←back to thread

243 points greesil | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
sheepscreek ◴[] No.44637662[source]
TL;DR - Looks dangerous, but is it? (open question) Can we quantify it or at least make it more tangible?

God, this contraption appears to be the kind of thing I wouldn’t trust my life with. Every time I look at a fusion reactor, it seems far more dangerous than my hobby lab, failing to inspire any confidence. The numerous moving parts create an equal number of potential points of failure. In contrast, a nuclear reactor doesn’t have to contend with plasma gases hotter than the Sun, contained within an artificial bubble solely through the assistance of electromagnetic radiation.

I’ve often tried to imagine the worst case scenario, but I am limited by my knowledge on the subject. What kind of damage can hot plasma at a few million degree C do?

On one hand, the plasma is hotter than anything on earth created by mankind. Then I believe there’s also a significant number of wild neutrons shooting around which can cause havoc in their own right, if not contained. But on the other hand, unlike an uncontrolled chain reaction, without a source of heat, the whole operation shuts off by itself. I’m probably wrong about a few assumptions here but this is what I often find myself wondering.

replies(2): >>44637723 #>>44639967 #
1. Workaccount2 ◴[] No.44637723[source]
I'd imagine that these research reactors are chock full of "adjustable parameter" parts and modular assemblies.

Once they get everything dialed in, they can make a static purpose built machine with dramatically less complexity. Generally with research machines they are very unwieldy while still being dialed in.