this post was submitted on 21 Jan 2025
395 points (97.1% liked)

Science

3384 readers
726 users here now

General discussions about "science" itself

Be sure to also check out these other Fediverse science communities:

https://lemmy.ml/c/science

https://beehaw.org/c/science

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] secretlyaddictedtolinux@lemmy.world 11 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

what an incredible achievement. rome wasn't built in a day and real.science takes time and effort. so much effort by these scientists!

[–] Shyfer@ttrpg.network 4 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

I'm so used to hearing that this technology is 10 years away, or whatever the old adage was, that i can't believe we've been seeing actual progress on this front in the last few years. Maybe it will actually happen eventually!

[–] Loss@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 hour ago

It just took someone without a profit motive

[–] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 7 hours ago (3 children)

I'm studying Physics at the moment and Prof. gave us a printout of a textbook last week stating that the internal of the sun generates approximately 150 W / m³ on average. That's about as much as a compost pile, so, not very much. The sun only generates enormous amounts of power because it's so huge. In other words, reproducing fusion on Earth might actually not be very efficient.

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 hour ago

Yeah that is not how that works

The sun is enormous, yeah, but fusion only really happens at the core. A very tiny fraction of the sun is doing the fusion, the rest jlgets heated up, makes gravity and such, bit doesn't really do anything of interest energy wise.

Fusion creates a shit tonne more energy than 150w/cm3. Heck, you've never seen what a nuke does

[–] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 3 points 1 hour ago

Look up the etymology of the word "sophomore".

[–] _stranger_@lemmy.world 25 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Found this article

https://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2012/04/17/3478276.htm

And it looks like it's saying that the energy produced by nuclear fusion (which happens in the relatively small core) divided by the entire mass of the sun, gives you that low number.

Terrestrial fusion power plants are aiming to be sun cores, so that all the hydrogen they put in gets fused, and not just a few atoms here and there.

[–] CleoTheWizard@lemmy.world 15 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

Why do people assume that scientists don’t sanity check themselves? Genuine question, no offense to the OC here.

[–] Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works 8 points 2 hours ago

Cause maybe they assume scientists are hyping things up like VCs for AI.

In a dishonest world, the honest would be mistrusted more.

[–] cazssiew@lemmy.world 13 points 4 hours ago

"guys, I know we've been working on this for decades, but I've been going over this first-year textbook, and I have some bad news..."

[–] MothmanDelorian@lemmy.world 7 points 7 hours ago

Good job scientists!

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 16 points 9 hours ago (3 children)

I feel like little fusion has kind of missed the boat. It's been "just a few decades away" since I was in school, and that's a good while ago now.

We can already get limitless clean energy from the real sun.

[–] Loss@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 hour ago

A) solar energy isn't clean, and it's the exact opposite of environmentally friendly; it's just that current power sources are so much worse it looks good by comparison.

B) fusion cannot ever be profitable. The fuel for it is the most common on the planet, if not the universe, requires no special refining, and can't be made artificially scarce. A post fusion world is a post energy industry world. It's the practical end of what currently owns the US and other countries.

This has drastically reduced funding for it and has blocked advancement for decades. This project among others in China have no profit motive, they are trying to accomplish a goal without caring how they can become rich off it. If fusion energy is possible, it'll be done in China.

[–] _stranger_@lemmy.world 20 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)
  1. We should do both

  2. There is no two.

[–] GaMEChld@lemmy.world 34 points 7 hours ago

Here's why it's been so long:

[–] NatakuNox@lemmy.world 19 points 10 hours ago (3 children)
[–] CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world 7 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (2 children)

Living in the UK I suspect you have the same problem we have. Plenty of people capable of doing all the impressive shit China is doing (science, infastructure, whatever) and all of them being starved of funding as all the money dissapears into gigantic blackholes of backroom deals where huge amounts of money are spent on vague things that never seem to materialize or even be adequately explained; but whatever they are they sure do generate enormous profits for the cronies of whoevers currently in power.

[–] Shyfer@ttrpg.network 1 points 1 hour ago

Well at least here we can pretty easily see where the money goes by looking at the billions of dollars given to Israel and the military.

[–] kmaismith@lemm.ee 2 points 4 hours ago

My country is in this comment and i don’t like it

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] rbesfe@lemmy.ca 20 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Someone needs to bash these scicomm journalists over the head until they stop using the words "artificial sun"

[–] barnaclebutt@lemmy.world 11 points 12 hours ago

Also, where's the study? Is it even peer reviewed?

[–] x00z@lemmy.world -5 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Maybe they miss the sun because of all the smog in the air.

[–] aspensmonster@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 58 minutes ago

lemmy.world. Yep. Checks out.

[–] SplashJackson@lemmy.ca 14 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Forget artificial suns, let me tell you right now how to make an artificial moon:

  1. Be a robot.
  2. Pull down pants.
  3. Bend over.
  4. Point robo-crack towards recipient
  5. Artificial Moon.
[–] RubberElectrons@lemmy.world 6 points 10 hours ago

Meh, net gain is the point, long cycles well be useful for production. Useful, eventually. Cart before the horse, otherwise.

load more comments
view more: next ›