Slashdot Mirror
Lightning Fusion And Other Hot News
DumbSwede writes "PhysOrg.com reports that according to calculations by B.M. Kuzhevsky, the head of the neutron research lab at Moscow State University, neutron levels far above normal background levels exist during lightning strikes. While only a small percentage of rainwater contains atoms of deuterium, the lightning still provides enough energy to create fusion events. Frequent Slashdot readers no doubt remember recent articles on Fusion induced by sonic compression and more recently by pyroelectric effect. Perhaps more controversially, and yet to be discussed on Slashdot, the NIF has possible plans for a hybrid fusion approach that uses not only deuterium and tritium, but uranium and plutonium as well in what amounts to a miniaturized version of how thermonuclear weapons achieve fusion. Fears are that this could lead directly to micro-H-bombs. This year has also seen the final selection of France for the ITER experimental Fusion Reactor site. With all the recent discoveries and developments in fusion research, my question for Slashdotters - are we on the verge of something big that will make fusion a practical reality in a much shorter time frame than the often quoted '30 years away, and always will be'?"
The future can never accurately predicted. Investment in technology is a gamble, but I believe it is a worthwile one. Fusion, like some others have stated, could solve energy problems, powering almost everything (a possibility). I'll never say such and such will happen in a certain time period, because unexpected things always happen. I think I may go offtoppic here a bit, but for example, my mom had this book from the 1950's (I think) titled, "You Will Live on the Moon". It more or less predicted space travel would be like air travel was before 9/11 by the year 2000. Obviously, we're not there yet. We'll just have to wait and see, won't we?
Sometimes I comment just to hear myself typing.
haha, I love BTTF!
Speaking of kiwis and fission, how's your election going?
Seriously, I can understand and respect the "no nuclear weapons" stance, but the "no nuclear-powered vessels/no fission at all" stance just strikes me as silly.