48 seconds. I predict a glut of helium. balloons for everyone

  • assembly@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    48 seconds at those temperatures is no joke, that is pretty amazing. I didn’t see the article elaborate on what the current limiting factors are for pushing beyond 48 seconds. Like I wonder if it’s a hard wall, a new engineering challenge, a tweak needed, etc. this is the reactor that set the last record so they are doing something really right.

    • remotelove@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      (The article touches on this bit a little) I was watching something about fusion the other day and it seems that it is super tricky to keep the magnetic field balanced in a way that keeps the plasma in a proper toroid. Not only does it need to keep the correct strength, it has to fight against random turbulence. This is critical to start the reaction, but also to maintain it.

      Also, they gave some other physical limitations in the article as well:

      To extend their plasma’s burning time from the previous record-breaking run, the scientists tweaked aspects of their reactor’s design, including replacing carbon with tungsten to improve the efficiency of the tokamak’s “divertors,” which extract heat and ash from the reactor.

      Basically, it’s the container that has limitations as containing a pseudo-sun probably isn’t easy.

      • Nastybutler@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        According to another commenter the heat generated is 7 times that of the core of the sun. Considering we use the sun in sci fi to destroy anything that can’t be destroyed by other means, controlling that level of heat seems like a real challenge

        • remotelove@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Yeah. Actually using that heat is the next challenge, I suppose. If I am not mistaken (and I am often mistaken), they are not actually using the reaction to power the reactor yet.

          It’s all math, basically. If they measure more energy coming out than they put in, it’s considered a win.

          • Dojan@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            How would they use it to power a reactor? Is it like a regular nuclear reactor where you essentially boil water to power a steam turbine?

            I swear a part of my inner child died the day I found out that nuclear reactors are essentially big kettles.

            • remotelove@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              It’s likely going to create steam, just like a reactor today. It is a very effective way to turn a turbine for a generator, after all. All the bits that actually start and maintain the reaction need fuck tons of electricity, so the reaction can literally power itself when attached to a generator.

              While there are a ton of formulas for converting energy from heat, to steam, to mechanical energy and then into electricity, it’s all basically the same: more power out than you put in is a good reaction.

              Almost forgot, water is dual function. It cools the equipment and it acts as an energy transport. I believe ammonia is more efficient in some circumstances, but water is better for obvious reasons.