Slashdot Mirror
'Super Steel' Sought For Fusion Reactors
Smivs writes "New research shows how
steel will fail at high temperatures because of the magnetic properties of the metal.
Scientists say an understanding of how the Twin Towers collapsed will help them develop the materials needed to build fusion reactors.
The New York buildings fell when their steel backbones lost strength in the fires that followed the plane impacts.
Dr Sergei Dudarev told the British Association Science Festival that improved steels were now being sought.
The principal scientist at the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA) said one of the first applications for these better performing metals would be in the wall linings of fusion reactors."
"Steel isn't strong, boy. Flesh is stronger. Look around you." Thulsa motions to some of the thousands of followers surrounding his mountain who worship him as the mouthpiece of Set. He points up to the top of a cliff, "There, on the rocks, that beautiful girl." He motions to the girl, "Come to me, my child." The girl steps off the cliff and falls to her death. "That is strength, boy. That is power: the strength and power of flesh. What is steel compared to the hand that wields it? Look at the strength of your body, the desire in your heart. I gave you these...."
Who run Barter Town?
If it worked and we can make Fusion Reactors. This would leave some irony to the terrorist.
The Terrist may think they won because once we go Fusion we won't need to protect our oil interests thus mostly ignoring that area of the world, except for the occasional humanitarian mission, thus reducing our influcene in their countries...
However because we are not funding those countries with money they end up bankrupt in far more trouble then with the US involved.
When the Terrorist actually win they loose, because their goals will lead to their destruction.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
I disagree. I think it would be the most wonderful irony if a crucial piece of the technology required to provide humanity with a cheap source of energy came from their attacks. The only reason the theocracies in the middle east have any power is that they have a natural resource that the rest of the world needs. With commercial fusion, this evaporates (you can make oil for plastics from air and water if you have enough cheap energy).
Or would you rather that their deaths only benefited Al-Quaeda?
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Would the fact that we've learned something new about steel thanks to the way the Twin Towers fell, silence the conspiracy lovers?
No, of course not. What the hell was I thinking there?
Well, we're getting WAY off topic from the original story here but people deal with loss differently. Some Americans have a near psychotic desire to be a part of bringing justice to those responsible. 9/11 affected us all in different ways. From losing loved ones to losing a sense of security to losing our rights, everyone believes they've lost something.
I listened to a This American Life episode where a man whose mother was raped and killed spent a large part of his life going over what had happened. He even went so far as to go to the jail and interview one of the murderers. He was so convinced there was more to it than just a random robbery gone wrong.
The "Truthers" (as they call themselves) are trying to cope with this in a unique way where they will relentlessly seek the truth--to a fault. They won't ever be satisfied because the attacks were so inconceivable that there must be an equally outrageous explanation for them. Occam's Razor is not in their reasoning kit anymore.
Personally, I think we just need to let them have their community and leave them alone and give them the information they need. You can't change the way these people think and as Americans they have this right to believe what they want--so long as they don't go infringing on other people's life, liberty & pursuit of happiness.
Following World War II, the public's imagination has gone wild from JFK's assassination to 9/11. It's simply something that can no longer be avoided.
My work here is dung.
It is not as if high strength hasn't always been sought after in steels (iron-carbon alloy). INcluding high temperature strength. The usual solution is various nickel alloys starting with the austenitic stainless steels and going up from there (HK-40, HP modified).
Yes, we may yet find some interesting corners on phase diagrams, especially via combinatorial chemistry and high-throughput experiementation. But please do not pretent this search is anything remotely novel.
For many high temperature applications, the usual solution is cold wall designs with refractory (insulating alumina) linings keeping the load bearing steels cool. With or without a (thermal expansion problematic) liner (usually austenitic SS) as a membrane seal.
We didn't learn anything new. Whatever story you choose to believe, the only facts are that two planes flew into two of the strongest buildings on the planet, and then they crumbled like a house of cards. Structural failure, insider job, whatever; the only thing that could have provided any answers was scooped up and shipped off to China.
With all the evidence gone, all the rest is at best theories. And theories won't help you build any reactors.
Adventure, Romance, MAD SCIENCE!
Aren't the magnetic fields in a Tokamak pretty intense? As in, you wouldn't want something ferromagnetic inside?
I thought the leading candidate was vanadium, for its low neutron capture cross section and quickly decaying activation products.
I recall that the church where I grew up used huge laminate wooden beams to support the roof. We asked our pastor why they'd used wooden beams instead of steel beams. He responded that the laminate wood beams were actually stronger than steel in a fire, because the steel would weaken (not melt) in the heat and wouldn't support the roof for long. Laminate beams, OTOH, had been shown to hold their strength for hours in a fire - taking up to 24 hours to burn all the way through. (And of course, the wood beams look a lot nicer than steel.)
You've been out-engineered by a Lutheran pastor from the 70's.
A post a day keeps productivity at bay.
No it didn't. Oh, the land existed, and the House of Saud existed, but the entity we call Saudi Arabia exists solely because of the oil under their feet
Saudi Arabia gained it's modern borders in 1932. Oil wasn't discovered until 1939. It wasn't actively exploited until the late 40s due to WW2. You can argue that oil helps prop them up but the idea that we created these theocracies to get that oil strains creditability when they existed prior to the discovery of that oil.
Furthermore, blaming the United States as the GP did doesn't tell the whole story either. The United States didn't draw the lines on the map in the Middle East. The French, British and Turks did. The United States didn't conspire with Israel to seize the Siez Canal -- the French and British did. The United States never invaded Iran -- but the Russians and British have.
Our hands aren't clean by any means but this knee-jerk anti-Americanism that places all of the blame at our feet doesn't even survive a casual reading of history.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
Iron should ultimately become the most abundant element in the universe. This is because energy can be extracted from the fusion of everything lighter than iron and from the fission of anything heavier than iron.
Unfortunately, this may take an inconveniently long time.
un-ALTERED reproduction and dissimination of this IMPORTANT information is ENCOURAGED