schroedingershat @ schroedingershat @lemmy.world

Posts

1

Comments

375

Joined

2 yr. ago

It's so weird that all these places the global north have been intentionally destabilizing are unstable and sympathetic to (even worse) groups that oppose the west. If only there was an alternative to undermining their democracies and exploiting their people and natural resources.

I was surprised at how I actually needed to put in a little effort to keep up with her downhill.

^ precisely my point though. A little effort exceeds the motor speed limiter. Effort that is much more readily available because you didn't spend it going up the hill.

I'm not sure if the time scale would be measurable. Nanoseconds at most. But the relevant part is that it's ignition.

A device to harness inertial confinement fusion would work very very differently to a magnetic confinement one if that were the goal here (it's not, it's a weapons research facility). Essentially heating something up a lot in milliseconds and then extracting the heat over hours to months.

This research comes frim the llnl weapons complex: https://wci.llnl.gov/

There is an international treaty against nuclear arms testing, so as new weapons and platforms are developed there is no way to expose them to the conditiona they'd encounter if they actually had to deploy nuclear weapons (or operate in an environment where they are being used such as trying to take out the other bomber that is on its way to destroy your other city while the first city burns).

In addition to the enormous military budget, They take large quantities of civilian money via the DOE because they pay lip service to it being "energy research". This is the part that is objectionable.

It's a cool thing, and arguably necessary given we recently got to see what happens when a country bordering Russia gives up its nuclear weapons altogether, but there is little application for energy. It may also see the development of some micro-fusion warhead with no fission component which is technically a nuclear bomb, but nigh-impossible to make if you don't have the US military budget so they'll use it anyway and say "nuh-huh!" when anyone objects.

Either the technology is highly limited in the volume where the reaction is self sustaining, so the machine as a whole will never break even energy-wise, or it is not, and every inertial confinement generator produced is essentially a weapon of mass destruction that the US will never let exist outside of the control of nuclear armed countries.

There may be some limited application to energy, but it's a stretch (essentially it would look like asking the US military nicely to come set another bomb off in your artificial geothermal reservoir every few months). It will certainly never be deployed in a non-military mobile application (which rules out most of the use cases where renewables are not strictly superior).

I see you've never encountered an ebike on a hill.

Acoustic bike riders rest on the downhill.

Ebike riders who have motors that exceed their power output by a factor of 3 rest on the uphill.

The rolling resistance difference is single digit watts. Any influence from extra weight will increase coasting speed.

https://www.jinkosolar.com/en/

Except this one isn't basic physics research. It's an end run around nuclear weapons treaties to test how missiles and planes respond to H-bombs going off nearby.

It could have an energy application (maybe), but given that the targets are ludicrously expensive, the most viable power plant would resemble the attempts in the 60s to use bombs in underground caverns to heat things up and put essentially a geothermal plant on top. Except with a laser detonator rather than a fission one. Chances of making it economically viable or reliable are slim.

Neither of those things are liberal. Liberalism is a right wing ideology.

The amount of energy you can get per m^2 without heating the planet is definitionally the amount you can get by covering a small fraction of the planet with PV. No thermal power generation can beat this.

Large, inflexible, overly centralised generation is also unable to reach high grid penetration (for example france produces 20-30% of their load from dispatchable sources like gas and hydro even on a summer's night during the pandemic where demand is <50% of their nuclear fleet's nameplate capacity)

Yet you seem to be completely sold in regard to the original claims

At no point did anything I say suggest this.

Assuming for a moment it is real and works and this class of material is useful for transmitting current with 0 resistance or making magnets, many attributes of other ceramic superconductors also shouldn't apply given the theory that predicted it says it's not one of those either.

This also leads to a very very stupid reactionary semantic argument you'll start seeing more and more over the coming weeks.

Bite the bullet. Move to slightly worse but non-abusive alternatives. Fund them with the portion of your budget that was previously coerced from you.

There is no extraordinary claim. The claim follows the exact pattern of the discovery of type ii superconductors (right down to BCS failing to predict it and gatekeepers swarming to shout about how it is an "extraordinary claim). Multiple independent simulations predict the material will be interesting, and the 40 year old theory that did predict type ii superconductors was used to find it. I'm asserting nothing other than that the most likely explanation for the five independent reproductions is the simplest.

The potential impact on society if it is a superconductor and not a novel diamagnet, and if a process can be found to make pure bulk material is large. You're trying to conflate this with an extraordinary claim.

The potential impact if it is a novel diamagnet on theoretical physics is large. This would be the more extraordinary claim, and insofar as you have said anything at all, you are actively making this claim (or you are claiming that three universities are conspiring to fake videos).

You seem to be confusing faith with science. That’s not how science works

Et tu. Brutus. Additionally science does not work by gatekeeping and invoking magic words like "peer review" without actually paying attention to the meaning of those words. It's just a short hand for "get someonenelse who knows what they are doing to try and falsify your work". The LK-99 paper has already had much, much more scrutiny than the average publication.

Terrestrial fusion achieves very little that using the existing fusion generator we have does not do better.

Evidence that the class of materials is a thing is decently solid so far (but will still take a few months to confirm).

The hard bit of finding a process or another material in the class with a yield of more than a couple of milligram specks per kg of input starts after that.

Plus even then, the anisotropy (it only works in one direction) will give it some odd limitations. Still really cool though

It's a superposition

What are you even trying to say?

If the luxuries are causing the harm, and you keep taking them, then you are complicit. End of story. Stop trying to pretend it was some kother teresa bullshit or justify your killing of current and future generations by saying life is "not dimensional".

Extraordinary consequences are not extraordinary claims. It's probably a perfectly boring and normal advancement of physics that will take a long time to bear fruit if it is even possible to use it, or possibly an interesting anomaly with little application.

The only one making unsubstantiated absolute positive claims here is you.

Then...stop giving it by making inane, tired, cliched comments. And stop blaming shitty journalism and mandatory PR department fake hype for grant money on the scientists. Downvote and move on.

Each breakthrough had elements that were messy and complicated and once you break through the hype and look at what the breakthrough actually was, you can see they're in hearing aids, and single use applications and many of them (even ones not originating in lithium batteries) are now in lithium batteries.

Hence why they went from barely more than lead acid in energy density with abysmal lifetimes to at around 90Wh/kg and <200 cycles to 500Wh/kg for pilot-scale (still larger than the total scale of lithium in the early 2000s) commercial batteries that do 1000s of cycles, charge ten times as fast and cost a tenth as much using no precious or rare earth metals and a 20th of the lithium. 2015-2020's breakthroughs are gearing up to give us 700Wh/kg expensive batteries and 160Wh/kg dirt cheap sodium batteries.

The breakthroughs happened and are in mass production, just because the charge carrier is the same (with good reason) doesn't make the other parts the same. Stop focusing on a single word as if that defines the entire thing.

That saie, this 'breakthrough" is pure hype. The concept is interesting, but the suggested application of residential energy storage is worse than a sodium ion battery by every metric.