[HN Gopher] A primer to nuclear fusion and First Light Fusion
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       A primer to nuclear fusion and First Light Fusion
        
       Author : gtzi
       Score  : 27 points
       Date   : 2022-10-15 19:22 UTC (3 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (startuppirate.substack.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (startuppirate.substack.com)
        
       | ohiovr wrote:
       | "There are three boxes we need to tick, in order to overcome this
       | repulsion I mentioned before and get the nuclei very close. And
       | this is not an easy feat. We need high temperature (think a
       | hundred million degrees), high density (have a lot of these
       | nuclei in a very small space), and keep the nuclei in that small
       | space long enough for them to "react". "
       | 
       | High temperatures are usually used because the nuclei must have a
       | lot of force to counter that of the liked charged partner. The
       | most obvious way to do this is with heating the plasma because
       | individual particles, when they collide head on, can have the
       | combined momentum to plow their way together.
       | 
       | But Philo T Farnsworth found a clever way to get them close with
       | electrostatic forces. If it weren't for those darned wires.
       | 
       | With millions of degrees that plasma viciously expands. An even
       | more incredible contraction force must be used to keep this
       | together long enough for "interesting results". This is done with
       | inertial confinement like the Hbomb or emulations of it. Magnetic
       | confinement merely slows the expansion, but it must at some point
       | touch the walls.
       | 
       | Actually, heat is not wanted. You only need to get the nuclei
       | close enough that they quantum tunnel to each other to relieve
       | their own stress in their environment. 2 Dueterons spread farther
       | than helium3 does. Think of it like phase changes in condensed
       | matter. Except we don't care at all about electrons, simply move
       | them somewhere that the fuel ions wish to congregate at.
       | Fortunately this can be a single point, as charges are
       | concentrated on pointy things, as Faraday found in his
       | experiments. The other side is full of the fuel ions. They don't
       | have to be hot but warming them a little in an environment that
       | is under 770 giga-pascals of pressure might be enough to moderate
       | a nuclear combination process. It isn't hard to create two
       | chambers in a crystal and make them undergo reductions or
       | oxidations to free ions or electrons (tragically this happens
       | with lithium ion batteries all the time). If they are surrounded
       | in an environment that is very hard, very good dielectric
       | strength, ions or electrons can be freed with no where to go.
       | This is known as a meta-stable state and many crystal patterns
       | exhibit this. The best dielectric known is diamond and it's also
       | the hardest and has a ton of other helpful properties. If diamond
       | couldn't do this, then nothing can. A mad genius with money and
       | time would not have to go further than it to rule it out
       | completely.
       | 
       | Say my fancy idea doesn't work, if colliding macro projectiles is
       | something useful to the author have they tried something like
       | levitating pyrolytic carbon and propelling it with laser
       | ablation? It could be done in a loop if part of the magnet can
       | de-energize fast enough to allow the tiny block of carbon to
       | escape.
       | 
       | The plan they have seems very Wile E. Coyote to me but fun and
       | cool. I hope they succeed.
        
       | raydiatian wrote:
       | One thing I don't understand about fusion is the mechanics of
       | gain factors. If we can achieve a fusion reactor with a very
       | small gain factor of say 1.01, is that sufficient to kick off an
       | energy revolution, or do we need something more extreme like 10x
       | or 100x?
       | 
       | I suppose it boils down to what the "saturation threshold" of
       | nuclear reactors is, where you can't pump more energy in without
       | breaking the thing.
       | 
       | In any case, what are the benchmarks that engineers are shooting
       | for?
        
       | Game_Ender wrote:
       | Lots of interesting fusion startups. This group is using a gun
       | type design that reminds of the Fat Man atomic bomb [0]. Except
       | here it's a fusion target hit by high speed slug causing is to
       | rapidly compression and undergo fusion. The key things is that
       | unlike the NIF they have a clear path to power extraction. In
       | production they are planning to use a chamber with circular
       | sheets of falling liquid lithium to capture the fusion neutrons
       | then transfer the heat [1]. Breeding some tritium along the way.
       | 
       | 0 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun-type_fission_weapon
       | 
       | 1 - https://firstlightfusion.com/technology/power-plan
        
         | sbierwagen wrote:
         | Cool idea. Capital costs would certainly be lower than any of
         | the magnetic confinement designs, if it works.
         | 
         | The power plant design they show has a 150MWe target power.
         | Will be an interesting engineering challenge scaling it up and
         | keeping all the finicky little parts and seals in the gun
         | working when by design it's connected to a (small) nuclear
         | explosion by a long pipe. If the timing is right you could have
         | a heavy rotating shutter shielding the muzzle from the
         | backblast.
        
       | legohead wrote:
       | I've asked before but didn't get an answer. If we can achieve
       | stable fusion, what are the plans for getting the power out?
       | 
       | The guy in the article said you just do the same thing as coal or
       | any other plant - generate steam. But we're talking about
       | millions of degrees vs a couple thousand. Does it really scale
       | that simply?
        
         | raydiatian wrote:
         | Haha. Stable fusion. Stable diffusion. I get it.
        
         | DennisP wrote:
         | Plasma temperature is high but total heat is similar to other
         | power plants. The atoms are moving fast but there aren't many
         | of them. So basically, surround the plasma with a neutron-
         | absorbing coolant and you're good. CFS uses molten FLiBe salt,
         | and some others use a molten mix of lead and lithium. Then you
         | run water pipes through that.
        
         | chihuahua wrote:
         | I'm just guessing, but I imagine if you have a way of
         | maintaining something at a temperature of millions of degrees,
         | there's always a way to transfer that heat to some other thing.
         | For example, by moving a gas past the very hot object, thus
         | heating up the gas, and then moving the gas through a more
         | conventional heat exchanger, where you generate steam for a
         | steam turbine. Depending on the speed of the gas, it absorbs
         | energy but isn't necessarily heated to the same temperature of
         | millions of degrees, so it doesn't destroy the heat exchanger.
         | 
         | I think this is somewhat similar to how a fission reactor is
         | used to drive a steam turbine in an ordinary nuclear (fission)
         | power plant.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-10-15 23:00 UTC)