i decided not to get excited until replicated experiments by third parties were done, it was too good to be true
this post was submitted on 08 Aug 2023
101 points (99.0% liked)
science
14884 readers
83 users here now
A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.
rule #1: be kind
<--- rules currently under construction, see current pinned post.
2024-11-11
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I know better and still got excited.
I know we need to fix our problems as a society, but damn that technology hopium really gets me going.
In unrelated news, did you see the fusion news! We did it! Net positive energy! Fusion will be in our toasters in a few short years!
i hate to break it to you, but net positive isn't exact here. the "energy in" used to calculate it is the energy of the actual photons, but to actually fire those lasers, you need 100 times the energy, so it's a net 1%
The fusion definition of "net positive" has always been heavily inflated so that investors and governments will actually put money into these dreams
In unrelated news, did you see the fusion news! We did it! Net positive energy! Fusion will be in our toasters in a few short years!
Now they simply have to figure out how to get that super-powerful laser, which can fire only once a day, to firing once every milisecond ;-)
Easy! Run it on fusion!
Do you have more information on said laser? I work on lasers that I would consider quite powerful and they fire at 6 kHz, soon to be 8 on the next model. I'd like to compare the specs
The National Ignition Facility has an explainer here. Typically, these facilities operate at petawatt peak powers by using lots and lots of pulse amplifiers. From what I heard, after every shot, the staff have to comb through the facility making sure things are still working, replacing blown out components, etc...
Oh wow a few Joules, that's orders of magnitude bigger than ours
You may know more than me on this, but I believe multiple fires per day are possible now. Besides, tokamak reactors show more promise.
I tapped out after high school physics and college organic chem, so have almost zero understanding of what’s at work here, but why wouldn’t the original authors have thought to test for ferromagnetism?
Motivated reasoning effects everyone. Even scientists can see what they want to see over what is. One of many reasons peer review is an important part of the process.
What’s the typical damage done to the careers of folks who mistakenly claim cold fusion or room-temp superconductor discoveries?
Nothing, people in research usually judge your work for what it is. In non blind peer review your work might not be looked at with as much interest or diligence, as you already lost some credibility
What careers?
These are often done purposefully. And the scientists are often repeat offenders of academic fraud. It's a very bad look for their career.
That’s a shame. Is was hoping this could be it