Talk:678: Researcher Translation - Revision history

42.book.addict at 18:49, 23 April 2026

2026-04-23T18:49:13Z

42.book.addict at 18:49, 23 April 2026

2026-04-23T18:49:00Z

69.204.108.174: Response to most recent post about title text

2026-04-23T01:54:42Z

Response to most recent post about title text

SilverTheTerribleMathematician at 06:25, 8 December 2022

2022-12-08T06:25:18Z

108.162.216.166 at 12:06, 2 August 2017

2017-08-02T12:06:08Z

Danshoham at 01:07, 17 December 2015

2015-12-17T01:07:07Z

Vctr at 01:18, 4 April 2015

2015-04-04T01:18:06Z

Jolbucley: Created page with "This does explain a lot, doesn't it? --~~~~"

2014-01-29T03:40:53Z

Created page with "This does explain a lot, doesn't it? --~~~~"

New page

This does explain a lot, doesn't it? --[[User:Jolbucley|Jolbucley]] ([[User talk:Jolbucley|talk]]) 03:40, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 This does explain a lot, doesn't it? --[[User:Jolbucley|Jolbucley]] ([[User talk:Jolbucley|talk]]) 03:40, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
-Why is this explanation so pessimistic, I don't think this is what Randall was trying to get at. -{{unsinged|Vctr|01:18, 4 April 2015 (UTC)}}
+Why is this explanation so pessimistic, I don't think this is what Randall was trying to get at. -{{unsigned|Vctr|01:18, 4 April 2015 (UTC)}}
 By 2001, we should have lunar colonies and manned missions to the outer planets... [[User:Danshoham|Mountain Hikes]] ([[User talk:Danshoham|talk]]) 01:07, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 This does explain a lot, doesn't it? --[[User:Jolbucley|Jolbucley]] ([[User talk:Jolbucley|talk]]) 03:40, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
-Why is this explanation so pessimistic, I don't think this is what Randall was trying to get at. -Vctr
+Why is this explanation so pessimistic, I don't think this is what Randall was trying to get at. -{{unsinged|Vctr|01:18, 4 April 2015 (UTC)}}
 By 2001, we should have lunar colonies and manned missions to the outer planets... [[User:Danshoham|Mountain Hikes]] ([[User talk:Danshoham|talk]]) 01:07, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
@@ Line 12: / Line 12: @@
 I am more pessimistic, It is a long journey from momentary positive energy (more energy from fusion than from the laser that powered it, but not more than the energy needed to power the laser, and also not productively captured) to sustained power generation at scales similar to fission plants. Given the enormous difficulty of developing materials that can handle the heat and pressure and can  capture the surplus energy to make it productive. These materials also have to cheap and abundant enough to compete with other energy sources and fulfill global demand.
 Language is fun. while an indefinite amount of time can mean essentially *forever*, it can also just be an unspecified amount of time. It's never aliens-until some day (we hope) it is. Fusion power plants are forever 20+ years away-until some day (we hope) it's all ready except the business details.
 [[Special:Contributions/69.204.108.174|69.204.108.174]] 01:54, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:54, 23 April 2026
Line 8:		Line 8:

	The first commercial fusion plant is indefinitely 20+ years away? We will ‘’’eventually’’’ get flying cars, lunar colonies, and energy-efficient commercial fusion plants, at least within this century. It has been heavily proven that commercial fusion plants will be technologically capable to deliver energy at a rate above 100% of the energy put into it. Sure, in December ‘09, it was indefinitely 20+ years, but now that estimate is now definite, as thirteen years have come by and research has been done. [[User:SilverTheTerribleMathematician\|SilverTheTerribleMathematician]] ([[User talk:SilverTheTerribleMathematician\|talk]]) 06:25, 8 December 2022 (UTC)		The first commercial fusion plant is indefinitely 20+ years away? We will ‘’’eventually’’’ get flying cars, lunar colonies, and energy-efficient commercial fusion plants, at least within this century. It has been heavily proven that commercial fusion plants will be technologically capable to deliver energy at a rate above 100% of the energy put into it. Sure, in December ‘09, it was indefinitely 20+ years, but now that estimate is now definite, as thirteen years have come by and research has been done. [[User:SilverTheTerribleMathematician\|SilverTheTerribleMathematician]] ([[User talk:SilverTheTerribleMathematician\|talk]]) 06:25, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
		+
		+	Humanity has made some development in our research of fusion technologies. The first fusion device was the H bomb, and now we have multiple designs which can controllably heat and pressurize heavy varieties of hydrogen enough to fuse into helium. You may be right that this moves fusion into the 10 year category of "not finished inventing yet".
		+
		+	I am more pessimistic, It is a long journey from momentary positive energy (more energy from fusion than from the laser that powered it, but not more than the energy needed to power the laser, and also not productively captured) to sustained power generation at scales similar to fission plants. Given the enormous difficulty of developing materials that can handle the heat and pressure and can capture the surplus energy to make it productive. These materials also have to cheap and abundant enough to compete with other energy sources and fulfill global demand.
		+
		+
		+	Language is fun. while an indefinite amount of time can mean essentially forever, it can also just be an unspecified amount of time. It's never aliens-until some day (we hope) it is. Fusion power plants are forever 20+ years away-until some day (we hope) it's all ready except the business details.
		+
		+	[[Special:Contributions/69.204.108.174\|69.204.108.174]] 01:54, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:25, 8 December 2022
Line 6:		Line 6:

	No in 2001 we should have had Spaceships capable of committing murder and regular flights to the moon. Not sure if you would consider that mission to Europa/Jupiter successful. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.166\|108.162.216.166]] 12:06, 2 August 2017 (UTC)		No in 2001 we should have had Spaceships capable of committing murder and regular flights to the moon. Not sure if you would consider that mission to Europa/Jupiter successful. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.166\|108.162.216.166]] 12:06, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
		+
		+	The first commercial fusion plant is indefinitely 20+ years away? We will ‘’’eventually’’’ get flying cars, lunar colonies, and energy-efficient commercial fusion plants, at least within this century. It has been heavily proven that commercial fusion plants will be technologically capable to deliver energy at a rate above 100% of the energy put into it. Sure, in December ‘09, it was indefinitely 20+ years, but now that estimate is now definite, as thirteen years have come by and research has been done. [[User:SilverTheTerribleMathematician\|SilverTheTerribleMathematician]] ([[User talk:SilverTheTerribleMathematician\|talk]]) 06:25, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:06, 2 August 2017
Line 4:		Line 4:

	By 2001, we should have lunar colonies and manned missions to the outer planets... [[User:Danshoham\|Mountain Hikes]] ([[User talk:Danshoham\|talk]]) 01:07, 17 December 2015 (UTC)		By 2001, we should have lunar colonies and manned missions to the outer planets... [[User:Danshoham\|Mountain Hikes]] ([[User talk:Danshoham\|talk]]) 01:07, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
		+
		+	No in 2001 we should have had Spaceships capable of committing murder and regular flights to the moon. Not sure if you would consider that mission to Europa/Jupiter successful. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.166\|108.162.216.166]] 12:06, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:07, 17 December 2015
Line 2:		Line 2:

	Why is this explanation so pessimistic, I don't think this is what Randall was trying to get at. -Vctr		Why is this explanation so pessimistic, I don't think this is what Randall was trying to get at. -Vctr
		+
		+	By 2001, we should have lunar colonies and manned missions to the outer planets... [[User:Danshoham\|Mountain Hikes]] ([[User talk:Danshoham\|talk]]) 01:07, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:18, 4 April 2015
Line 1:		Line 1:
	This does explain a lot, doesn't it? --[[User:Jolbucley\|Jolbucley]] ([[User talk:Jolbucley\|talk]]) 03:40, 29 January 2014 (UTC)		This does explain a lot, doesn't it? --[[User:Jolbucley\|Jolbucley]] ([[User talk:Jolbucley\|talk]]) 03:40, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
		+
		+	Why is this explanation so pessimistic, I don't think this is what Randall was trying to get at. -Vctr