The Sun and the solar system

Discussion in 'Astronomy, Exobiology, & Cosmology' started by kingwinner, Jan 23, 2006.

  1. Light Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,258
    No, quite the opposite, Mosheh - it shows exactly how little YOU know about the tokamak (again, the correct spelling). Any attempt to use it to "transmute nuclear waste" as you claim would be the MOST outrageously expensive possible way of dealing with the problem. Even the very thought is utter nonsense. (Which is very fitting for you, by the way.)
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Mosheh Thezion Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,650
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Mosheh Thezion Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,650
    READ THOSE LINKS....

    and understand.

    -MT
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Light Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,258
    You poor, poor dummy. You should read them again yourself. But your reading comprehension appears to be so low that it probably wouldn't even help if you reread it 20 times.

    First, how about this: "After 30 years of operation, the biological hazard potential level of the whole system will decrease by two orders of magnitude."

    30 years??

    And second, on top of that, just how much would it cost to run a tokamak continuously for 30 years ?? They don't even attempt to answer that.

    The cost would be ENORMOUS, stupid!
     
  8. Mosheh Thezion Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,650
    YOUR the one who sings the value of fusion technology...

    but those who know... know its not happening any time soon.

    gesh...

    -MT
     
  9. Light Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,258
    You mistake me for some kind of "Mosheh." I know very well it will still require a lot more time.

    But you, on the other hand, seem unable to distinguish between a theoretical idea (like the transmutation business) and turning it into a practical reality.

    For example, the freezing of people with terminal diseases so they can be brought out of it and made healthy after a cure has been discovered. Neat idea, but they can't make it work.

    Or how about this one. Given enough energy we could change the Earth's orbit. Yes. But would it ever happen? Don't hold your breath.

    You don't seem to realize that there are TONS of ideas out there, especially on the fringes, but making them work in a practical sense is an entirely different matter.

    You know something? I really think you should sue your self-taught teacher for doing such a bad job of it.
     
  10. Mosheh Thezion Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,650
    THEN WHY are the makers of the tokamak selling it as a transmutation system??

    maybe because they know what you dont... !!!

    seriously.. i mean.. why dont you email them and complain??

    cause you would be proven a moron... thats why.

    -MT
     
  11. Light Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,258
    Really?!? Show me where they are selling it. The links you provided earlier were nothing more than theoretical ideas - that's all!

    There's nothing to complain about except for your lack of understanding...
     
  12. Laika Space Bitch Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    638
    They're very interesting links Mosheh Thezion. But they seem to contradict your central claim - that fusion cannot produce usable energy. This is a quote from the abstract (I'm afraid I haven't read the whole thing yet so forgive me if I'm quoting out of context):

     
  13. Mosheh Thezion Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,650
    -yes...

    but still not an worthy output...

    yet the point is... the nuetron flux.... is usable... isnt it???

    for transmutation and induced fission.


    -MT
     
  14. Laika Space Bitch Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    638
    2000 MW not a worthy output? How many watts would make fusion worthwhile in your eyes?
     
  15. Light Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,258
    Off on a tangent of your own again, eh? There was absolutely no mention of "induced fusion" in the information you provided.

    And I certainly agree with Laika question to you? Are you so silly that you don't consider two gigawatts a worthy output????????? (Wow! Talk about a thick head!) Do you even understand how MUCH power that is???
     
  16. Laika Space Bitch Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    638
    Of course the neutron flux is usable. The article you linked to suggests a novel (and, in my layman's opinion, optimistic) use of the neutron output. But even without using neutrons for this purpose, did you think they'd just go to waste? Dueterium-tritium fusion outputs most of its energy in the form of high speed neutrons. Of course they will be used to transmit the energy from the reaction vessel and they will also be used to create more tritium.

    But I think you're trying to duck out of the debate here. For many pages of posts you've been adamant that fusion can never do more than break even in terms of energy, and that tokamaks are instead being touted as a means to make high level waste safer. Now, in an article that you yourself linked to, a possible power output of 2 GW is cited and transmutation is suggested as a novel bonus application. So you change the focus of the debate and claim that 2 GW (significantly more power than an average nuclear or fossil fuel power station outputs) is
    And that
    (My boldface).

    No Mosheh Thezion, that is not the point. The point is that you have demonstrated yourself to be wrong. That's fine by the way - I do it a lot. But when you do, please have the good grace to admit that you were mistaken.
     
  17. Mosheh Thezion Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,650
    THAT article... never said.. they have got it to work....

    i.e... put out the power...

    its the plan... like so many plans for the past 50 years...

    you guys just believe everything you read like it was scripture???

    gesh.

    how about ...

    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=tokamak+transmutation+nuclear waste

    im tired of trying to educate you people..

    do your own research... there are 13,000 references to that search.

    have fun.

    -MT
     
  18. Mosheh Thezion Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,650
    LIAKA??

    im wrong???

    gee.. i have even said so.. THAT I CAN BE WRONG.

    but people say to me.. tokamak doesnt produce nuetrons.. they were wrong.
    they say.. it isnt being used for transmutation.. it is.. they were wrong.

    and not once have any of you admitted it.

    i can do so.. i can be wrong.. and probubly am.. about many things.
    but i know i am right enough in the subject that i can discuss it.

    most of you when you are wrong.. quickly change the subject or simply ignore your own faults...

    there is a clear difference...

    -MT
     
  19. Laika Space Bitch Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    638
    Mosheh Thezion,
    Are you sure they said that? I don't remember. It seems to me that the argument was about the utility of nuclear fusion as a source of energy. Now, you did claim that tokamaks were to be used to make radioactive waste by transmutation, and the sites you linked to have verified that that might be a bonus application.

    But please don't try to squirm out of it. Yes, fusion projects are yet to break even in terms of energy, but energy generation is still the primary goal of such endeavours. Transmutation of heavy nuclei, as far as I can tell, is not.
     
  20. Light Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,258
    Hello, Laka,

    I would gather he's talking about me, but as usual he has it all distorted. (We've pretty well settled the issue that he has severe problem with reading comprehension.)

    I told him clearly that tokamaks produced neutrons - as he had said - however, they are not an integral part of the fusion process as they are in fission. Not only that but they have to be shielded against because the cause degradation of the copper coils used to create the magnetic bottle.

    He then proceeded to tell me that tokamaks were being sold for the purpose of transmuting fission waste. I asked him for a source on that and he ignored it just as he did my statements about neutrons.

    Beyond his difficulty with reading comprehension I've really no idea what his problem is. But he's among the densest individuals I've ever tried to communicate with. {sigh}
     
  21. Laika Space Bitch Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    638
    But in fairness, I had no idea that nuclear transmutation was on the cards as a possible application (except, of course, for the obvious transmutation of hydrogen, helium and their isotopes into heavier elements). Without Mosheh Thezion I would have been that little bit more ignorant.
     
  22. Light Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,258
    Yes, you are quite right - and I must say I wasn't aware of it either. I suppose he just gets carried away...
     
  23. Mosheh Thezion Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,650
    its true ... i do... ocd maybe? ha.. its fun anyway.

    i love science... as i hope you all do as well.

    my main point is... alot of what is preached as truth.. is in fact.. un-proven assumptions...

    and you know what happens when you ASSUME.

    -MT
     

Share This Page