[dennisp]

“So this is basically a fusor? Not even a polywell?”

Why do you say this? IEC sounds like polywell to me.

[dennisp]

“As recent, general traffic on the forum site seems to be covering the AGW debate, and movies, and games, better than real progress toward exceeding unity, I’m finding myself suddenly deeply dissatisfied.”

I’m not much for those particular topics either but it’s hard for those of us outside the research team to talk much about real progress in focus fusion when the last news about real progress was posted a month ago. Just sayin’.

[dennisp]

“Again with the fusion ex machina.”…hmm, as if fusion were some unexpected savior coming out of nowhere? Isn’t this entire forum about the invention of fusion, and its consequences? On non-fusion related forums, I don’t bring in fusion as an argument.

Pretty much agree on the rest. If we were smart, we’d start taking carbon out of the atmosphere, with things like biochar and carbon-negative cement. Then instead of carbon credits being issued by the government, they could be issued by anyone who verifiably remediates carbon. If you emit, pay someone to clean up your mess, or do it yourself, like we all learned in kindergarten. The technologies are remarkably inexpensive.

We could have a carbon-neutral civilization and still drive around our SUVs, even without inventing fusion. Fusion is my main hope only because I think we’re too dumb to actually do it.

[dennisp]

“Cap-and-trade is dangerous precisely because it gives that lot, and other similar bodies, authority over the valuation of every productive activity on the planet, almost.”

Once we have a fusion-based economy that will no longer be remotely true.

[dennisp]

With cheap enough power, it should be reasonably economical to make liquid fuels from CO2 in the atmosphere.

If the human race can’t be bothered to go carbon neutral even after inventing cheap aneutronic fusion, we should all just shoot ourselves in our heads and get it over with.

[dennisp]

Obviously my comment is based on the idea that focus fusion works as described. Just like pretty much all other comments in the economics forum.

[dennisp]

Why thank you 🙂 …Didn’t realize that was how it started, but I did know that people were well aware of the rocketry application. Just haven’t found the specs anywhere. How fast can we get to Mars, what’s the highest speed we could get to, what would be the launch cost per pound…I’m guessing it would be in the same range as polywell designs, with cheaper hardware. (Polywell rocket specs here: http://nextbigfuture.com/2007/11/fusion-propulsion-if-bussard-iec-fusion.html) Then again, cost per watt is way cheaper with focus fusion, maybe launch costs would be somewhat cheaper as well.

I saw a design the other day for an implosion-based fusion rocket that could hit 20% lightspeed with two stages. Exhaust velocity is 6.3% lightspeed, about twice the Daedalus design. Here is is: http://nextbigfuture.com/2009/10/winterberg-fusion-rocket-could-go-20-of.html

So, just wondering how focus fusion compares to all this.

[Author]

Posts