13 Aug '15 11:56>
http://phys.org/news/2015-08-fusion-power-closer-reality.html
Breakthrough in high power magnets makes the new design possible.
Breakthrough in high power magnets makes the new design possible.
Originally posted by sonhouseFantastic! This sounds VERY hopeful!
http://phys.org/news/2015-08-fusion-power-closer-reality.html
Breakthrough in high power magnets makes the new design possible.
Originally posted by humyI was thinking the exact same thing. I wonder if they will actually do that? Or will political exigency and inertia just keep on the same old program? It seems to me only the basic groundwork has been done, I don't think any real construction has been done yet so it seems they COULD change course if they WOULD.
Fantastic! This sounds VERY hopeful!
At last, for the first time ever, it really seems to me the old tiresome joke of “Practical nuclear fusion power plants are just 30 years away—and always will be. “ no longer applies and we could really be looking at practical cost-effective fusion power SOON! ( within ~10 years ) . I have been through this link with a fin ...[text shortened]... building the one with this vastly improved design made with this new superconductor? I think so.
Originally posted by sonhouseI have just inserted my own comment about that at the bottom of that link along with some other comments I made in response to some other comments made by some other posters there that I think are pretty idiotic.
I was thinking the exact same thing. I wonder if they will actually do that? Or will political exigency and inertia just keep on the same old program? It seems to me only the basic groundwork has been done, I don't think any real construction has been done yet so it seems they COULD change course if they WOULD.
Originally posted by humyAlthough not an identical situation, I often think that large expensive projects whose main cost is computing power should simply be put on hold for a few years as the costs are guaranteed to drop dramatically. I feel that way about SETI@home for example. Only time sensitive projects are worth pursuing such as those that will save lives if completed sooner.
-tt makes me think that, unless I am missing something here, they should now definitely completely halt construction of that “ ITER” and divert all funds from that to building the one with this vastly improved design made with this new superconductor? I think so.
Originally posted by twhiteheadThe problem is that technological progress in any given area does not happen automatically.
Although not an identical situation, I often think that large expensive projects whose main cost is computing power should simply be put on hold for a few years as the costs are guaranteed to drop dramatically. I feel that way about SETI@home for example. Only time sensitive projects are worth pursuing such as those that will save lives if completed soone ...[text shortened]... also cases where the costs drop [b]because of the big expensive projects that lead the way.[/b]
Originally posted by googlefudgeThat bit with the Saturn V was purely political. I was a tech on Apollo, Apollo tracking and timing, maybe you remember me talking about that. Anyway, Nixon thought 1) it was a democrat project so republicans refuse to fund something from across the isle, and 2) we proved our point, the main point being to beat the Soviets to the moon. So Nixon thought of the whole Apollo program as a publicity stunt so, Americans on the moon, enough, goodbye Apollo, throw out all those 'usesless' Saturn V drawings and so forth. After I was laid off at Goddard, I drifted west and found myself at Goldstone space tracking center in the California desert east of Los Angeles.
The problem is that technological progress in any given area does not happen automatically.
Progress only happens when it is intentionally driven forwards.
This means that waiting for technology to come along to fix your problem us typically doomed
to failure because technology wont come along unless it is made to come along.
This is why both ...[text shortened]... without
something else being designed first.
But they are the rare exceptions to the rule.
Originally posted by sonhouseI did have you in mind when I was writing my post as I am well aware you worked on Apollo. ๐
That bit with the Saturn V was purely political. I was a tech on Apollo, Apollo tracking and timing, maybe you remember me talking about that. Anyway, Nixon thought 1) it was a democrat project so republicans refuse to fund something from across the isle, and 2) we proved our point, the main point being to beat the Soviets to the moon. So Nixon thought of t ...[text shortened]... , don't worry, I won't accept the offer, and we went back to Venice Beach. Talk about dumb......
I noticed all my previous hardware was gone and new tiles put down on the floor. I kind of grieved for the loss of that hardware I had come to know pretty dam well
Originally posted by googlefudgeThe speed of computing is being driven mostly by business. Any science project whose costs depend on computing speed and whose urgency is not critical could save enormous costs by simply waiting.
The problem is that technological progress in any given area does not happen automatically.
Progress only happens when it is intentionally driven forwards.
Originally posted by twhiteheadI think you just made my argument for me.
The speed of computing is being driven mostly by business. Any science project whose costs depend on computing speed and whose urgency is not critical could save enormous costs by simply waiting.
Some projects like the human genome project could have benefited by waiting, but at the same time were largely responsible for the drop in costs as the projec ...[text shortened]... al, would be so beneficial for mankind that it is probably worth pursuing now rather than later.
Originally posted by googlefudgeSo the question for any project is whether or not the extra cost of doing it now rather than later justifies the faster results.
But if we had waited for the technology to advance first we would not have
got that important result as soon as we did.
This applies to everything we do.
Originally posted by twhiteheadThere is a space technology company that was working on anti-vibration technology for
So the question for any project is whether or not the extra cost of doing it now rather than later justifies the faster results.
In my opinion for Seti@home it is not justified, for Rosetta@home, it is. But I may be underestimating the benefits of finding alien transmissions.
Originally posted by googlefudgeI googled Apollo equipment museum and the only thing I got was the module. MY equipment probably went to the garbage dump. Some of the stuff though, was off the shelf items like the two atomic clocks made by HP and the third backup, an advanced temperature stabilized quartz crystal clock, not near as accurate as the atomic clocks but good enough for short term outages. The tracking modules were one of a kind and probably hit the dumpster. I wish I had been there at Goldstone when the dumped my stuff out the door๐
I did have you in mind when I was writing my post as I am well aware you worked on Apollo. ๐
I am not sure however that it was 'entirely' a political issue. Although politics is a major and ongoing
problem for NASA. Which is why I currently have more hope for Space-X.
While we could be significantly further ahead than we currently are, I don't t ...[text shortened]... rity. I mean seriously, they couldn't find suitable museums for this stuff at the
very least??