Fusion Triple Product

[@garyhartwelldinmore]

Great, easy, and to the point explanation.

[@nicholas1460]

Go guys, your work is really exciting. Happy Earth Day!

[@Apollost]

Thank you! This is a good and simple explanation!

[@Channel_1728]

Is triple product a better judge of reaction than Q?

[@StephenShankland]

They're complimentary. Q>1 is the destination. The triple product helps tells you how well you're doing to get there, showing the knobs you can tweak to reveal how well your machine is working. If it's working well, you'll get to Q=1 and then Q>1.

[@solapowsj25]

Fair. 👍

[@johnjakson444]

So that was great, completely convinced, so what exactly is the fuel and where does it come from, and what is the neutron gain. Gonna assume tritium is the fuel, gonna assume the DT reaction releases 1 neutron carrying 80% of the energy released, gonna assume the neutron will hit something to heat it up so that water or some other coolant can take away the heat for conversion to power. What is that coolant? Gonna asume the thing that get hit gets irradiated and becomes radioactive, is that a non problem now?. Gonna asume the iradiated vessel also has cryogenics coz I did hear about the superconducting ribbon magnets somewhere, that is the entire premise of this project hugely better magnets.. So where does the tritium come from, are there lithium or berylium targets in the vessel wall. So if each DT burn event creates 1 neutron, won't these neutrons have to create well more than 1 tritium to cover the huge losses at the various stages. In the ITER project I hear that most of the tritium is lost in the vessel and has to be somehow recovered, I also hear most of the neutrons will not be used to breed a tritium replacement, and that any tritium that is bred will be hard to capture and recirculate back into the loop. So why is fission that has an easy neutron gain of 2.5 or so not interesting while every fusion design that burns DT has a gain

[@JacobWolf-no5zu]

Let's go

[@penumbraman99]

At this time, scientists need to focus massive research into using nuclear fusion reactor to efficiency produce large volumes of much needed tritium fuel. Secondly, at this time, scientists need to develop small, safer, nuclear fusion reactors using stable helium-3 as the fuel source. Tritium has a half life of only 12.3 years, but it decays into a much more potentially better nuclear fusion fuel, helium-3. As tritium decays, helium-3 could be easily separate from tritium for safer long term storage.

[@erdem--]

So what if we make fusion in a very small scale? A molecule that is capable top hold and fuse protons?

[@penumbraman99]

You need to find out how the sun’s corona is so much hotter then the the sun’s surface and reproduce that effect in a fusion reactor. It must have to do with power twisting magnetic fields that confine the plasma? A a well designed stellarator might work better than a Tokamak to mimic the sun’s corona.