Reply To: Some about a fusion dispute in Sweden.

[JimmyT]

Phil’s Dad wrote: Just for clarity; are we talking a fusion confidence monitor or a FF confidence monitor? 8-/

Breakables Polywell link is very helpful.
(Having said that and just to be pedantic; if the theory is wrong it will not work however many times you try. So the probability does not approach 1 just by doing it over and over. If the theory is right it will work the first time you get the engineering right too
– but I digress) 🙄

I think the questions ought to include two things.

Firstly a step by step approach similar to that suggested by chrismb in the Polywell link with a probability at each stage.

Step / Probability

Will it get built? / 100%
If built will it achieve pinch? / 100%
If pinch will it fuse “low temperature” fuels / 99%
If so will it fuse p11B / 98%
If so will it overcome x-ray cooling / ?
If so – and so on

The second factor is time (back to the markets?)

How confident are you that proof of concept will be achieved in 10 yrs, 5 yrs, 1 yr
How confident are you that commercial FF generators will be available in …
How confident are you that they will be widely adopted in…

etc.

Of course a short education in progress to-date would have to be included prior to the question as most people haven’t even heard of it. :down:

Just as a relevant aside; I was chatting to a physicist in his lab at the UK National Physical Laboratory on Monday and Focus Fusion came up (well… y’know… I might have slipped it into the conversation). His specialty is fine measurement of temperature using sound so FF was a bit outside his brief. None the less his view was “it is thirty years away in the laboratory.” His big idea at the moment is to make energy so expensive that market forces drive emissions down to an acceptable level.
Much to do. :-S

I am confident that once we check off a couple of more items in Phil’s Dad’s list that funding for the next step will become available. Money will follow experimental results.