Reply To: Some about a fusion dispute in Sweden.

[Aeronaut]

JimmyT 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.

I agree. We already have 2 successful experimental machines that have confirmed the predictions of our in-house theory development (theoretical progress is accurate but doesn’t sound substantial to my gut). This lets us plot the Plan and milestones on a ray (lines are a fixed length :down: ). This graphic would set the stage for 2010 to prove that funding FF has produced and continues to produce concrete results aimed at achieving practical fusion long before 2015. This would make the educational part more compelling, especially as we fill in a lot of dots next year.

As for government funding, this seems to be a restatement of the ‘How to get a loan- prove you don’t need it’ banking cliche. One of our local hamlets just turned down a Stimulus Fund project to repave ~1 km because they could do it quicker and cheaper without the government meddling. I’m looking to the private sector, iow. Making the case that doing the right thing has enormous economic, environmental, and PR benefits for early adopters. But outstanding benefits for the mainstream, as well.

Until then we have to soldier on. This means that we must have a vision, even if others label it a dream.