Why Has the Pursuit of Fusion Technology Persisted Despite Challenges?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion explores the persistence of fusion technology research despite its challenges, highlighting the philosophical implications of scientific hypotheses that endure even without success. Key reasons for pursuing fusion include its potential for significant energy release and the unique patterns of thinking it inspires within the scientific community. Cold fusion remains an attractive concept due to its promise of overcoming the technological barriers of traditional fusion methods, although it has not been successfully demonstrated. The conversation emphasizes the value of concepts that lead to innovative thinking, regardless of their current viability. Overall, the quest for fusion technology continues to be driven by its theoretical potential and the scientific curiosity it generates.
Tsunami
Messages
88
Reaction score
0
Hey,

From a Philosophy of Science angle, I'm trying to argue why concepts (say, scientific hypotheses) survive even when they don't seem to be succesful. I thought a great example would be fusion.:biggrin:

Now, I'm not that big on particle physics (I've a Bachelor in Engineering Physics, but my main focus has been elsewhere), so I don't really have a clue what books/papers I should read into. What I'm looking for, basically, is:

-what reasons people have had to go looking for fusion technology; what theories supports this search
-why people believe in cold fusion; I know that hot fusion is basically what happens in the sun; but has cold fusion ever been demonstrated?
-my main thesis: I've the impression that as long as a certain concept leads to patterns of thinking that are unique and at least seemingly useful, then there's something about this concept that's scientifically valuable. I've no idea why this is, what this something is - I was hoping by investigation the science history of fusion this would become clearer.

So, can you put me on the right track? (This is entirely an indie project, not something I do for uni, just one of my many interests on the side... this is why an initial shove in the right direction is very welcome.)
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Nice little intro -
In the late 1930s the German-born physicist Hans A. Bethe first recognized that the fusion of hydrogen nuclei to form deuterium is exoergic (i.e., there is a net release of energy) and, together with subsequent reactions, accounts for the energy source in stars.
http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-48320

Here is some background - http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/nucene/fusion.html#c1

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/nucene/fuscon.html#c1


Cold fusion has not been demonstrated. It is nevertheless attractive since is overcomes the technological hurdles associated with high temperature plasmas and magnetic confinement, or the alternative inertial confinment, and the huge energy supply systems (i.e. high power lasers).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hello everyone, I am currently working on a burnup calculation for a fuel assembly with repeated geometric structures using MCNP6. I have defined two materials (Material 1 and Material 2) which are actually the same material but located in different positions. However, after running the calculation with the BURN card, I am encountering an issue where all burnup information(power fraction(Initial input is 1,but output file is 0), burnup, mass, etc.) for Material 2 is zero, while Material 1...

Similar threads

Back
Top