40 replies to this topic

[Abisha]

KraftySOT, on 16 October 2014 - 09:20 AM, said:

Yeah but its Skunk Works.

This isnt some random company of hipsters from Nevada. This is Skunk Works.

The Sr-71, the U-2, the F-117, the B-2, stealth technology, GPS guided bombs, drones...

They wouldnt just make this up. Theyre claiming this is the engine of the future, and theyll have a production prototype in 5 years...thats economically viable.

Thats insane.

I mean people have been seeing Skunk Works things in the sky for 50 years and thinking theyre UFOs for godsake.

These are the people that make Bradbury, Clarke, and Asimovs dreams reality.

And I want to take a moment to go ahead and thank Wernher von Braun. Without him, thered be no Skunk Works.

right, trouw all logic right out of the window, mate.

you know the temperature of plasma even is?, try around 1 mil degree's. no materials exist in the known universe that can hold it.
the brightest minds over the world been working on this for the past 60 years.
it's just big Hoax reason their stocks also drop last Monday.

[Mavairo]

Abisha, on 16 October 2014 - 09:25 AM, said:

right, trouw all logic right out of the window, mate.

you know the temperature of plasma even is?, try around 1 mil degree's. no materials exist in the known universe that can hold it.
the brightest minds over the world been working on this for the past 60 years.
it's just big Hoax reason their stocks also drop last Monday.

Or have they?
Let's be honest here, for the most part it doesn't get brighter than the guys who are on and beyond the bleeding edge of military development.

The question is, how long has Lockheed been working on this?
If this is real, this is going to utterly destroy modern economics as we understand them.

[KraftySOT]

To be fair, theyve never ever hoaxed before. When they say they can do something, in the past at least, theyve been able to do it. I dont see any reason that theyd destroy a legacy thats lasted since the final days of world war two.

[stjobe]

Abisha, on 16 October 2014 - 09:25 AM, said:

you know the temperature of plasma even is?, try around 1 mil degree's. no materials exist in the known universe that can hold it.

Dammit, I bet none of the boffins had thought of that.

Good thing you came along, or those stupid scientists would have looked really silly when all their equipment melted.

Or, you know, magnetic containment.

Nah, you're right. "The brightest minds over the world" have been working on this "for the past 60 years", and none of them have ever thought of how they need to contain the 1-15 million degrees plasma.

[Xtrekker]

Don't forget we also have myomer.

http://www.engadget....-more-lifelike/

[KraftySOT]

Mavairo, on 16 October 2014 - 09:35 AM, said:

The question is, how long has Lockheed been working on this?

According to Bob Lazar, since they captured Wernher and Penemunde. Since 1945.

And had a test model working in 1958. Supposedly its their ultimate goal, if you believe the tin foil hat gallery. Though if this story is actually from Lockheed Skunk Works...maybe theyre not as insane as everyone thinks.

And wouldnt that be some ****?

Edited by KraftySOT, 16 October 2014 - 09:41 AM.

[Lily from animove]

Abisha, on 16 October 2014 - 09:25 AM, said:

right, trouw all logic right out of the window, mate.

you know the temperature of plasma even is?, try around 1 mil degree's. no materials exist in the known universe that can hold it.
the brightest minds over the world been working on this for the past 60 years.
it's just big Hoax reason their stocks also drop last Monday.

vacuum does, otherwise the whole universe would burn woudln't it?

[KraftySOT]

Not to mention unless you guys missed it, we've added some elements lately.

Uup 115, is actually alot older than 2003, thats just when they announced it. Other elements and such exist, so you cant say nothing in the universe. Just nothing we've either made or discovered.

[Abisha]

Lily from animove, on 16 October 2014 - 09:46 AM, said:

vacuum does, otherwise the whole universe would burn woudln't it?

ahh, yea but with a little help of a gravity.
anyone i done with this discussion, you will not see fusion reactors for the next couple of hundred years.

[XtremWarrior]

Am i the only one being a bit troubled by the fact that this beautiful thing is coming from an american defence company?

I'm not really sure the end of it is a clean and perfect world for everyone, as the (not at all partisan) article suggests...
Might just be because i'm french, though.

[Xtrekker]

XtremWarrior, on 16 October 2014 - 10:21 AM, said:

Am i the only one being a bit troubled by the fact that this beautiful thing is coming from an american defence company?

I'm not really sure the end of it is a clean and perfect world for everyone, as the (not at all partisan) article suggests...
Might just be because i'm french, though.

I'm more disturbed that you spelled defense with a "c". We'll be over to drop off textbooks on proper American English soon.



#yeehawmericapewpew

[Lefty Lucy]

Abisha, on 16 October 2014 - 09:25 AM, said:

right, trouw all logic right out of the window, mate.

you know the temperature of plasma even is?, try around 1 mil degree's. no materials exist in the known universe that can hold it.
the brightest minds over the world been working on this for the past 60 years.
it's just big Hoax reason their stocks also drop last Monday.

Typical non-exotic plasmas (i.e. simple ionized species), are typically room temperature to around 6000 C. You know nothing.

[1453 R]

The science seems sound enough, though of course I'm speaking from a total rube layman's perspective so take that for what it's worth.

As Krafty said, Skunk Works wouldn't be putting their rep on the line for this if they didn't think they had a good shot at making it happen. And if they can make compact, easily installable, intrinsically safe (at least compared to fission) nuclear reactors available to the public sector...well, the whole power industry's going to start flipping tables. The very notion that such a thing could be used for nuclear aircraft - AIRCRAFT, people! Things that are crazy sensitive to weight and any kind of failure chance! - should be a very exciting flag.

If Skunk Works can pull this off, then the whole ball game changes.

[elismallz]

Alek Ituin, on 16 October 2014 - 06:59 AM, said:

1. It's hard enough to generate a stable fusion reaction as it is, those reactors would be perfectly safe.
2. Lithium-7 breeds Tritium if bombarded by fast neutrons, no He-3 or Deuterium needed.
3. Tritium and Deuterium are Hydrogen isotopes, you appear to suggest them being Helium isotopes instead.
4. Fusion reactor =/= Neutron bomb. It's simply impossible for the former to generate the same level of neutron radiation.

I can't decipher the rest of what you're trying to say (no offense intended), but you don't seem to have more than a rudimentary knowledge on the subject of nuclear fusion.

As for the design itself, it looks like an inertial confinement design... So it's basically useless for power production due to the method by which it fuses the fuel. Magnetic confinement tokamak reactors are much more efficient for power production because they produce steady power output, ICF reactors produce power spikes instead. This is a pretty decent research reactor though, but that's just about the only thing ICF is good for.

2 cheers for science!

[XtremWarrior]

Xtrekker, on 16 October 2014 - 10:27 AM, said:

I'm more disturbed that you spelled defense with a "c". We'll be over to drop off textbooks on proper American English soon.



#yeehawmericapewpew

You made me doubt here! But i just use the english word, cuz english is what we learned at school, not american!
Sorry pal
(Just in case:http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/defence.)

EDIT: You shouldn't laugh about a fusion-reactor-propulsed-eiffel-tower (flying straight toward the lower part of your body )
EDIT2: also, i'll be riding it

Edited by XtremWarrior, 16 October 2014 - 11:44 AM.

[CocoaJin]

How would fusion be used to produce useable power? ie: electricity or some form of exhausted thrust.

XtremWarrior, on 16 October 2014 - 10:21 AM, said:

Am i the only one being a bit troubled by the fact that this beautiful thing is coming from an american defence company?

I'm not really sure the end of it is a clean and perfect world for everyone, as the (not at all partisan) article suggests...
Might just be because i'm french, though.

I'm not so sure it can be weaponized...but it will undoubtly be used to power future weapon platforms and systems.

Edited by CocoaJin, 16 October 2014 - 11:42 AM.

[KuroNyra]

Question, doesn't fusion reactor create "dechet" (Waste)? Radioactive Material who need to be stored somewhere?

[XtremWarrior]

CocoaJin, on 16 October 2014 - 11:37 AM, said:

How would fusion be used to produce useable power? ie: electricity or some form of exhausted thrust.

I'm not so sure it can be weaponized...but it will undoubtly be used to power future weapon platforms and systems.

Search on google for "fusion reactor" and you'll know some way to make energy with that.

About weapons, well, just think about everything we have now (from bombers to aircraft-carriers, through missiles and tanks) then give them more (a lot more) engine power and almost no needs for fuel.
Also those fancy lasers we have in MWO, they mostly need power.

Edited by XtremWarrior, 16 October 2014 - 12:19 PM.

[Burktross]

Fishbulb333, on 16 October 2014 - 06:06 AM, said:

http://youtu.be/UAZNPfxuwXg

Ew. we said stompy, not rolly.
(jk)

[Glythe]

You realize there is almost no reason to make a big stompy robot right?

I mean as long as we have long range missiles, high level bombers, helicopters and a multitude of other things there just isn't a logistic reason why you would want a tall building sized robot walking around.

Now then..... an infantry sized robot is a completely different issue.