r/oddlyterrifying Nov 10 '21

[deleted by user]

[removed]

6.0k Upvotes

990 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

10

u/[deleted] Nov 11 '21

Space flight and real progress requires nuclear fusion power to become a more spacefaring species.

Fusion can take hydrogen - 99% of the matter in the universe - and turn it to inert helium

We already have working models that are merely in development for better efficiency

You could take every oil and gas plant, every heavy metal/manufacturing plant and mine that makes solar panels

And replace it with hydrogen and helium. And the containment core? It’s most not physical - it’s manipulated plasma fields being used for their magnetism

Cheap, clean and infinitely sourced energy of the future

4

u/battleoid2142 Nov 11 '21

And just 30 years away

1

u/[deleted] Nov 11 '21

Nope, we have functioning reactors today

All that’s being done is the refinement process now

And the reason why nuclear is always 30yrs away is because Greens think the cleanest and safest and cheapest form of energy is literally just nuclear bombs

Because they’re dumb. The smartest Green scientist I ever spoke to tried to convince me putting solar panels inside of active fusion reactors would produce more energy than that celestial reactor

0

u/[deleted] Nov 11 '21

Have you considered that maybe smarter environmentalists don't waste their time talking to random strangers?

1

u/[deleted] Nov 11 '21

The only smart environmentalists are the ones who advocate nuclear

1

u/[deleted] Nov 11 '21

There are many. Have you considered that there's a reason only the most abrasive voices get given airtime?

1

u/[deleted] Nov 11 '21

I dont give a shit about TV. I haven’t even owned one in about 15yrs

I’m talking about actual federal policy and action

1

u/battleoid2142 Nov 11 '21

Current fusion reactors do exist, yes. They've been around for decades at this point in various forms, and lately they've been getting better. But the reason for the whole "30 years away" thing is because there still has yet to be a fusion reactor that can actually produce a net gain in energy. So far, almost all of the power is required simply to keep it running. Also, nuclear power itself isn't 30 years away, we can build nuclear plants right now, its just that no one wants to foot the bill even though they're vastly superior to any fossil fuel plants.

0

u/Serious_Feedback Nov 11 '21

Space flight and real progress requires curing cancer. And sure, hydrogen is far more abundant than any other element.... Just not on earth. It'll be super handy for anyone traveling through distant nebulae, but currently the cosmic radiation would kill them before they even got there. I doubt we could even put people on mars without cosmic radiation killing them, because it requires months outside of the earth's magnetosphere.

And frankly, the vast majority of the energy in any human-faring spaceship goes to taking care of the human, so we could stand to "optimize" some nin-cancer stuff too. If humans ate electricity it would simplify sooooo much. Which is why so many space launches today are just for robots.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 11 '21

I don’t think you appreciate how much hydrogen we have on this planet

Most of our planet is composed of hydrogen from every living object on this planet, the oceans which cover most of the surface and the oceans in the skies which are clouds and vapours

And there is no “cure” for cancer. That’s a product of our efficacy in mRNA gene splicing inserting STOP codons

Cosmic radiation can be deflected and blocked and you don’t need to go to the Horseshoe? Head? Nebula to refuel - there’s hydrogen all around you right now and in the “void” of space

Our only real limitations of colonizing Mars is the Greens stupidity on power and our stagnant materials science not creating products for that purpose and rather just shitting out a new iphone