Nuclear fusion reaction releases almost twice the energy put in
Nuclear fusion reaction releases almost twice the energy put in
The US National Ignition Facility has achieved even higher energy yields since breaking even for the first time in 2022, but a practical fusion reactor is still a long way off
You're viewing a single thread.
Let me ask as an informal poll, how many of you here were all into Elon Musk;s Hyperloop as a sure thing back when he first introduced it?
You seem to be implying that fusion is a gimmick of an idea by comparing it to Hyperloop which was nothing but that.
Fusion is a mechanism which has been providing humanity with energy from the first moments in the form of the sun. It's a well known functional form of energy generation. The struggle isn't whether or not it could possibly work, but just to make it practical enough to make it work.
This isn't even necessarily about a single company promising that they have an idea that may work, this is an example of it functioning in some capacity.
Your comparison is simply arbitrary.
I am implying no such thing. I even explained why I brought up the Hyperloop. Maybe you missed the comment?
I didn't miss it, I just didn't search through your comment history to find your own arguments for you. Consider editing the actual top level comment if you want to use these arguments without retyping them.
Not my job to retype, your job to read if you want.
Lol what? This is a crazy take. I'm not reading you're comment history to make sense of a single comment
It's not my job to do either of those things. It may have been in your interest to make a comprehensible point though.
Nobody’s at work here.
To me it’s not so much about it being your job, as the fact you aren’t willing to just say it again indicates you don’t really enjoy this topic.
What in tarnation? You literally did no such thing in this thread. You expect people to go find your comments?
By gosh! Golly gee willikers. I guess I forgot to make this comment right here. Let me go back right quick and make it now.
While you’re at it, figure out how a thread works. And maybe tack on some social awareness.
Not me, but I think fusion is not a 1:1 equivalent to the hyperloop.
The thinking is but continue with the special pleading to give yourself a pass.
Just say what you want to say instead of riddling us with your smug responses.
I did, in my first comment if you read it.
Nobody's going to look for another top level comment that's further down
Been buried by a bunch of haters for a reason. They be hatin....
The reason is your comment was shortsighted and contrarian with no backing for the claim.
It was doomed from the beginning, but it was just meant to delay or supercede the HSR proposal in California. But what does that have to do with this post?
Just a question to see how many people here think critically. By your answer, I'd say you tend, in this case, to think conspiratorially. Seriously, billions of dollars were sunk into something that would never work just to delay a statewide proposal in California? Yet the Hyperloop was in Las Vegas, planned for Chicago among other cities and countries then it suddenly disappeared into thin air yet it was all meant to delay something in California?
Ehhhh, not really. This is a pretty common belief about the Hyperloop. A couple of years ago, someone released a book claiming they had private interviews with Musk back in the early 2010's where he admitted to trying to delay HSR. Here's an article explaining it: https://jalopnik.com/did-musk-propose-hyperloop-to-stop-california-high-spee-1849402460
The reason this is not conspiratorial thinking is that automakers have a long history in the US of dismantling, lobbying against, and even physically preventing railways from being developed. Elon Musk, especially at that time, was an automaker making claims in order to directly counter proposed high speed rail.
Yes, it was in California, but the intended reasoning is that if it succeeds in California it may be expanded upon elsewhere, meaning there would be less reliance on cars.
Claiming...no evidence though....just like Musk had no science backing him. For example, just ignore the G-force on the passengers that's just an inconsequential matter.
I'm not making the claim myself, just explaining it is a bit different than engaging in what we colloquially understand to be conspiratorial thinking. I would argue it falls under that category in the most broad, objective sense, but I would also argue that the common belief about conspiratorial thinking is that it is when someone believes demonstrably false information.
The difference is that most conspiratorial thinking is believing something despite overwhelming evidence of the contrary while this situation is believing something despite a lack of conclusive, objective evidence (that being no official statement from Musk or investigation into him about this). There is a lack of overwhelming evidence in support of Musk.
I think it won't be in our lifetimes, if ever. Its a cool idea though