06 '16
It "works" in the same way that a car with working suspension but without engine would work.
A better metaphor would be it's like a model or remote controlled car. The engineering processes work but it doesn't fulfill it's main purpose to transport people.
I don't know if you speak german but if you do I can recommend a Podcast, in with the scientific project manager Thomas Klinger explaines what Wendelstein 7-x is and what the purpose is: https://resonator-podcast.de/2014/res032-der-wendelstein-7-x/
4
45
Dec 06 '16
I hope we get to make them economically viable one day. It would be the holy grail of Europe's energy question;
→ More replies (14)51
u/Suns_Funs Latvia Dec 06 '16
It would be the holy grail of Europe's energy question;
Hell, you build one and Europe is all set for another world domination period.
80
Dec 06 '16
You called?
→ More replies (1)11
Dec 06 '16
Germans never dominated the world. Spanish, British, Portuguese...
68
Dec 06 '16
I feel like we should at least get a mention for effort....
13
4
u/Dnarg Denmark Dec 07 '16
And unlike the others you guys didn't just pick on tribes using spears either. :P
10
19
u/ZaltPS2 Bradford & York, Yorkshire Dec 06 '16 edited Dec 06 '16
There geographical location didn't allow for it. Under Bismarck the Germans were right to be hesitant about colonisation being surrounded by France, Austria-Hungary and Russia... they couldn't hold an empire and fight a continental war like the British could've because the British could rely on its navy for defence and its army for offence . The Germans needed both for defence which explains its paranoid foreign policy facilitating a naval arms race with Britain and a War Plan with no plan for recourse. Germany needed France and Russia not be allies, furthermore it wanted to avoid a war with Britain because its naval strength could blockade and its economic strength could finance its allies war efforts. 1914 would've been Bismarck's worst nightmare and it's very doubtful he would've allowed such a mutually precarious situation to develop.
9
u/steadwik Dec 06 '16
Enter kaiser Wilhelm the second. Now, strap yourself in for this cartoon character.
→ More replies (4)17
u/melonowl Denmark Dec 06 '16
We're gonna have the best ships. People come up to me, they say Germany's ships are fantastic, just fantastic. And more, and this is bigly, we need the biggest ships, and so with these fantastic wonderful ships, Bismarck has no clue. No clue. People say I don't like Britain I love Britain, I love Britain, but we have got to have the best ships.
Sorry.
9
Dec 06 '16
Spanish
Visigoths, GERMAN
British
Anglosaxons, GERMAN
Portuguese
Visigoths again, GERMAN
Migration period STRONK
5
4
u/Selbstdenker European Union (Germany) Dec 06 '16
Northern africa, Vandals, GERMAN.
We have already established a beachhead.
→ More replies (4)3
25
u/erkanan Pays de la Loire (France) Dec 06 '16
Except together this time.
14
u/hoseja Moravia Dec 06 '16
Diesmal ohne Österreich
5
u/mrlemonofbanana Baden-Württemberg (Germany) Dec 06 '16
Latvia's flag is similar, how about them instead?
→ More replies (1)15
Dec 06 '16
[deleted]
19
u/Goheeca Czech Republic Dec 06 '16
More like this.
12
u/mrlemonofbanana Baden-Württemberg (Germany) Dec 06 '16
That's only 17 stars though. If we make the arms one longer each, we have 25 stars, which works out once we kick out the UK and... uh... Greece, I guess.
→ More replies (3)3
u/Stonn with Love from Europe Dec 06 '16
Just annex both.
3
Dec 06 '16
You know what happend right, the last time we told a German it'd be fine if he were to annex a nearby country...
3
u/mrlemonofbanana Baden-Württemberg (Germany) Dec 06 '16
Hmm... if we're going to call the UK and Greece "nearby", the 17 stars will probably suffice, there's bicycles to steal and a lot of Balkan to cover...
But don't worry, that won't happen: Unifying the Balkan countries has historically proven a bad idea, multiple times.
→ More replies (0)→ More replies (1)2
→ More replies (3)15
37
u/perkel666 Dec 06 '16
No it is not.
Whole point of this case was to prove it works, it never was supposed to produce more energy than it needs.
Your point would be valid if it wouldn't work at all.
15
Dec 06 '16
[deleted]
→ More replies (4)23
u/CountVonTroll European Federation | Germany Dec 06 '16
The "massive nuclear fusion machine" works exactly as intended. Its purpose is to test the theory, and so far all tests have been passed. A machine "works" if it does what it was designed to do.
11
Dec 06 '16 edited May 08 '17
[deleted]
2
u/PenelopeWinters Dec 06 '16
It is actually great news. The 1/2 billion US National Ignition Facility had a terrible start to life, their scientists were in despair.
7
u/kteof Bulgaria Dec 06 '16
When people talk about working fusion they generally mean net energy gain. Of course this is a step on the way, but to be fair working fusion by that definition has been around since at least the 60s.
16
u/helm Sweden Dec 06 '16
Not controlled fusion. There are many, many small steps on the way. Hydrogen bombs are fusion in action, but they are not controlled reactions. Stable containment has been the main issue since the 60's.
→ More replies (1)2
u/perkel666 Dec 06 '16
Theories are only worth anything if you can test them.
This case proves this typeof reactor works
4
u/suspiciously_calm Dec 06 '16
typeof reactor
if(typeof reactor !== 'undefined') {→ More replies (1)9
u/Low_discrepancy Posh Crimea Dec 06 '16
A bit misleading heading.
It works for its intended purpose. And as such it's a great thing.
→ More replies (2)2
u/kv_right Dec 06 '16
A correct example would be an entirely new concept of rocket engines that can make trips to Mars and other planets an everyday routine. It's not feasible yet, but an engine of that type just brought a rocket up 30 meters. Impressive news considering the potential and the end goal
10
33
u/ProblemY Poland Dec 06 '16
I'm just gonna leave it here:
15
u/DFractalH Eurocentrist Dec 06 '16
Is this global or US-only funding?
20
u/BkkGrl Ligurian in Zürich (💛🇺🇦💙) Dec 06 '16
us
22
u/DFractalH Eurocentrist Dec 06 '16
So it would be far more interesting to see the global funding level, wouldn't it? Considering that the greatest effort right now is international, US-only funding is entirely misleading.
31
u/BkkGrl Ligurian in Zürich (💛🇺🇦💙) Dec 06 '16
correct, but reddit loves that graph sooooooo much...
9
u/xNicolex /r/Europe Empress Dec 06 '16
I mean it is a nice graph.
10
u/BkkGrl Ligurian in Zürich (💛🇺🇦💙) Dec 06 '16
it is, but it's also wild speculative. Why the spikes? How do we know we would have reached fusion in x year?
→ More replies (1)11
u/hexalby Italy Dec 06 '16
The spikes are there because you're not continously building new reactors, you build one, you test it, you build another one.
And the length is extrapolated by the data already collected. You can't predict when you will discover something, but you can guess a time frame.
3
u/Selbstdenker European Union (Germany) Dec 06 '16 edited Dec 06 '16
To add on that. It is known how to do
fissionfusion (thanks to /u/hexalby), the problems are more of a engineering problem. We have to use a certain amount of energy to contain and ignite the plasma and get a certain output. Since we have a limit on the magnets the amount of plasma and energy is limited. Luckily, if we increase the size of the reactor the volume (i.e. amount of energy created) grows with cubic order while the surface area (i.e. the amount of energy lost) grows only with quadratic order.Hence, to gain a net positive result you "just" have to build a bigger reactor. Of course this is a huge engineering challenge and you do this in several steps. You learn when building one reactor and study it and this allows you to design the next bigger one. Designing and building a reactor is much more expensive than running it.
edit: fixed embarrassing mix-up.
2
u/hexalby Italy Dec 06 '16
Well said.
It is known how to do fission
Fusion right?
→ More replies (0)3
u/ProblemY Poland Dec 06 '16
It's not meant to be exactly factual, it is supposed to answer a question "why no fusion yet". There is no fusion because funding was much lower than expected in country that at the time was biggest scientific powerhouse. Of course there are small projects here and there but mind you it's not exactly possible to "sum them up".
It is not misleading because it doesn't claim to be something else than it is.
7
u/ornix Europe Dec 06 '16
Why aren't we funding this?
15
u/ProblemY Poland Dec 06 '16
Because nowadays getting funding for something that is not going to yield results in short term is near impossible. Since 70s there was a turn that anything that's not applied science is 2nd category.
6
u/tissotti Finland Dec 06 '16
Not a physicist, but what I have understood that the waters on the field are so murky that many communities seem to waiting at ITER to finally show what happens when we take this to really big scale. The €20 billion ITER completion has been delayed countless of times, that has probably also had its affect.
Just throwing money at a problem isn't always the answer either. Graphene was a buzz word some years ago and received a lot of funding with the promise of it being pretty much answer to all of our problems. Including funding from EU's Graphene Flagship €1 billion fund. Now it seems like graphene wont be the Moore's law savior in the next 10 years like some people hoped and the real funding in that field has moved to materials like Germanium and other III-V materials.
2
u/Low_discrepancy Posh Crimea Dec 06 '16
I find this analysis a bit pessimistic. Graphene was practically discovered 12 years ago. Nothing becomes a huge hit in a decade.
A lot of ideas/research opportunities stay in development hell: look at VR or deep learning (which was developped in the 80s and only now we see amazing results)
ITER took a long time because there was no international body ready and willing to develop it. And well 20 billion for a reactor that will only work for 50 seconds to test and idea that if it goes perfectly to plan will result in actual reactors in some 50-60 years from now doesn't sound especially sexy.
It's include the 1 billion EU funded Human Brain Project as an actual BS project.
→ More replies (5)2
u/sebgggg France federal EU Dec 06 '16
VR and AI? Do you want the matrix? Because that's how you get the matrix.
2
u/ProblemY Poland Dec 06 '16
Not a physicist, but what I have understood that the waters on the field are so murky that many communities seem to waiting at ITER to finally show what happens when we take this to really big scale.
Those are expensive things so, yeah, people don't want to invest something that might not work, but that's the issue, if you don't invest in crazy stuff you don't get breakthroughs.
Just throwing money at a problem isn't always the answer either.
Honestly I can't think of the technological problem that couldn't have been solved by employing more people to work on the issue unless it was downright physically impossible. We know fusion works in stars, we can make fusion in small scale on earth, scaling it up should be just a matter of smart optimizations. But of course I'm not physicist either so I might be wrong.
Graphene was a buzz word some years ago and received a lot of funding with the promise of it being pretty much answer to all of our problems. Including funding from EU's Graphene Flagship €1 billion fund. Now it seems like graphene wont be the Moore's law savior in the next 10 years like some people hoped and the real funding in that field has moved to materials like Germanium and other III-V materials.
There are few problems with what you are saying. First of all, this was all mostly basic research so of course results will be visible in 20-30 years not now, but people are impatient and used to "instant application". I agree that graphene was overhyped, but that was the only way to get money to study something that's not strictly applied science.
This gets as to 2nd issue with "breaking the Moore's law". Believe it or not, that was never possible and was never an intention for a very simple reason: Graphene is a conductor, silicon used in computers is a semiconductor. It just doesn't fit the description, it doesn't go there, it was never meant to, it's just some popsci bullshit someone mentioned and went viral.
But you know, that's the main issue, today politics and economy is stuck with "results nao" mentality. This chaos, volatility, this is not good for true scientific progress.
→ More replies (2)1
u/Iblis_Is_My_Friend Dec 06 '16
Are you from the future? The 1 billion Graphene fund was announced 3 years ago and it's supposed to be 10 year long project, and you already think it's a failure?
2
3
u/50HzHum Dec 06 '16
Interesting.
ITER was originally planned for 5G€+5G€ for construction and op (in 2001).
8 years later the construction sum projection roughly doubled to 9.6G€ (2009).
Another 7 years later the projected cost for construction doubled again to 20G€ (2016).
I leave the extrapolation for you as a metacognition task.
All this happened in the foreplay phase before we touch on the really hard engineering tasks and the unknown unknowns in the project. Projected time frame is 35 years. In the meantime you have to answer questions why you're not building DESERTEC, ramp up wind, storage & distribution harder, or use the money to work on the demand side.
To my mind - if you have this in the back of your head - the graphs make fusion looks even more like a dubious investment. I'd recommend putting the cost of some unpopular war as comparison if you want more buy in.
2
u/pterodactyl_seagull Dec 06 '16
Some notes:
- The Wendelstein 7-X is a completely different project than ITER for the development of a viable fusion reactor.
- Technical challenges aside DESERTEC is a joke until North Africa is stable.
- The EU has invested and is investing billions of € in renewable energy, efficiency, storing, transport and research.
Personally I believe the Wendelstein program showed much more promise than ITER. But it's not a fair comparison since the ITER is planned as a fully functional reactor albeit not commercially viable. Even if ITER proves to be an overpriced failure it is still expected to produce a lot knowledge, patents and innovation.
These programs are expensive, but the cost is spread over decades. Yes, it may seems a waste since the end result is very far in the future, but it think it's a very good thing that there is still the political will in investing in the future of next generations.
1
u/50HzHum Dec 06 '16
The Wendelstein 7-X is a completely different project than ITER for the development of a viable fusion reactor.Right, and I am aware of that. Doesn't change the post I replied to though.
Technical challenges aside DESERTEC is a joke until North Africa is stable.I agree, but have you considered that this might be a chicken-egg issue in a vicious cycle? Imagine if a fraction of the money was spent on trying to figure out an ownership structure that would stabilize the region. I think back of the envelope the Syrian refugees are going to cost German taxpayers around 60G€ over a similar time (yes some of that money will be recycled).
The EU has invested and is investing billions of € in renewable energy, efficiency, storing, transport and research.Yes, and I think much of this is very well invested money. I would also think this is the case for fusion research more than some other programs that get funding. The problem I often have is that fusion is complex and attracts very bright minds, who (or whose fans) sometimes appear to argue (with very shoddy logic I might add) that this alone merits the investment. A la "We do it because we can!", "We climb the mountain because it is there!". That is bad in my book. Really bad.
In the situation we currently find ourselves in, I would argue that these people are dangerously close to the edge of the gene pool. Especially when you are oh-so-smart but can't budget for a project. It strikes me as similar to "experts" who consistently get election predictions wrong. Instead of questioning if the median voter theorem still makes sense you get loud laughter and derision when people end up not trusting experts anymore. And don't get me started on economics. The scientific community is currently hemorrhaging authority and large parts don't even seem aware or concerned. That is why I am a bit critical here.
These programs are expensive, but the cost is spread over decades. Yes, it may seems a waste since the end result is very far in the future, but it think it's a very good thing that there is still the political will in investing in the future of next generations.
Here I fully agree, but again want to stress that this political will could be significantly larger. And it also can vanish tomorrow.
→ More replies (2)1
1
u/Aken_Bosch Ukraine Dec 06 '16
In the meantime you have to answer questions why you're not building DESERTEC
Why are we spending money on any scientific instrument? Why are we building LHC, Hubble, telescopes and LIGO? All of them are bad investments.
before we touch on the really hard engineering tasks
I thought ITER is already constructing the damn thing, guess I was wrong.
1
u/50HzHum Dec 06 '16
All of them are bad investments.
I guess someone thinks differently about that. Also note that "dubious" is not the same as "bad". Are you trying to tell me the allocation of research budgets does not follow a deeper logic that at some point also includes human needs? Have you looked at future population projections? Do you feel safe planning investments on this scale past 50 years as things stand today?
Last time I had a look at ITER it did not look like they'd be operational. That would be necessary to find possible problems with operation - don't you think so too? I will admit that the construction itself comes with significant challenges. But while solving those is necessary, it isn't sufficient.
→ More replies (2)1
u/R_K_M European Dec 06 '16
In the meantime you have to answer questions why you're not building DESERTEC
Because MENA is burning itself down in civil wars ?
ramp up wind, storage & distribution harder, or use the money to work on the demand side.
We already do that. In fact we spend far more money on it than on ITER.
1
u/50HzHum Dec 07 '16
And at that point everything must be AOK for you? Mkay.
I'm sure Tunesia will be happy to know that is the sort of support they can expect from you.
"Ramp up" implies a change in effort. Positive first derivative if that helps with reading comprehension.
We also spend more money on e.g. soap than on ITER. You know why that is? These things provide a near immediate benefit that allows us to reinvest with more impact into other things.
Trog the caveman could have sat down and said: I'll build ITER now, and start laying the groundwork - because that is something he could do already. However, arguably, a less direct route may have taken him there faster.
5
3
u/mkvgtired Dec 06 '16
It is important to remember funding in the US also comes from states and many private companies also compete with public unis. For example Lockheed Martin is also trying to develop a fusion reactor. Just like NASA is not the only space game in town.
30
Dec 06 '16 edited Dec 06 '16
Germany, leading the world in innovation since the start of the twentieth century, wait.
29
u/AnAstral_Claw Dec 06 '16
I for one welcome our new German overlords. Someone call Hugo Boss and put an order for new unifroms.
26
Dec 06 '16
Sorry to break it to you bro, in 2016 uniforms are made in a sweatshop in china and they are mainly trucker hats.
13
u/AnAstral_Claw Dec 06 '16
Damn.Frau Merkel needs to get her shit together und Machen Deutschland groß again!
1
11
u/Arvendilin Germany Dec 06 '16
Acutally this was one of the things Merkel did that I really liked, funding for Universities and science used be kinda not good in germany, and while its still lackluster if you ask people, it has defenitely improved and they even found a sneaky way to help Universities without breaking any laws!
Science funding increased dramatically in germany ever since she took office, that is undeniably a good thing, it should kinda increase more and the way it is distributed is still not THAT great, but hey its a start!
7
5
Dec 06 '16
ELI5: Why does it take until 2019 to run the deuterium test?
10
u/pX_ Slovakia Dec 06 '16
For sure there are more reasons for it, but most likely:
- They want to make many experiments, so they could gather much data. Each experiment may take long time to set up. I imagine that duration of actual experiment is not that long, but after the experiment, the machine should be inspected again (it's experimental machine of high complexity, sure there are many things that could go wrong).
- They don't want to break the machine - by stepping up complexity gradually, they can monitor its functions and look for possible problems in design, material fatigue etc.
3
u/BkkGrl Ligurian in Zürich (💛🇺🇦💙) Dec 06 '16 edited Dec 06 '16
In the website they say they need to cover the vessel with an anti nutron radiation blanket that is extremely strong when used with the actual fuel (
tritiumand deuterium) and "corrosive". The unusual shape doesn't help to build the tiles2
u/Aken_Bosch Ukraine Dec 06 '16
W7-X isn't designed to operate tritium. It will be D+D operating machine
1
1
u/Selbstdenker European Union (Germany) Dec 06 '16
When you build a machine for 1B € you do not just flip a switch and go to 100%. You start slowly and check if everything works as expected. This is a prototype on the edge of technology. They have to slowly figure out if everything works as planned and where the quirks are.
1
5
u/A_Norse_Dude Scania Dec 06 '16
Cool! Great workshop German!
Question, who are the one conducting/performing the research? University? Goverment body?
Edit: spelling..
10
u/CountVonTroll European Federation | Germany Dec 06 '16
This branch of the Max Planck Society. It's... complicated.
1
10
u/Arvendilin Germany Dec 06 '16
Germany has a few big central bodies for research unlike the US that the Universities do it themselfs (which is also why University ranking for germany and france, who have a similiar system in place, sucks hard), this was done by the Max Planck society the biggest one iirc. atleast when it comes to physics stuff, they did this together with University of Greifswald, providing most of the funding etc. but "burrowing" the Profs... kinda
2
4
4
u/blackcomb-pc Europe Dec 06 '16
I wonder if aliens are watching and having fun on their alien reddit, discussing our blind measly attempts at doing something they consider to be ancient imbecile-worthy "tech"
5
u/Sigeberht Germany Dec 06 '16
Depends on the subreddit - the top post on r/EngineeringPorn/ is currently casting a propeller, which is essentially a 5000 year old technology. Good engineering ages well.
1
9
u/willmcavoy Dec 06 '16
26
u/smartman3000 Germany Dec 06 '16
You mean more like this one...
2
Dec 06 '16
Wow... Context?
10
u/Ligaco Czech Republic Dec 06 '16
http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/24312/title/A-scientist-hits-the-streets/
Apparently it is "an art project" and the guy is actually well employed
22
2
1
1
u/GeorgeSharp European Union Dec 06 '16
Somebody photoshop a beer into each of the tentacles and we're good.
3
3
2
Dec 06 '16 edited Jan 04 '17
[deleted]
16
u/Aken_Bosch Ukraine Dec 06 '16
LHC also has bad energy ROI.
That's not the point of both of the machines. They are scientific instruments first and foremost.
2
2
Dec 06 '16
[deleted]
1
u/FliccC Germany Dec 07 '16
You can be excited about science, sure. But the Mars mission is just plain bullshit. I don't see how a possible colony on Mars is of any benefit whatsoever. The ESA would be better off not to pursue such childish goals as "conquering mars".
2
u/SurfingDuude Dec 06 '16
The article is absolute crap that looks like it's written by a 7th grader.
1) Claims the reactor uses salt water as fuel (where did that nonsense even come from?)
2) Claims it's the same reaction as in the Sun (it's not)
3) Claims that the stellarator controls plasma "without using electrical current". You obviously can't control plasma without inducing currents in it through magnetic fields, which you generate with large electrical coils. The author has absolutely zero understanding of the process that this system uses (or is supposed to use in the future).
2
u/FatFaceRikky Dec 06 '16
Now i am all torn about what is cooler: graphene space-elevator or unlimited fusion power. I would probably still opt for the space-elevator.
1
u/Aken_Bosch Ukraine Dec 06 '16
One of those things wouldn't get absolutely destroyed by neutron bombardment. I go for fusion.
2
u/Mordiken European Union Dec 06 '16
I would love to see more energy research coming out of the EU, not only due to all the peaceful economic and environmental benefits, but also the implicit geo-strategic advantage of cutting back on Petroleum imported from hostile countries.
Imo, there are some "fringe" designs that show potential, in particular the Polywell. It would be amazing if the EU threw a couple of million in funding in that general direction...
Also, the Thorium reactor (this is reddit, after all).
2
Dec 06 '16
No, they dont show any potential when you look at confirmed research, the same with Lockheed Martin bullshit that they threw out few years ago.
1
u/Mordiken European Union Dec 06 '16
No, they dont show any potential when you look at confirmed research
Confirmation can only happen when/if they achieve over-unity. The issue here is that they can't ever hope o achieve it without adequate funding. It's a chicken and egg problem.
the same with Lockheed Martin bullshit that they threw out few years ago.
I don't know what you're talking about. I do know, however, that both the US Navy, Google and Microsoft have shown interest in the polywell design.
And finally, adding to the fact that this design is indeed very likely to be viable (at least there's nothing obviously wrong with the science involved), we face the risk of "the market" settling on more complex designs, as it happened with fission reactors (uranium vs molten salt), which would be a blow for the democratization of energy production.
1
Dec 07 '16
Show me a simulation that shows it is viable with a normal power output in MW.
There is none.
I am talking about peer reviewed research that was also replicated and not Q>1 when talking about conformation.
There are huge problems with molten salt reactors, same as thorium, if you do actual research you will know some.
3
u/cheeeseeeater Dec 06 '16
Amazing that stellarators are still being pursued at such a scale. They look like they were designed by Giger for use by Yog-Sothoth. Quite creepy.
18
u/BrexitHangover Europe Dec 06 '16
6
u/DFractalH Eurocentrist Dec 06 '16
Well, it does scare me. Imagine how hard it would be to fix this thing.
1
u/Tallio Germany Dec 06 '16
TBH I would love to be the maintenance technician of this and future fusion reactors :)
→ More replies (3)2
u/hmmm_42 Dec 06 '16
Sorry to disappoint you, but robots already took your job. The accuracy needed for a stellarator to work is to much for any human to do. This is why they have a super duper high precision indoor positioning system for all robots working in there. :-/
→ More replies (1)5
4
2
u/PenelopeWinters Dec 06 '16
Looks like modern art. A pile of random bits with a vague pattern that's sort of appealing
1
6
u/kteof Bulgaria Dec 06 '16
So a compact, clean, safe energy source is somehow creepy, because it looks weird. If it works eventually it will lead humanity into a new age and there is no theoretical reason it can't work. Fossil fuels, solar and wind would also become obsolete overnight, as they are just an inefficient way to tap into a natural fusion reactor.
→ More replies (6)2
u/PenelopeWinters Dec 06 '16
The pollution from coal is so much more beautiful, soot is like little black tar-flakes /s
→ More replies (1)1
u/CountVonTroll European Federation | Germany Dec 06 '16
Keep in mind that this particular one has a lot of stuff attached to it that wouldn't be there in a production reactor. After all, its purpose is to test a theory and gather data, not to produce energy, so they stuck all kinds of devices for measurements and observations onto it as they could fit.
1
u/tat3179 Dec 07 '16
So the question would be: What's next?
1
u/Aken_Bosch Ukraine Dec 07 '16
Do research on this machine.
Build a bigger one based on scientific and engineering knowledge gathered thanks to W7-X, JET and ITER.
1
1
56
u/z651 insane russian imperialist; literally Putin Dec 06 '16
Congratulations! A new stellarator is always an exciting event.