New feedback system could allow greater control over fusion plasma

March 20, 2017 by Raphael Rosen
Goumiri has created a new system that will let scientists control the energy and rotation of plasma in real time in a doughnut-shaped machine known as a tokamak. Credit: Eli Parke

Like a potter shaping clay as it spins on a wheel, physicists use magnetic fields and powerful particle beams to control and shape the plasma as it twists and turns through a fusion device. Now a physicist has created a new system that will let scientists control the energy and rotation of plasma in real time in a doughnut-shaped machine known as a tokamak.

"When designing fusion machines, it's becoming more and more important to use control systems and modeling techniques taken from the world of aeronautics engineering," said Imène Goumiri, the scientist who led the work. "What's new is that these tools have now been applied to physics problems; that's what makes this research unique." Goumiri was a Princeton University doctoral graduate student who conducted research at the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (PPPL) and now is a physicist at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Goumiri's system, known as a feedback controller, includes sensors within the tokamak that are linked to a computer that interprets the data the sensors gather. The algorithm actuates six beams of neutral particles that heat and spin the plasma inside the tokamak and actuates six rectangular magnetic coils situated around the machine's exterior. "This is the first time these two actuators have been used together to control the plasma profile," said Steven Sabbagh, a senior research scientist and adjunct professor of applied physics at Columbia University who has collaborated with PPPL for 27 years and was one of the paper's co-authors.

By controlling rotation, physicists can prevent instabilities from degrading the magnetic field and allowing the plasma to dissipate, shutting down the fusion reactions.

Researchers designed the algorithm for the National Spherical Torus Experiment-Upgrade (NSTX-U), which has an enhanced neutral beam system that affects the plasma rotation by colliding with the plasma's charged particles and transferring momentum. The system has two emitters with three neutral beam sources each. One emitter targets the core of the plasma while the other targets the edge to exert leverage over the plasma as a whole. A flexible magnet system allows physicists to further control the plasma rotation distribution. In general, the algorithm uses the magnetic coils and the neutral beam emitters in different combinations to change how different regions of the plasma rotate.

The algorithm also balances the effects of the magnets and the neutral beams to make sure the overall plasma doesn't lurch roughly from one speed to another. The aim is to achieve a particular amount of plasma heat, or stored energy, along with the desired plasma rotation—an innovation that an earlier version of the algorithm lacked.

Goumiri and the team tested the new controller algorithm on a simulated tokamak created by the computer code TRANSP, a PPPL-designed program used in magnetic fusion research around the world. The test showed that the algorithm could successfully modify both the plasma's rotation profile and stored energy in ways that would increase the plasma's stability.

In the future, Goumiri hopes to test her controller algorithm on NSTX-U. Once in operation, the lessons physicists learn from using the algorithm could influence the design of future fusion reactors. Such reactors will have more than one algorithm to control , electric current, and the shape of the plasma. Future research will need to focus on how all the controllers operate together and to design a global that will allow the controllers to operate harmoniously.

This research was published in February 2017 in the online version of Physics of Plasmas and was funded by the DOE's Office of Science (Fusion Energy Sciences).

Explore further: Princeton graduate student creates program that helps stabilize fusion plasma

More information: Physics of Plasmas, DOI: 10.1063/1.4976853

Related Stories

Steering a fusion plasma toward stability

October 27, 2016

Plasmas in fusion-energy producing devices are gases heated to millions of degrees that can carry millions of amperes of current. These superhot plasmas must be kept away from material surfaces of the vacuum vessel that contains ...

Recommended for you

Single-photon detector can count to four

December 15, 2017

Engineers have shown that a widely used method of detecting single photons can also count the presence of at least four photons at a time. The researchers say this discovery will unlock new capabilities in physics labs working ...

Complete design of a silicon quantum computer chip unveiled

December 15, 2017

Research teams all over the world are exploring different ways to design a working computing chip that can integrate quantum interactions. Now, UNSW engineers believe they have cracked the problem, reimagining the silicon ...

A shoe-box-sized chemical detector

December 15, 2017

A chemical sensor prototype developed at the University of Michigan will be able to detect "single-fingerprint quantities" of substances from a distance of more than 100 feet away, and its developers are working to shrink ...

Real-time observation of collective quantum modes

December 15, 2017

A cylindrical rod is rotationally symmetric - after any arbitrary rotation around its axis it always looks the same. If an increasingly large force is applied to it in the longitudinal direction, however, it will eventually ...

104 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

AKron
2.1 / 5 (7) Mar 20, 2017
Been waiting literally all my life for fusion, and I'm 55. Maybe in another twenty years?
gkam
Mar 20, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
gculpex
2.6 / 5 (5) Mar 20, 2017
Been waiting literally all my life for fusion, and I'm 55. Maybe in another twenty years?

Me too ( age too)!
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (5) Mar 20, 2017
Fusion is complicated unless you have a big gravity field. Things that are complicated take a long time. It doesn't help any when the biggest fusion experiment gets advanced malignant bureaucratitis and all the small fusion experiments get cut from the budget. The human race is well on the way to going extinct out of sheer stupidity. A board is long and hard and made of wood. The committee is the only known form of life with fifty stomachs, a hundred hands, and no brains.

You can't trust scientists; they're unreliable because they're more interested in the truth than in politics. #realitybites

Meanwhile, nice to see the "no nukes" contingent hystericalizing again. @Gracie, your true colors now show forth. It's now apparent you don't know the difference between fission and fusion, from your own pie-hole. Which you should shut before you broadcast your ignorance further... not that anyone could have missed it before.
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (5) Mar 20, 2017
And meanwhile back in reality, and back to the actual subject of this article, it's nice to see someone applying some systems engineering; maybe they'll try it on stellarators or small fusion soon. Just sayin'.
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (5) Mar 20, 2017
The fusion occurs in the plasmoid instabilities, eliminating them will only delay the end game.
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (8) Mar 20, 2017
The fusion occurs in the plasmoid instabilities, eliminating them will only delay the end game.


And of course, @cantthink69, you have the math and resulting simulations to prove this, ummm, conjecture.

NOT.
gkam
1 / 5 (7) Mar 20, 2017
"@Gracie, your true colors now show forth. It's now apparent you don't know the difference between fission and fusion, from your own pie-hole."

Hey, Da Jerk, If you assume that, it is from your ignorance, not mine.

Being a jerk got in the way of you remembering that has always been my opinion on large centralized Brute-Force Power. My friend working for General Atomic in the 1980s affirmed that opinion then.

It is the same now, and it is still 40 years away, like the "cleanup" of Fukushima.
Da Schneib
3.7 / 5 (6) Mar 20, 2017
@Gracie, as usual, tries to avoid addressing the point at issue, and posts off-topic claims to divert attention from her BS.

@Gracie, arguing against fusion is politically incorrect. <- Clue, type A, quantity one.
EyeNStein
5 / 5 (1) Mar 20, 2017
It would be 20 years (or more) if we had to wait for ITER then DEMO.
But numerous teams developing designs like ARC using standardised design tools and others working on advanced materials like high field REBCO superconductors, which can now be bought to order, are leaving ITER's design in the dust. Complex modelled and constructed systems like the 7-X stellarator are working above expectations for such an early stage.
The issues of neutron flux damage annealing and tritium re-processing are almost the final obstacles to be overcome before the design looks so good that Uncle Sam will dip in his pockets again.

ARC design tools:-https://www.youtu...IVBAxBS4
7-X Stellarator results:-http://www.pppl.g...llarator

gkam
1 / 5 (7) Mar 20, 2017
No, we do not need a big, complicated, grossly-expensive magic box upon which we will all depend.

All the snark from those inthralled with this idea does not diminish the long odds against it.
Uncle Ira
4.6 / 5 (9) Mar 20, 2017
Being a jerk got in the way of you remembering that has always been my opinion on large centralized Brute-Force Power.
So now you are a Fisher-Price engineering expert too?

My friend working for General Atomic in the 1980s affirmed that opinion then.
Cher that ain't no great claim to fame. My friend working for Mandeville State Mental Institution affirmed our opinion of you. Bat-Doo-Doo crazy.

It is the same now, and it is still 40 years away,
For a guy without any engineering education why should we believe you? Are you now going to add some nuclear physics to your resume?
gkam
1 / 5 (7) Mar 20, 2017
" Bat-Doo-Doo"
-------------------------------------

Well you're the expert on that stuff, . . . but your analysis is wrong again.

"Believe" me? I care not. You are irrelevant, an anonymous internet sniper

I worked in parts of the energy field and that is my personal and professional opinion.
Uncle Ira
4.5 / 5 (8) Mar 20, 2017
I worked in parts of the energy field and that is my personal and professional opinion.


Well that is nice to know. So if anybody needs advice about the Big-Brute Power wheels I know where to send them.
Da Schneib
4.2 / 5 (5) Mar 20, 2017
Give it up, @Gracie.

There's this great big ball of fire in the sky you might have noticed. Fusion seems to work fine. Just sayin'.
gkam
1 / 5 (7) Mar 20, 2017
Well, then, go get it.

I did not say fusion does not work. Nice try.

Have sufficient character to admit the truth.
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (3) Mar 20, 2017
It is the same now, and it is still 40 years away, like the "cleanup" of Fukushima.


@Gracie always lies when cornered.
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (4) Mar 20, 2017
@Gracie gives a 1 because she doesn't believe in the Sun.

Perhaps you can organize a protest march against the Sun, @Gracie. Good luck with that.
Arthur_McBride
5 / 5 (6) Mar 20, 2017
@ gkam. With all due respect but I have to take exception to such a trite dismissal of possibilities of fusion.

It is the same now, and it is still 40 years away, like the "cleanup" of Fukushima.


It is nothing like it was 40 years ago. That is a completely empty statement. What we know about fusion now, and what we knew about fusion then are not the same in any respect. You might have a "friend" who used to work for General Atomics in 1980. But he was not working on fusion because they weren't. They did not begin participating in fusion research until the 90's.

Leonardo Da Vinci was working on an heavier than air flying machine 500 years ago. Should the dream of flying have been called off 460 years ago for being fool's errand?
gkam
1 / 5 (4) Mar 20, 2017
Arthur, it is not quick nor a dismissal, it is an opinion that our developments in individual and group power sources have made the top-down model obsolete.

I can make my own power, and so can you. We can use it for house and car. We do not require dependence on some Integrated Monopolies to do it for us, thanks.

And the developing nations can skip the era of centralized power almost completely like they did wired phones. Massive power systems may be beyond the economic ability of the nation, but collections of microgrids to interconnect as growth continues can do it using native talent and free natural "fuel".

They are not an appropriate place for the advanced nuclear technologies, with the dependence on foreign expensive units and personnel, yet that is where the growth will be.
Da Schneib
4 / 5 (4) Mar 20, 2017
@Gracie, you were last seen bragging about solar you hadn't installed.

Apparently you're lying again and you can't make your own power.

Now let's stop the BS and stick to the real world, shall we?
gkam
1 / 5 (4) Mar 20, 2017
Grow up. You are whining from emotion.

Just go look up my house on your cell phone Google Earth then come back and apologize.

My android phone shows it.
Da Schneib
4 / 5 (4) Mar 20, 2017
@Gracie, nice try but your own historical posts aren't "my emotion."

@Ira will be here soon enough to post links to you lying. I'd think you'd've learned that by now, but apparently you're so stupid you haven't.

Last I heard you were trying to lie about Google Earth pictures of the top of your house and claim your neighbor's solar installation was yours. It was pretty disgusting as I recall. Looks like you're doubling down on the lie again.
gkam
1 / 5 (4) Mar 20, 2017
Yeah, and last Trump heard, Obama was looking in his window.

Give it up. Your emotions have gotten the better of you, and now you sound like the typical adolescent screaming across the playground.

I am at 533 Westover Lane, 94523. Look it up and apologize.

Where are you, and why are you hiding?
Da Schneib
4 / 5 (4) Mar 20, 2017
It's perfectly straightforward, @Gracie:

You lied in Nov 2014 about having solar panels on your house, and got caught.

I prefer to remain anonymous due to trolls exactly like you, @Gracie.
gkam
1 / 5 (4) Mar 20, 2017
You prefer to dodge responsibility for your words.

Meanwhile, we got the EV in December of 2015, and the PV system Jan 28, 2016.

What have you done? Still drive your polluter?

Don't forget to change the oil.
Da Schneib
4 / 5 (4) Mar 20, 2017
Sorry, @Gracie, I'm done talking to you because you make up lies.

If you want to have a serious discussion, don't lie. <- Pro Tip™
gkam
1 / 5 (4) Mar 20, 2017
SCARED to check it out?

I think you did, and are now crawling off in embarrassment.
Captain Stumpy
4 / 5 (4) Mar 21, 2017
aigh... @STOLEN VALOR LIAR-kam
I can make my own power, and so can you. We can use it for house and car. We do not require dependence on some Integrated Monopolies to do it for us, thanks
1- PV's aren't for everyone nor is the addition financially viable for most of the US who are poor

2- having PV's also means tracking power usage and knowing what you can and can't do unless you're tied to the grid ( http://realgoods....-edition )

which leads to...

3- yes, you are dependent upon the grid and thus " Integrated Monopolies" to generate your power at night to charge your EV
http://www.pge.co...options/

http://www.pge.co...S_EV.pdf

http://www.seia.o...reements

you do not have batteries, so you absolutely do require the grid and monopolies for power because you don't generate enough considering typical households
Osiris1
not rated yet Mar 21, 2017
Fusion in small devices begin in the plasmoid...if one can keep it alive and AVOID instabilities... That requires scrupulously clean gear and some finite element analyses of the process akin to but more intense than statistical process control, a subject near and dear to many factory managers.

Like the lady is doing over time is refining her control parameters. We have processes that can grow unstable faster than humans can react..... kinda like flying the space shuttle manually. Impossible without computers to react to incipient spatioaerodynamic unstable oscillations in the flight regime akin to the second order partial differential equation of vibration with respect to resonant or quasi resonant instabilities. Think hyperbolic instead of parabolic.
gkam
1 / 5 (4) Mar 21, 2017
I generate sufficient electricity to power the house and car. Yup, with the grid connection, I do not need batteries, and any power overage I produce goes into the system free.

It's wonderful. You can do it, too.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4 / 5 (4) Mar 21, 2017
I worked in parts of the energy field and that is my personal and professional opinion
You lie about working in parts of the energy field. And professionals have undergrad diplomas.

Every day you come here and brag about what a loser you are.

I dont get it.
Da Schneib
3.7 / 5 (3) Mar 21, 2017
@Gracie, you contaminate the message because you won't understand the technical details and dismiss them as immaterial, and because you lie and are easily caught in prevarication. It's shameful, and until you purge yourself of shame you will never be accepted.

The truth will out. Your hands are covered with the blood of those you deny.
gkam
1 / 5 (4) Mar 21, 2017
"Your hands are covered with the blood of those you deny."
-------------------------------

Are you 12 years old?
Whydening Gyre
5 / 5 (2) Mar 21, 2017
... do it using native talent and free natural "fuel".

Electrons and photons are free, too...

They are not an appropriate place for the advanced nuclear technologies, with the dependence on foreign expensive units and personnel, yet that is where the growth will be.

They absolutely are.
Less bureaucracy to get in the way...
It's lookin' like"Mr. Fusion"s will arrive before any of the big guys are workin',. Nose t' nose, at the finish line! The race of the Century!
And that, m'friend is excitement...:-)
Whydening Gyre
5 / 5 (2) Mar 21, 2017
I am at 533 Westover Lane, 94523. Look it up and apologize.

Maybe YOU ought to look it up, George...
gkam
1 / 5 (4) Mar 21, 2017
I did. On the desktop the last photo is dated 10/30/2015, so it does not appear. We got the e-Golf in December 2015 and the PV system in late January 2016.

The android phone has a more recent pic, and shows three of the five of us with panels.

The point is, . . it is nothing to do this. It ain't special.

It is here today, for us, and ranges from practical to beneficial in consequence.
Whydening Gyre
5 / 5 (3) Mar 21, 2017
I generate sufficient electricity to power the house and car. Yup, with the grid connection, I do not need batteries, and any power overage I produce goes into the system free.

Your bill may be lower, but to claim grid free, the neighbor that your stealing power from will need to add about 3-4 times more panels, a couple of wind turbines AND battery storage...
BTW. what's your neighbor's panel efficiency rate?
10%, maybe?
Did he buy 'em outright or use one of them leasing guys?
And try Google Earth. Shows two and your address ain't one of 'em...
gkam
1 / 5 (4) Mar 21, 2017
Read that post and see the what emotions do to logic.

I am NOT grid-free, I use it to the benefit of me and the power company. I just generated the same amount of electricity used by both car and house last year.

10%? Why, . . you want him to suffer so you can make a silly point?

Is Schadenfreude all you can get?
gkam
1 / 5 (4) Mar 21, 2017
Go look at the date of the pic. I told you when the panels went up.

The neighbor across the street got his 5-6 kW first, owned by a company which guarantees him a certain low rate for 20 years. It costs him nothing for installation, and he gets 4 cents or so for overages.

The next door neighbor got his next, 2.7kW, and paid for them. His bill last year was six cents.

Then, we got our 4.59 kW, and paid for them, followed by the neighbor on the other side of us, 5.5kW paid, then the one across the street, 6 kW paid.
gkam
1 / 5 (4) Mar 21, 2017
As I said, my cell has a later version of Earth with three of us showing panels.

And once again, it ain't anything. We have row after row of new houses with them.

I pay a separate fee for the distribution system I barely use. I generate power when it is costly and the power company sells it to my neighbors. I take power out which is baseload, more efficient and cheaper.

It is fine with me, and the utility, too. And they loved to hear of the e-Golf charging late at night, offering to make any line upgrades necessary to serve it.

Everybody wins in this one.
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (1) Mar 21, 2017
And of course, @cantthink69, you have the math and resulting simulations to prove this, ummm, conjecture.

NOT.

See link;

http://aip.scitat...Code=php

Will you even understand the importance of of this paper, or the findings? NOT!
Captain Stumpy
3 / 5 (2) Mar 22, 2017
@STOLEN VALOR LIAR-kam
I generate sufficient electricity to power the house and car.
and again: PROVE IT

how many panels do you have, and what is their rating?

Mind you, that rating is under perfect conditions!

... and considering the picture you sent to Ira, you don't have those because you don't have a tracking system - those panels in the pic Ira has look to be static and secured to the roof

now, assuming those *are* yours and that your house is typical in size and contents (over 1200sq ft), then those panels do not generate enough to run all the stuff in your house for a 24 hour period

and that is without the EV charging or the multi-ton A/C unit that shows up in your yard even being considered

taking that into consideration and using the above links i left, which also have real engineers who do nothing but solar and power, and using the calculators linked in the site ... there is no f*cking way you generate all the power you need with PV's
Whydening Gyre
5 / 5 (2) Mar 22, 2017
And of course, @cantthink69, you have the math and resulting simulations to prove this, ummm, conjecture.

NOT.

See link;

http://aip.scitat...Code=php

Will you even understand the importance of of this paper, or the findings? NOT!

All it shows is that they've matched input to output for a period of time insufficient to make the ENTIRE operation functional...
Einstein said - The key to your success is work, play & hide your sources...
They're playing, not working. And hiding it behind techno gobbledly-gook...
Sounds like a good plan...
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (2) Mar 22, 2017
And hiding it behind techno gobbledly-gook...

That's an interesting artistic impression from the relativity fanboy. Obviously the ignorance of real plasma physics isn't only reserved for astrophysicists.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4 / 5 (4) Mar 22, 2017
Go look at the date of the pic. I told you when the panels went up
-I think we're missing the point here. Even if george squandered his wifes money on EV/PV it doesnt mean he knows anything about the tech as he claims.

This is what this psychopath does. He gets a job hes not qualified for and then quickly loses it. But he uses it to claim hes knowledgeable in that industry.

He buys a degree rather than earning a real one, and then thinks people will believe hes knowledgable because of it.

George doesn't own PV/EV to save the environment but to claim hes an expert in alternative energy.

George has spent his whole life acquiring things to deceive people into believing he is somebody that hes not.

It may be far more trouble for the psychopath to do things this way. But the deception is why they do anything. They live to deceive, not deceive to live.

George may well have been able to get those degrees or do those jobs. But where is the thrill in that?
Whydening Gyre
5 / 5 (5) Mar 22, 2017
And hiding it behind techno gobbledly-gook...

That's an interesting artistic impression from the relativity fanboy. Obviously the ignorance of real plasma physics isn't only reserved for astrophysicists.

You're right. It's reserved for those who can't add properly.
Who also can't drive at 85.
You should limit yourself to 65 to 70.
gkam
1 / 5 (4) Mar 22, 2017
By the time we get fusion, we will not need it.

We will have individual and collective power for ourselves.
gkam
1 / 5 (4) Mar 22, 2017
If we continue to build centralized power systems we are asking for trouble. They are too vulnerable to problems and attack.

Distributed energy gives us all the ability to power ourselves, and if we lose some we still have the others.
434a
4.8 / 5 (5) Mar 22, 2017
By the time we get fusion, we will not need it.

We will have individual and collective power for ourselves.


I don't entirely disagree that we might eventually be able to produce power sufficient to run a home from localised sources 24/7/365 but what about industry? Steel and aluminium production, fertilizers, chemical feed stocks, car manufacturing etc etc They all need huge amounts of energy that could be readily and cleanly supplied by fusion when it gets here.
gkam
1 / 5 (4) Mar 22, 2017
434A having been a Plant Engineer of a large iron foundry, I expected this reply. You got it right, . . . for now.

We will need still some brute force power. But remember, our industries are becoming more efficient and using different technologies now. The big users of today, the data centers, are working to get their power from renewables. Others are finding better ways to produce their goods, as we did in the foundry business in the late 1970s in California.

We will have many factors changing in a dynamic restructuring of work and production, and it will be interesting to see how it shakes out.
Whydening Gyre
5 / 5 (4) Mar 22, 2017
By the time we get fusion, we will not need it.

We will have individual and collective power for ourselves.


I don't entirely disagree that we might eventually be able to produce power sufficient to run a home from localised sources 24/7/365 but what about industry? Steel and aluminium production, fertilizers, chemical feed stocks, car manufacturing etc etc They all need huge amounts of energy that could be readily and cleanly supplied by fusion when it gets here.

They're also gonna need huge amount of mined resources...
gkam
1 / 5 (4) Mar 22, 2017
The resources required for new technologies are not yet fully specified, since we are finding other ways to do things and to use substitutes.

I am more concerned with the social disruptions. We have to plan for that, and find ways to get folk into other jobs.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4 / 5 (4) Mar 22, 2017
434A having been a Plant Engineer of a large iron foundry
-for, what was it? six months?

Who do you think youre kidding georgie?
RealityCheck
2 / 5 (4) Mar 22, 2017
Hi Ghost, Da Schnieb et al. :)

@ Ghost: How many times does it have to be pointed out that the skilled practitioners were the ones who travelled from employer to employer, project to project precisely because their was NO Formal Courses/Qualifications at that time (during/immediately after WWII)...ONLY LATER did their knowledge/skills become FORMALIZED and THEY were the ones who TAUGHT those earlier PhD's their requisite formal qualifying knowledge. :)

@ Da Schneib: Are you so gullible/careless, that you use 'certain posters' here for your own opinions about others. No wonder you fell for that Bicep2 crap because you TRUSTED the WRONG people just because YOU 'believe' they are right...even though they are LYING TO YOU. Mate, how many times now have you just jumped in and attacked despite NOT HAVING ALL the CORRECT facts? Too may times now, as the record shows. When will you LEARN to keep out/keep mum WHEN YOU DON'T KNOW if your 'beliefs' are correct/complete or NOT?

Learn.
gkam
1 / 5 (4) Mar 22, 2017
RC,I just let these goobers ramble. Yes, I have a Bachelor of Science, too. But anything I prove will just serve as more distortions for them later.

Same with the engineering jobs. Having actually done them, it is just irrelevant that anonymous goobers want to deny it.

It is attention they crave.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3 / 5 (4) Mar 23, 2017
ving actually done them
We know. 14-16 of them. Lost every one. Exactly like you told us.

Lessee... 40 year career minus 10 year idle 'consulting' minus 10 year aggregate unemployment divided by 16 jobs = many 6 month positions.

George comes here every day and brags about what a loser he is.

I dont get it.
RealityCheck
2.3 / 5 (3) Mar 23, 2017
Hi Ghost. :)

Didn't you read my above post to you explaining that gkam was one of those external consultant and/or project-specific-hired sort of skilled practitioner/project/problem-solving engineer whose career was based on INTENTIONALLY CHANGING employment/projects not being a lifelong employee of one company? You know that is different career from the usual boring job/career YOU may be in. OK?

As for your constant stalking/trolling him, you are being 'personally creepy' again; stop it please; for your own sake as much as anyone else's. Stick to the facts/science/logics, not your own personal ego-tripping 'needs'. This is a science discussion site, not a generic social media site. Good luck. :)
gkam
1 / 5 (4) Mar 23, 2017
RC, it's a fixation.

Having been proven to lie, he fights back against the person who got to him.

Like Trump, he can't stand to lose, . . . again.
Estevan57
4 / 5 (4) Mar 24, 2017
And like you, Gracie, he turns all subjects to himself. Congrats on the thread derailment... again.
RealityCheck
3 / 5 (4) Mar 24, 2017
Hi Estevan57. :)

Mate, your double-standards 'slips' are showing....hitch them up! And stop making such obvious double-standards trolling posts excusing the stalkers/trolls responsible and instead attacking their victims.

It was those stalkers/trolls who "made it about gkam", not gkam. And I reminded Ghost et al of what gkam's career was like...unusual, not the usual boring lifelong job which Ghost seems to prefer because he hasn't the nouse to do any better or more interesting career (which is why he has 'settled' for being a creepy stalker and troll on a science site...and so betraying any 'intellect' he did have to start with).

As for YOU, Estevan57, your enabling/encouraging/defending/excusing such internet losers sabotaging the discussions and feedback metrics HERE at PO, is even MORE of an affront to science and humanity ethics/discourse...because YOU should know better! So, mate, drop the double-standards and stalking/trolling excuses/bot-voting etc...asap. Thanks. :)
gkam
1 / 5 (4) Mar 24, 2017
Let's get back to fusion and the fact we will have better and cheaper ways to get power by the time it works.
Estevan57
4 / 5 (4) Mar 24, 2017
@RealityCheck If you don't like how I vote, stick a badger up yer butt.

To clarify: I vote how I want, for my own reasons, independently, without any consult with anyone else here.

Gkam a victim? Is that how you spell narcissism? 15 posts on this thread alone are from him about him. Some are not, but will never lead to, or enable discussion because his point of view only comes from his "experience".

As for "enabling/encouraging/defending/excusing", I hereby announce:

Everybody! You can do what you want!

By the way, I purposefully *usually* wait until the thread is derailed before I chime in.

Bring on the sockpuppet army, like last time. Show Gkam what "games" here really are.

gkam
1 / 5 (4) Mar 24, 2017
Give it up, Estevan.

Outgrow it.

You can do it.

See?, . . . this one is about you.
Estevan57
Mar 24, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
gkam
1 / 5 (4) Mar 24, 2017
If all of us think about what we are doing, and how our cities, towns and homes operate, we will not need this expensive and complicated stuff.
Whydening Gyre
5 / 5 (3) Mar 25, 2017
Let's get back to fusion and the fact we will have better and cheaper ways to get power by the time it works.

Small fusion fits that better and cheaper criteria...
RealityCheck
2 / 5 (4) Mar 25, 2017
Hi Estevan57. :)
I vote how I want, for my own reasons, independently, without any consult with anyone else here.
Scientific Method dictates you should consider/vote on the science, not person/source.
Gkam a victim?......15 posts on this thread alone are from him about him.
CONSIDER: If the stalkers/trolls/bot-voters (whom you excuse/enable) didn't intentionally make it about him, he wouldn't have to post in self-defense AT ALL, would he?
As for "enabling/encouraging/defending/excusing", I hereby announce:

Everybody! You can do what you want!
Scientific Method/Discourse principles/ethics say otherwise (else you are being 'subjective/biased'; not good!).
Bring on the sockpuppet army,... Show Gkam what "games" here really are.
I don't have "sockpuppet army". I don't even vote in the feedback pages AT ALL (as its metrics are skewed intentionally by the 'gang' whom YOU excuse/enable by your own failure to condemn their bad behavior/sabotage.

Rethink it. :)
gkam
1 / 5 (4) Mar 25, 2017
"Small fusion fits that better and cheaper criteria..."
------------------------------------

Sure, . . . how much do you have?
Whydening Gyre
5 / 5 (3) Mar 25, 2017
"Small fusion fits that better and cheaper criteria..."
------------------------------------

Sure, . . . how much do you have?

Better question - how much will I need?
gkam
1 / 5 (4) Mar 25, 2017
Best question: How are you going to do it?
Estevan57
5 / 5 (3) Mar 26, 2017
There, RealityCheck - I rethought it. I will do what I want.

That ol' scientific method never did make no sense nevermind.

Certainly your opinion of gkam is different than mine. Hows about you go use some scientific method on percentage of his posts are about himself? Report back with results. My hypothesis is that more than 75% are about himself. Yours?

Go science that thing. Go man go.

There, I condemn their bad behaviour/conduct. Shame! Shame on them.
Whydening Gyre
5 / 5 (3) Mar 26, 2017
Best question: How are you going to do it?

Actually, that's the stupidest question...
By figuring out which elements fuse easily and moderately with moderate assistance.
Before ya ask - I'll get back to you on which ones after the patent is granted...
cantdrive85
2.6 / 5 (5) Mar 26, 2017
"Small fusion fits that better and cheaper criteria..."
------------------------------------

Sure, . . . how much do you have?

Small minds can't grasp small devices apparently. We could make as many as needed with cheap abundant fuel and devices just where we need them with less waste than inefficient processes such as wind and solar. Or we could listen to george and his moronicity.
http://lppfusion....-fusion/
gkam
Mar 26, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
cantdrive85
3.5 / 5 (4) Mar 26, 2017
It's happening, the "best buy in fusion" with just a fraction of the investment of other techniques;
http://lppfusion....roaches/
Even you can put your money where your mouth is with a tiny donation. It offers a peaceful (no nuke waste), environmentally clean, small and non-centralized, put it anywhere, affordable, and unlimited power supply for future generations to come.
http://lppfusion....-fusion/
We may be as little as five years away from a truly fundamental improvement of power generation for humanity.
gkam
1 / 5 (4) Mar 26, 2017
No, it is not "happening". We do not have it. It has not worked yet.

We may be as little as five years away from an asteroid killing us all.

I understand the lure of it, but is it really what we need? Would not it be better to learn to live without such concentrated power? Who would own it, control it? Who do you trust with that kind of power?
cantdrive85
3.4 / 5 (5) Mar 26, 2017
No, it is not "happening". We do not have it. It has not worked yet.

We may be as little as five years away from an asteroid killing us all.

I understand the lure of it, but is it really what we need? Would not it be better to learn to live without such concentrated power? Who would own it, control it? Who do you trust with that kind of power?

You are clearly a fearful moron. Go buy yourself a gun, you need it.
gkam
1 / 5 (4) Mar 26, 2017
No fear of you. Only the fear of ignorance in action.

Look up what Goethe said about it.
Whydening Gyre
5 / 5 (3) Mar 26, 2017
It's happening, the "best buy in fusion" with just a fraction of the investment of other techniques;
http://lppfusion....roaches/
We may be as little as five years away from a truly fundamental improvement of power generation for humanity.

Actually, CD, your on the right track, here...:-)
Here's something we both believe in.
Mr. Fusion's for everyone!
George is gonna get steamrolled if he doesn't adapt...
Whydening Gyre
5 / 5 (3) Mar 26, 2017
No, it is not "happening". We do not have it. It has not worked yet.

We may be as little as five years away from an asteroid killing us all.

I understand the lure of it, but is it really what we need? Would not it be better to learn to live without such concentrated power? Who would own it, control it? Who do you trust with that kind of power?

Close your eyes, George. It's about to begin...:-) (Thanks, ELP)
gkam
1.8 / 5 (5) Mar 26, 2017
"Close your eyes, George"
---------------------------------

Open yours.

It has been almost here for decades.

I do not object to it, as long as we can be free of it as well.

I prefer to not depend on the magic box of specialists.
Whydening Gyre
5 / 5 (4) Mar 26, 2017
"Close your eyes, George"
---------------------------------

Open yours.

It has been almost here for decades.

I do not object to it, as long as we can be free of it as well.

I prefer to not depend on the magic box of specialists.

It ain't a magic box of "specialists", it's the toolbox of the universe, that we are just now understanding the limit's of the "tools" in it...:-)
Radiation free power, George... Can't you see it?
Mine are open... and I even gotta pretty good idea of what I'm seeing...:-)
RealityCheck
3 / 5 (4) Mar 26, 2017
Hi gkam, Whyde, cantdrive. :)

@ gkam: I suspect you may have the wrong end of the stick on this one, mate! Your aversion to big, centralized/expensive BLACK BOX type fusion plants is quite justified because of the 'monopoly' and 'exploitation' potential (not to mention the final costs which have to include AMORTIZATION of the Billions of research/development TAX moneys ploughed into the BIG fusion experiments so far by our govts!). However, the whole point of Focus Fusion systems is they are simple, cheap and scalable/flexible so they can fit in anywhere on the grid or in self-contained domestic/residential situations! The ANTITHESIS of the BIG stuff you so rightly criticize.

Maybe you missed my post on March 03, comparing Focus Fusion approach to BIG and EXPENSIVE approaches? If so, please read my relevant post in thread:

https://phys.org/...html#jCp

It is addressed: "Hi all. :)".

Subsequent posts clarify the distinctions further. :)

cantdrive85
3 / 5 (4) Mar 26, 2017
"Close your eyes, George"
---------------------------------

Open yours.

It has been almost here for decades.

I do not object to it, as long as we can be free of it as well.

I prefer to not depend on the magic box of specialists.

It has "almost been here for decades" mostly using an incorrect method/theory based on Tokamaks and other such expensive boondoggles.
Lerner and his DPF device/theory has been in research for just over 20 years and he is light years closer to the end game. Technology moves quickly george, you not so much...
gkam
1 / 5 (4) Mar 26, 2017
"Technology moves quickly george, you not so much...
-----------------------------------
Really?

What have you done?

Not fusion, that's for sure.
gkam
1 / 5 (4) Mar 26, 2017
"Technology moves quickly george, you not so much..."
---------------------------------------

Which one of us has their power generated onsite cleanly and with no moving parts?

Which one of us has the EV?

Who is still stuck with 20th Century thought and technology?
RealityCheck
2 / 5 (4) Mar 26, 2017
Hi Estevan57. :)
I will do what I want.
No rational/objective checks and balances? Careful you don't fall foul of the local constabulary, mate!
That ol' scientific method never did make no sense nevermind.
If I recall correctly, it was SOCRATES who said:
"The unexamined life is not worth living."
So the OBJECTIVE Scientific Method was invented, as the best way we humans can DO just that!

Humanity has also evolved ethics/compassionate approach to help us all better comprehend the "Human Condition" too!

These things help separate human intellect/understanding/society from the cockroach's.
My hypothesis is that more than 75% are about himself [gkam].

Go science that...
Already done! BUT I INCLUDED a most critical question/parameter:
How many posts were MADE TO/ABOUT gkam" which he had to defend against?
See? Your careless attempt was flawed/biased from the start.
There, I condemn their bad behaviour/conduct...
Well done! Kudos Estevan! :)
gkam
1 / 5 (4) Mar 26, 2017
RC, what do you think the new administration would do about fusion? If he lasts, will he invest in it? I have no idea if we are any closer than we were 20 years ago, no matter how much we have learned, but those in the field may surprise me.

I do not oppose it, but I think we do not need it.
RealityCheck
2.3 / 5 (3) Mar 26, 2017
Hi gkam. :)

One must first make the distinction between monopolistic BIG fusion systems and readily scaleable/dispersible fusion such as Focus Fusion devices which ANYONE can make/afford once the most feasible/optimal apparatus/configuration and operational setups are devised (which is much more likely to come earlier to fruition than the costly/monopolizable/profiteerable BIG Fusion types which you and I could not hope to make/employ ourselves!).

Focus Fusion approach being realized as the best way to go re Fusion Power (the OTHER approaches now realized more expensive/unfeasible by comparison).

As for "WHY" Fusion at all? Well, history teaches us that if given the choice, a MIX of options is always a good idea. Especially as we don't know exactly what the future may hold for humanity/this planet (eg, FF may: become part of a safer, efficient space propulsion/power system; (2) replace more dangerous sources of certain radiation for medical/research/materials; (3) ??). :)
gkam
1 / 5 (4) Mar 26, 2017
So, you think the new small focus has a chance? I keep on hearing how somebody has every few years found a way toward table-top fusion, but so far, it is no closer than the brute-force fusion we have been trying.

I am only a few miles from the failed inertial-confinement-with-the-world's-biggest-lasers attempt. But the real reason for those was for weapons research, not to help anybody.

It may have to be some clever approach, because the complex, immense, costly, and finicky tokamaks are not doing it.
Whydening Gyre
5 / 5 (4) Mar 26, 2017
So, you think the new small focus has a chance? I keep on hearing how somebody has every few years found a way toward table-top fusion, but so far, it is no closer than the brute-force fusion we have been trying.

I am only a few miles from the failed inertial-confinement-with-the-world's-biggest-lasers attempt. But the real reason for those was for weapons research, not to help anybody.

It may have to be some clever approach, because the complex, immense, costly, and finicky tokamaks are not doing it.

To paraphrase Einstein -
Science evolves one generation at a time....
Not to mention, those giant projects have kept a lot of smart people employed and less apt to be rebellious in a negative sort of way...:-)
barakn
3.5 / 5 (4) Mar 27, 2017
@Gracie, as usual, tries to avoid addressing the point at issue, and posts off-topic claims to divert attention from her BS.

@Gracie, arguing against fusion is politically incorrect. <- Clue, type A, quantity one. -DaSchneib

Using a female name to insult to a male commenter is childish and misogynistic. There's nothing wrong with being female.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.7 / 5 (3) Mar 27, 2017
Using a female name to insult to a male commenter is childish and misogynistic. There's nothing wrong with being female
But theres a lot wrong with a serial liar and fact-fabricator who posts here daily and routinely insults the 'goobers' who have the nerve to challenge him.

But even wronger are people like barkin who defend such behavior just because this psychopath happen to support his cause.

Pretty selfish eh? Pretty greasy.
gkam
1 / 5 (4) Mar 27, 2017
"Bigger brains help social primates to make up after a fight, study says"

https://phys.org/...tes.html
--------------------------------------

Yes, . . and those without such advantages nurse grudges and wind up overcome by fixations.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.7 / 5 (3) Mar 27, 2017
Psychopathic brains are also big but they are like swiss cheese -
gkam
1 / 5 (4) Mar 27, 2017
Please go complain elsewhere. Try your doctor.

This thread regards fusion, which I think we will not really need.
cantdrive85
2.3 / 5 (3) Mar 27, 2017
To paraphrase Einstein -
Science evolves one generation at a time....

You are trying to paraphrase Max Plank, although it wouldn't be at all surprising if Einstein tried to claim this as he is a known plagairist.
Whydening Gyre
5 / 5 (3) Mar 28, 2017
This thread regards fusion, which I think we will not really need.

It's inevitable, George, as the cost per output watts of maintaining a small fusion device will be SO-O-o-o much cheaper than a windmill or solar panel...
This will be middle school stuff in 40 years or less...
Personally - I can't wait to see it...:-)
antialias_physorg
4.3 / 5 (6) Mar 28, 2017
@Gracie

Using a female name to insult to a male commenter is childish and misogynistic

Gracie is the name of a (male) character in a William Gibson novel (Zero History, I think). A character ofthe same name and same demeanour also appears in other works by other artists. 'Gracie' is basically an ex-military 'contractor/consultant' who thinks because of his military background he's competent at teaching anything - while vastly over-estimates his own competence.

Pretty fitting for gkam, don't you think?
TheGhostofOtto1923
4 / 5 (4) Mar 28, 2017
Gracie is also a vaudville character from georges era, 'burns and allen'.

Shes also a brainless twit who babbles on about nothing and gets laughs.
https://youtu.be/yiLpFTeXVPg

Say goodnight gracie.
gkam
1 / 5 (4) Mar 28, 2017
Hey, AA, why do you have to be an asshole?

Is it because you have joined the ranks of anonymous snipers?

I thought you were better than that.
Whydening Gyre
5 / 5 (4) Mar 30, 2017
To paraphrase Einstein -
Science evolves one generation at a time....

You are trying to paraphrase Max Plank, ...

I stand corrected.
Don't let it go to your head, tho...:-)
gkam
1 / 5 (4) Mar 30, 2017
Looks like we have some fission trouble somewhere.

http://bellona.or...o-follow

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.