Re:MIT's Pathway to Fusion Energy [video]
by tambourine_man on Sunday July 23, 2017 @10:29PM
(#14835499)
>Viewers should take into account that this, like most talks, is pushing an agenda
Exactly, and it annoyed me a bit the somewhat dismissive tone he applies to the competing ideas. He starts by trying to show an impartial overview while being anything but.
To be fair, his dismissal was consistent in focusing on the most important metric, Q (energy out / energy in).
However, I'm not qualified to assess anything else in the video, and I do recognize the potential for bias here.
Any breakthroughs on the horizon to tackle the issues of the containment vessel being battered, and the plasma diverter?
Re:MIT's Pathway to Fusion Energy [video]
by abefetterman on Monday July 24, 2017 @12:23AM
(#14835868)
The most interesting thing for these is liquid lithium metal--especially a great solution on diverter. For the wall neutron flux this is unfortunately seen as a "materials issue" (someone else's problem). It is a bit stalled out until we can build something with high enough neutron flux for testing.
Exciting news on the liquid Li, but I'm a bit dejected to hear about the wall.
But he's from MIT so he must know what he's talking about.
Remember kids--and by kids, I mean fellow scientists--every presentation serves to either help secure or maintain funding.
> Remember kids--and by kids, I mean fellow scientists--every presentation serves to either help secure or maintain funding.
What's the point of this statement? Funding is how things happen - these things don't happen out of thin air.
"Remember kids--and by kids, I mean fellow scientists--every presentation serves to either help doing or maintain doing."
Sometimes a presentation is just a presentation. A means of imparting unbiased knowledge.
Re:MIT's Pathway to Fusion Energy [video]
by ruleabidinguser on Monday July 24, 2017 @12:47AM
(#14835949)
It's a reminder not to think the presenter was honestly trying to teach
Or not necessarily that there isn't any noble intention in him, of course there is some. But, the pressure of keeping funding will always color their presentations, for example, to make them leave out other competing groups and ideas.
As a former researcher of alternative magnetic confinement schemes, I'm disappointed the latest research in FRCs and mirrors didn't make it into this talk. Viewers should take into account that this, like most talks, is pushing an agenda, in this case a new device called SPARC. It appears to also be a way of using the incredibly talented tokamak researchers at MIT now that Alcator C-Mod is not operating.
[1] http://library.psfc.mit.edu/catalog/online_pubs/iap/iap2016/...