Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
Biology
BiologyBotanyMicrobiologyEntomologyEvolutionPaleontology
Chemistry
General ChemistryAnalytical ChemistryElectrochemistryOrganic Synthesis
Earth Science
GeologyMineralogyOceanographyMeteorologyEarthquakes
Physics
General PhysicsResearchRelativityParticle PhysicsElectromagnetismFusionOpticsAcousticsNew Theories

Natural Science Forum / Physics / Fusion / May 2005



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Nano Explosions Might Not Stay Nano

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Bret Cahill - 20 May 2005 02:02 GMT
Even if small scale hot fusion could be made to work there probably
would be the same problem as anything that could be converted/increased
for a large bomb.

The only difference is this would fit into carry on baggage.

Bret Cahill
Bret Cahill - 20 May 2005 14:09 GMT
It would be difficult to distribute energy in any form of deterium to
the public that would be safe.

Bret Cahill
Phil Weldon - 20 May 2005 15:43 GMT
Why?  Deuterium is already distributed to the public.  A 25 liter bottle of
99.8% D2 gas (bout 4 grams) is $182 US at Isotech.

Complete fusion of 4 grams of Deuterium would yield about 2.5 X 10^12
joules, or about 700 megawatt hours.  The problem of releasing that energy
is left as an exercise for the student.

> It would be difficult to distribute energy in any form of deterium to
> the public that would be safe.
>
> Bret Cahill
Bret Cahill - 20 May 2005 22:01 GMT
$30,000 juice for only $182 in fuel?

We'll worry about terrorists when we get the technology.

Bret Cahill
Phil Weldon - 21 May 2005 03:00 GMT
Fortunately, in the real world of classical fusion, ignition costs are
beyond the means of NGO terrorists.
And if waste heat from a fusion reactor could could be used to distill heavy
water from tap water....
No wonder the idea of fusion power is so seductive.

Phil Weldon

> $30,000 juice for only $182 in fuel?
>
> We'll worry about terrorists when we get the technology.
>
> Bret Cahill
Bret Cahill - 21 May 2005 13:47 GMT
< Fortunately, in the real world of classical fusion, ignition costs

< are beyond the means of NGO terrorists.

Not the biggest plus for mainstream fusion.  The likelihood of a few
terrorist attacks using technology for small scale fusion power is
small spuds compared to the advantages of cheap portable energy.

They can afford bio and fuel-air explosions but they haven't done
anything.

After 9/11 Islamists were hyped as being brilliant but I could never
believe that one.  How bright do you have to be to blow yourself up?
I think it is the definition of stupid.  Wouldn't you get twice as many
virgins if you spent $5.00 for a remote at Radio Shack and used that
for your first attack against the decadent infidel West?

< And if waste heat from a fusion reactor could could be used to

< distill heavy water from tap water....

< No wonder the idea of fusion power is so seductive.

I'm always impressed with solutions to past problems where you need to
deal with something basic, a really big mass, force or other things I
would NEVER be able to solve.  Considering the tens of trillions of
dollars involved it's pretty surprising there isn't anyone or any group
clever enough to do it.

The internet churns every possible insight, every possible idea
together so it is like the whole of humanity is working on it.

And still no elegant economical results.

Bret Cahill
Phil Weldon - 20 May 2005 14:42 GMT
There are alread fission devices that small.

> Even if small scale hot fusion could be made to work there probably
> would be the same problem as anything that could be converted/increased
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>
> Bret Cahill
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2010 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.