Re:Lockheed Martin has obtained a patent for a compact fusio...
by paulmd on Tuesday March 27, 2018 @06:54AM
(#16687070)
> Why would it be exponential? ... Why should money make fusion have Moores-like growth?
Because fusion research is critically underfunded and always has been. Like any project, there is probably a point where we'll hit diminishing returns, but right now we're barely keeping the lights on, much less hitting diminishing returns.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:U.S._historical_fusi...
Re:Lockheed Martin has obtained a patent for a compact fusio...
by adventured on Tuesday March 27, 2018 @03:35AM
(#16686185)
> Why would it be exponential? ... Why should money make fusion have Moores-like growth?
I'd say the key to the parent's premise, is they said it'd be exponential for quite a few years (rather than indefinitely). That's likely correct. The early improvements would probably leap substantially in regards to the output possible. We saw the same thing in nuclear reactor tech.
Sure, more money means more improvements faster, but at best that can only amplify already-exponential progress. Unless, it leads to even more money? Or, that each improvement scales all factors? Or, that one improvement makes it easier to find subsequent improvements (a kind of positive feedback loop; accelerating returns).
Why should money make fusion have Moores-like growth? Not even silicon has it any more...