Slashdot Mirror


China Just Made a Major Breakthrough In Nuclear Fusion Research (techienews.co.uk)

New submitter TechnoidNash writes: China announced last week a major breakthrough in the realm of nuclear fusion research. The Chinese Experimental Advanced Superconducting Tokamak (EAST), was able to heat hydrogen gas to a temperature of near 50 million degrees Celsius for an unprecedented 102 seconds. While this is nowhere near the hottest temperature that has ever been achieved in nuclear fusion research (that distinction belongs to the Large Hadron Collider which reached 4 trillion degrees Celsius), it is the longest amount of time one has been maintained.

54 of 339 comments (clear)

  1. I am not a physicist but... by damn_registrars · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There have been some "big announcements" in other hard science fields from China in the past decade or two that have turned out to be bogus. Can someone comment on the likelihood of this being real?

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    1. Re:I am not a physicist but... by Harlequin80 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It is the second Tokamak reactor that China has built and it has been around for about 10 years. There is no inherent reason to disbelieve them. They have come a long way from 20 years ago.

      From what I have read China are claiming a significantly lower temperature than the recent German test, approx 30 million degrees K lower, but a much longer duration. The Germans also believe that their system will comfortably run for much longer, the recent operation was just a test so potentially we are seeing a point where engineering capabilities can produce the accuracy of design needed for tokamaks to work.

    2. Re:I am not a physicist but... by sunderland56 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There have been some "big announcements" in other hard science fields from China in the past decade or two that have turned out to be bogus.

      Why pick on China? Every country on the planet has been guilty of this. Until a scientific finding has been peer reviewed, and hopefully duplicated, it's just cold fusion all over again.

    3. Re:I am not a physicist but... by aaronb1138 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Probably reliable that they pulled it off. I just wonder how rough it was on the ablative neutron shielding. The current favorite is Boron alloys, but I have yet to hear anything remotely hopeful about long term containment of fast neutrons.

    4. Re: I am not a physicist but... by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 5, Interesting

      An interesting trend to watch, even if this one doesn't turn out to be verified, is that China is where most of the the significant energy research is happening.

      The US will be buying most of its advanced energy tech from China in just a couple decades. A couple decades ago that would have seemed unconscionable.

      Say what you want about the relative historical value of the two governments, but one stymies progress with fear-based regulations and denial and the other takes the engineering approach to solving problems. Only one of those can drive prosperity - the leads to despair.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    5. Re:I am not a physicist but... by Snotnose · · Score: 4, Interesting

      There is no inherent reason to disbelieve them.

      Their currency is manipulated. Their stock market has 2 books, one set you can see, the other you can't. They sell pet food that poisons pets. They sell baby formula that harms babies. They have no respect for IP property. They're poisoning their environment such that you can't see across the street due to air pollution, and can't drink the water because of some mining company upstream. The news media is censored so that non of their citizens know any of this, except what they can see with their own 2 eyes.

      I tend to disbelieve them until shown proof.

    6. Re:I am not a physicist but... by dsmatthews9379 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It is not hard to do, if you have the equipment, but doing it without wrecking it is another matter. So why did they only do it once, and does their machine still work or did they burn out the liner and need to fix it?

      There is a hint in this article that the previous time limit was safety related, http://www.scmp.com/tech/scien...

      I guess if you are in a race you sometimes have to take risks to get ahead of the pack, even at the risk of a wipe-out.

      Totally worth it if they learned anything useful.

    7. Re:I am not a physicist but... by Harlequin80 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Their currency is manipulated - as is the US currency it's called Quantative Easing.
      They sell pet food that poisons pets. They sell baby formula that harms babies. - Private companies that have been prosecuted, there are heaps of US equivalents. Asbestos is one of the biggest.
        They have no respect for IP property. Why should they? They don't produce large amounts of IP so it makes sense for them to ignore IP law.
      They're poisoning their environment such that you can't see across the street due to air pollution, and can't drink the water because of some mining company upstream. - No question it is bad currently, but again every developed economy went through the period of trashing their environment. Not saying it's right but it's pretty much pot meet kettle.
      The news media is censored so that non of their citizens know any of this, except what they can see with their own 2 eyes. You haven't been there have you? Yes their media is censored but everyone knows your list.

    8. Re:I am not a physicist but... by Harlequin80 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I kept reading that and I think something has gone wrong. 15 million K is much higher than absolute zero.... But if I am right about what you are getting at the temps achieved by the German and Chinese tests are higher than the core temperature of the sun. It is because they have to be. One thing that is missing from a fusion reactor that the Sun has is gravity. The sun gets to use a combination of extreme temp & extreme pressure, where as on earth all we get to use is the extreme temperature part.

    9. Re: I am not a physicist but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A practical fusion reactor has temperatures higher than the sun, because the sun has a horrible power density. Fusion reactions in the sun generate only about 100 wattas per cubic meter, and you need a lot more than that to get a net gain in a human built reactor of a reasonable size. The target is usually around 10 keV for DT fusion, or about 120 million K.

    10. Re: I am not a physicist but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You've just described the US.

      How is the water in Flint?

    11. Re:I am not a physicist but... by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 2

      If memory serves, and google says it does, the temperature of the sun is around 15 million K. I'm not gonna bother googling it, but I'm pretty sure 15 million K is lower (much, much lower) than absolute 0. So the numbers flat out don't work.

      A. The reaction rates differ by about 16 orders of magnitude: The sun is going to run about 10 billion years with no refueling. A Tokamak fusion reactor would run for a few seconds or minutes.
      2. The sun is using a completely different set of nuclear reactions with completely different fuel. There is no direct comparison anyway.

    12. Re: I am not a physicist but... by dbIII · · Score: 5, Informative

      Here is why it's not the USA - scroll down to the graph for the very quick answer:
      http://hardware.slashdot.org/s...

    13. Re:I am not a physicist but... by Hadlock · · Score: 5, Informative

      China is also dumping US 1960's-style money in to scientific research and development. Of the three major space-faring countries, China, Russia, and the USA, you'll note that only China and Russian currently have manned spaceflight programs.
       
      China has also built the largest ground recieving dish in the world, out-doing the one in Puerto Rico by a factor of almost two.
       
      China is rocking the 1960s American Science Research meme so hard it hurts.
       
      Meanwhile, American politicians are arguing about whether or not climate change is real, and we slot somewhere between countries like Latvia and Lithuania in Science globally. Hong Kong, (china), Singapore, and Japan are #1,2,3 globally, if you were curious.

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    14. Re:I am not a physicist but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "They have no respect for IP property"
      To be fair, "IP property" is not actually deserving of respect, so they got this one right.

    15. Re:I am not a physicist but... by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 3, Funny

      I'm not gonna bother googling it, but I'm pretty sure 15 million K is lower (much, much lower) than absolute 0.

      You really should've googled it.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    16. Re:I am not a physicist but... by thegarbz · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Don't confuse lying with management. Manipulating currency and the stock market is an economics trick. It's not fake, it's quite real. As is the race to the bottom manufacturing that causes their health and environmental woes. They also do not lie about this to the western media (don't confusing lying and censorship either).

      China have some of the best engineering and economic minds in the world. We should know, we in the west trained them at our grand universities.

      This is not North Korea, and I find no reason to disbelieve that their long running fusion projects have seen some results.

    17. Re: I am not a physicist but... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      On the other hand, a lot of people die in industrial accidents in China. You could argue it's worth it, but you don't get to make that determination for the victims so it's irrelevant.

      Anyway, Japan manages to innovate and develop its energy technology just fine, despite strong regulations. They just pick safer technologies, including fusion. The real difference is not the regulatory environment, it's the willingness to invest in new forms of energy and energy efficiency. The US is waking up to the huge new market, but it's been slow off the mark compared to countries like Germany and Japan. Then again, it's still doing better than the UK.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    18. Re:I am not a physicist but... by Mostly+a+lurker · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Also worthy of note:

      For the sixth consecutive time, Tianhe-2, a supercomputer developed by China’s National University of Defense Technology, has retained its position as the world’s No. 1 system, according to the 46th edition of the twice-yearly TOP500 list of the world’s most powerful supercomputers.

      (Source: Top 500 lists November 2015)

      Supercomputers are fundamental to leading edge scientific research.

    19. Re:I am not a physicist but... by camperdave · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So we shouldn't believe them because they are just like us?

      Do you need a better reason?

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    20. Re:I am not a physicist but... by KGIII · · Score: 2

      Err... I can't believe you're asking for citations? Really? I can understand some healthy skepticism but there are actually SCIENTIFIC PAPERS published on this. But, let me help you out... I searched first for "china scientific fraud" and found that there were papers on this subject but I clicked on the first, non-scientific, paper:

      http://www.ibtimes.com/chinas-...

      The money quote:

      Just last month, BioMed Central, an open-access publisher based in Britain, retracted 43 papers, most of them from Chinese researchers, after discovering that reviewers who had supposedly signed off on the studies were made up by agencies hired by the original authors.

      I liked their phrase better, so I searched for "china scientific credibility" and figured that I'd find you some more information though, to be honest, I've no idea why you want it as it's obvious you're not actually a scientist or following science with any great enthusiasm...

      Here's one about the "credibility paradox" that China faces. Zhang is Chinese, by the way.

      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pm...

      It's so prolific that China had to BAN dishonesty in scientific research... Ban it, by law... They just banned it recently, as in very recently. Who knows if it has actually had any real-world results? I'm thinking that "probably not" is a good answer. That should not be misread to make it seem as if I'm claiming this research is fraudulent. See below as to why I'm a bit skeptical about it having any major, real-world, long-term, impact. The link to cite that for you too:

      http://bigstory.ap.org/article...

      It baffles me that you have no idea and would ask for citations. They've plagiarized a ton of stuff, fabricated stuff, and made stuff up out of whole cloth and, by most accounts, that's actually due to governmental pressures. Some are inclined to believe that it is cultural. Being a bit of a pragmatist, I don't see why it can't be both. However, that's not my area so I probably am not qualified to speculate as to the reasoning.

      At any rate, WTF are you going to actually *do* with a citation? This is Slashdot, not Wikipedia, and you're not a scientist - I know because this is endemic across the entire board of studies, you'd know about it if you were a scientist or even just an enthusiast. Either way, there's a whole shit-ton more articles (and actual published research) on China's reputation in all things science.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    21. Re:I am not a physicist but... by bluegutang · · Score: 5, Informative

      Um... the US spends more money on R&D than any other country, and more money per person than any other country except Israel and South Korea.
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    22. Re:I am not a physicist but... by Dunbal · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Their currency is manipulated. Their stock market has 2 books, one set you can see, the other you can't.

      Unlike the West. LOL.

      The west sells food that poisons humans. The west has no respect for personal property (unless you're a billionaire). They are poisoning their environment such that you can no longer catch a fish in the ocean whose belly isn't filled with plastic. Oh, and don't get me started on the censorship of western news media.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    23. Re: I am not a physicist but... by phorm · · Score: 4, Informative

      Flint is an issue with switching from a good water system to a more acidic and known polluted one to save a few bucks. That's coupled with STOPPING procedures which helped prevent lead-leeching/corrosion in pipes, DENYING the issue despite people with rashes, hair loss, and other extreme symptoms, and then VICTIM BLAMING and COVER UPS (hey, it's better, we tested it... in homes that have already added filters) when many cases started to surface. At the same time people and their children were being poisoned by lead - and the gov't was denying it - they added extra water coolers of nice clean water in the offices of those same government officials.

      But hey, keep telling yourself how bad other countries are, and how yours is so much better. When the "best country in the world" is also a polluted, dry desert rock with a bunch of sick jobless people you can pat yourselves on the back that China is so much worse.

      The first step to addressing a problem is to stop denying it exists. Part of that means you start to realize that "but hey... look over there" is a method to distract from the problems "over here"

    24. Re:I am not a physicist but... by digitalderbs · · Score: 4, Informative

      Those numbers are highly misleading. The NIH gets about 32 billion, the NSF about 5-6 and NASA gets a few billion. That's ~10% of the research money account for on the Wiki link you post. Most of the money accounted for there is for defense, like the DoD--not for basic research. There's no doubt that China spends a lot here too, but you'd have to eliminate defense funds to make a better apples-to-apples comparison.

      I'm a Professor in the US, and I have many colleagues in the hard sciences in China. China and the Middle East are spending a lot more money on basic research now, per researcher, than the US.

  2. Things that I wish wouldn't keep getting repeated by Kobun · · Score: 4, Informative

    The goal of nuclear fusion research is to produce clean, renewable energy. It seeks to do this by replicating the same conditions that power the sun.

    Clean is misleading here - the public's idea of "clean" does not line up with any known fusion reaction that we can hope to achieve. They're all going to produce radioactive waste, just less so (and generally less nasty stuff) than fission reactors. But we need to get around the same stigma that has hamstrung fission reactors - that "radioactive" means "cancerous death" to the electorate.

    Replicating the same conditions that power the sun ... good god, no. Never. No one for a thousand years to come will ever seriously think about trying to smush two protons together hard enough for them to fuse without a sun-sized gravity well to assist with it. It takes an incredible amount of time for any two hydrogen atoms to fuse in the sun, on the order of millions of years.

    I realize that journalists need to summarize their stories, but fusion is a topic that is already understood more-poorly-than-normal by most people. They need to not be making people think about Spiderman 2.

  3. Re:Things that I wish wouldn't keep getting repeat by Harlequin80 · · Score: 2

    Except the general public doesnt understand fission or the relative radioactive material release of fossil fuels. The best thing we could have is fusion = sun = natural = clean.

  4. RFTA - this has not been peer reviewed by mykepredko · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Very exciting until you see that the results have not been verified in any way.

    If the claim is true, I would be very interested in reading how it was accomplished and what were the conditions. I would be particularly interested in finding out if the heat was contained or if energy was being continually driven into the system.

    Claims are just that until verified and the apparatus and results are published.

    1. Re:RFTA - this has not been peer reviewed by Fwipp · · Score: 2

      Not sure you know much about physics.

  5. Re:The sun does all of this by mykepredko · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Only if "JESUS" was an acronym for:
    Just
    Every
    Stunned,
    Uneducated,
    Simpleton.

  6. 4 trillion degrees ? by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 3, Funny

    While this is nowhere near the hottest temperature that has ever been achieved in nuclear fusion research (that distinction belongs to the Large Hadron Collider which reached 4 trillion degrees Celsius), ...

    Sadly, even at such temperatures, the LHC was, like the Mythbusters, also unable to successfully flash-fry shrimp in a shrimp cannon.

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  7. Cheap foreign helium atoms by penguinoid · · Score: 4, Funny

    I don't know about you, but I'm not getting any cheap, shoddily made helium atoms.

    --
    Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
  8. Re:Things that I wish wouldn't keep getting repeat by Kobun · · Score: 3, Informative

    Wikipedia has two great articles (go figure, the good ones are outside of election coverage topics) I would recommend:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    Also, it would seem that I misremembered the half-life of a proton in our Sun's core. It's a billion years; my millions of years is wrongish.

  9. Re: At that temperature... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    A very hungry one, I imagine.

  10. Re:High vs Low by Tough+Love · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The trouble with LENR is we can see it work, but we don't know why or how...

    Another problem is that nobody has been able to see it work reproducibly. Or work at all for that matter, in any verifiable way. The crank piece you linked does nothing to change my impression of that. As for military involvement in (let's say it) cold fusion, that does not exactly inspire confidence.

    --
    When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
  11. Re:Things that I wish wouldn't keep getting repeat by Michael+Woodhams · · Score: 5, Informative

    It takes billions (not millions) of years for hydrogen atoms to fuse in the sun - that is precisely why the sun has a billions-of-years lifetime. So in building a fusion reactor, we need many orders of magnitude higher reaction rates, and to achieve them at many orders of magnitude lower densities. One way of doing this is to have much higher temperatures. The solar core temperature is about 15 million degrees and TFA has 50 million degrees for this new result, and 80 million degrees for half a second at a European reactor. This sounds unimpressive, but the reaction rates are very sensitive to temperature - proportional to about T^8 as I recall, but I didn't quickly find an online reference for this. 75 million degrees would therefore give a boost of about 5^8 which is about 400,000.

    In the sun, the first reaction in the chain (proton+proton->deuterium) is the rate limiting step. In a reactor, we can provide deuterium enriched fuel and bypass this step. I don't know what the reaction rates are, but I suspect that this will be a greater benefit that the higher temperatures. You can do even better with tritium in the fuel, but your reactor becomes an intense neutron source, leading to induced radioactivity in nearby materials. Some proposed designs use these neutrons to breed more tritium from a lithium blanket around the reactor. (Once I get beyond the proton-proton chain reaction, I'm just relying on pop-science knowledge, so corrections from the more knowledgeable are welcome.)

    Stars a bit more massive than the sun burn hydrogen via the CNO cycle, which has even higher temperature dependence (from memory, about T^17). I've never heard of anyone suggesting using the CNO cycle in a fusion reactor - presumably there are good reasons, but I don't know what they are. One problem is you need to wait for radioactive decays, but these have half-lives on the order of 1 to 2 minutes, and a commercial reactor would be running for much longer than that.

    --
    Quattuor res in hoc mundo sanctae sunt: libri, liberi, libertas et liberalitas.
  12. Great, another inflationary new statement by wakeboarder · · Score: 2

    The author of the article must have been running around the street, naked, screaming "fusion is here", "fusion is here". I'm not that excited. For one nobody has said anything about efficiency. Its easy to maintain a plasma if your dumping enough energy into it, so how much energy did they dump into it? Nobody knows. You have to confine the plasma, and get more energy out than you put in. I'm not convinced that they did this. Congrats for producing the longest lasting plasma "flame". But I can make a plasma "flame" in my microwave for minutes at a time. So tell me how much energy did they produce? I'll bet they didn't break even or everyone would be running naked through the streets.

    1. Re:Great, another inflationary new statement by Harlequin80 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Ummmm they didn't try to create a fusion reaction...... Or get any energy out of the system at all...... In fact it is at about half the temperature it needs to be for fusion to work. The whole point of the research currently is to create a system for containing plasma heated to 100,000,000K. The plasma can't come into contact with the walls of the chamber because, either it is so low in mass the chamber instantly cools it, or is has enough mass to melt the chamber walls down.

      Once they have a containment system that can run for extended periods of time, the current target is 1000 seconds, then they will look to trigger a fusion reaction inside the super heated plasma. At that point the plasma starts pumping out heat rather than needing it.

  13. Re:High vs Low by Prune · · Score: 5, Informative

    https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Attachment/386-IEEE-brief-DeChiaro-9-2015-pdf

    Dear reader, I quit reading this document as soon as I saw convicted fraudster and scam artist Andrea Rossi cited by it unironically -- as you should as well.

    Hot fusion is also going nowhere until anuetronic fusion becomes practical (pro tip: it's quite a bit harder to do) because the fast neutrons eventually destroy every known material used as the plasma-facing "first" wall. That's something the ITER fanboys are not telling you (for obvious reasons).

    --
    "Politicians and diapers must be changed often, and for the same reason."
  14. Why the silly comparison? by l2718 · · Score: 5, Informative

    The LHC experiments concern high-energy particle physics, not fusion research. It is operating at energy scales well above plasma [unless you want to talk about "quark-gluon plasma, which is something else entirely] and at conditions which have nothing to do with nuclear fusion.

  15. Security Implications by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 2

    As for military involvement in (let's say it) cold fusion, that does not exactly inspire confidence.

    I completely agree that there is absolutely nothing of substance in any of the so-called evidence of LENR/cold fusion presented so-far. However I actually don't think it is a bad idea for the military to be involved in checking out the claims because the security implications are enormous. Any fusion reaction will produce neutrons and if these are moderated and then incident on uranium you can produce plutonium. This is essentially how a fast breeder reactor works.

    Plutonium can be chemically separated from uranium for more easily than separating two isotopes of uranium. So having the military know that cold fusion is impossible is a good thing otherwise they might take terrorists claiming to have used cold fusion to build a nuclear device seriously.

  16. Re: title by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Keep in mind this is China's news, the same ones who tell us Taiwan/Hong Kong/Tibet/South sea islands is belonged to China, nothing bad ever happen on Tiananmen square, there is no corruption in China (except a few to make example of, the rest of the world is polluted as bad as China (lol no) and countless other lies about their country to surpress to people/save face.

  17. Re:title by Joce640k · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Spending $20,000,000,000,000 (and counting...) on pointless war in the Middle East instead of energy research is really working out well for the USA.

    --
    No sig today...
  18. Re:Thanks! by tempmpi · · Score: 4, Informative

    The german stellerator Wendelstein 7-X aims for up to 30 minutes of confinement. At the moment only a some very earlier tests have been done, that did not aim for long confinement but just to check that everything is okay with the installation. Wendelstein 7-X started operating end of last year and EAST started operating in 2006.
    This chinese tokamak aims for confinement of up to 1000s and has reached 102 seconds of confinement after 10 years. At the end of 2013 they already had reached 30 seconds. Wendelstein 7-X will first do some experiments that do not aim for a really long confinement time, only up to 10 seconds. These experiments are planned to last about 2 years, after that they will install some additional equipment, that is planned to take 15 month. The chinese record should thus last for at least 3-4 years. But news from Wendelstein 7-x have been very positive, I would not be surprised if confinement works extremely well.

    --
    Jan
  19. Re:title by greenfruitsalad · · Score: 4, Funny

    did they use a thermometer from alibaba.com?

  20. 30+Min by k2r · · Score: 3, Interesting

    > The german stellerator Wendelstein 7-X aims for up to 30 minutes of confinement.

    Unlike the Tokamak the Stellarator in theory runs continuously. The Wendelstein team just decided that 30 minutes would be enough for all experiments and designed the cooling system to last about 30 minutes.

    1. Re:30+Min by Khashishi · · Score: 2

      Actually, there are a lot of experiments in non-inductive current generation in tokamaks which can allow it to run continuously (in principle). Current generation is done with a combination of phased microwave antennas, tilted neutral beams, and harnessing a phenomenon called bootstrap current.

      (Background: the plasma current in tokamaks is normally generated by a transformer and is called inductive current. The induced current is proportional to the time derivative of the transformer voltage, so for a constant current, there's a limit on available transformer voltage so the current must stop at some point. These non-inductive current generation techniques get around that.)

  21. Re:title by Nyder · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's not all pointless. The nutjobs need to be dealt with. Look at Syria. The only one doing anything is Russia and they are doing it only for their own good and causing shitloads more suffering. Can't say what US has done is a mark of excellent, but it's all better than what Russia is ever capable of.

    Considering our policies and actions of the last 50+ years led to what is happening in Syria, I'm going with the grandparent post and say it was pointless.

    --
    Be seeing you...
  22. Re:title by Viol8 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "It's not all pointless. The nutjobs need to be dealt with"

    Sorry, but the 2nd Iraq "war" was utterly pointless. It cost lives and money for what - to remove one psychopath under bogus pretenses who at least held the region together, and allow him to be replaced with 10s of thousands of psychopaths who have created anarchy in the whole region and europe. Way to go USA!

  23. Re: title by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There are a lot of posts about how we can't trust China, but for any one who has followed fusion work, this should be no surprise. EAST has been one of the major research tokamaks in the world, and results like this are incremental results that were expected to come about. What is more interesting is how cheap EAST and some other Chinese fusion research facilities are, like KTX which I am more familiar with and has been both cheap and fast. Yet they still contribute new results and share info at conferences, so it is not like they are just a lagging copy of other countries.

  24. Re:High vs Low by nojayuk · · Score: 2

    because the fast neutrons eventually destroy every known material used as the plasma-facing "first" wall. That's something the ITER fanboys are not telling you (for obvious reasons).

    That's weird, I've been aware for a decade or more now that ITER is working on assorted possible first-wall technologies and the JET in Culham, England is being repurposed as a wall material testbed. Maybe they didn't tell you but they've been telling everyone else.

    The walls are going to be sacrificial, needing to be replaced using remote handling equipment. It's part of the "E" in the acronym "ITER", standing for "Experimental". Lithium, converted into tritiurm and deuterium by neutron bombardment is one possibility for walls as its product is a fuel source for further fusion. Other tougher materials might last longer, possibly decades or more before needing replacement though. ITER is a testbed for such research.

  25. Re:title by Viol8 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There's a difference between not being able to exactly predict the future and being willfully purblind in a moronic effort to get back at someone after 9/11 regardless of whether they were responsible. George W Bush was an arrogant fool and a liar.

  26. Re: title by StrangeBrew · · Score: 2

    Who has more incentive to create a clean source of power than the Chinese? Massive pollution, reliance on coal fired power plants, and no scruples when it comes to stealing technology to get on par with other nations. Combine all this with a government that can dictate where the most brilliant minds focus their talents and unlimited funding and you'll see major advancements. I can't stand our Canadian Prime Minister, but one thing he said that was taken out of context was how he admired the Chinese government. This advancement is what he was talking about, not their human rights record.

  27. Re: title by Khashishi · · Score: 5, Informative

    You seem to not be aware that fusion research is an open and collaborative project between all nations. We share data, equipment, tokamak run-time, and scientists. Your partisan suspicion is understandable for someone not in the know, but it's totally wrong. The fusion scientific community is well aware of what is going on at EAST (and all other major collaborative facilities), when the machine turns on, when it turns off, when there is a leak, when a diagnostic malfunctions, and when things go well.

    At DIII-D (USA), we have built a "remote control room" for EAST and KSTAR so that researchers in US can operate EAST on the third shift when our colleagues in China are sleeping. Control parameters will be transferred to Hefei over the internet and diagnostics will be fed back to the monitors in almost real time.

    BTW, I am a fusion research scientist based in US, but I do do some work on EAST as well as other machines.