POPULATION

[tvbcof]

Ultimately, the planet's human population would be limited by the limit on the conversion of available sunlight to food.

Not with nuclear fusion.

[1714827561]

1714827561

[BADecker]

Ultimately, the planet's human population would be limited by the limit on the conversion of available sunlight to food.

Not with nuclear fusion.

Are you talking about allowing fusion energy that is good for life, but shielding from fusion energy that is dangerous for life? Or are you talking about converting fusion to electricity so we can power white light "bulbs" for plant needs?

What do you mean?

[tambok]

How to live comfortable in an over populated environment?

Over populated areas lead to scarcity of resources at different levels if not dealt properly. There is fight and increase in prices of land, food and water. Also, healthcare and employment is difficult to serve as demand is high and capital can be less. But there can be some positive outcomes for overpopulated areas like diversity in culture and if we consider a marketplace, more players lead to more competition which leads to competitive pricing and eventually benefits the people.

There are advantage and disadvantage of over population, it creates scarcity yes but it also creates opportunity for most people as you can sell any kinds of staff, good and services as there's a lot demand, just like here in our country wherein it is over populated but created a lot of demand.

[kuyaJ]

How to live comfortable in an over populated environment?

You cannot stop growing it but a country can reduce it. By limiting child in every country can reduce a population. By the people who doesn't do family planning can do for adding much population.

If you want to live comfortable you can migrate to some country who doesn't overpopulation. If you haven't any money for that then it's fine to live uncomfortable.

[tvbcof]

Ultimately, the planet's human population would be limited by the limit on the conversion of available sunlight to food.

Not with nuclear fusion.

Are you talking about allowing fusion energy that is good for life, but shielding from fusion energy that is dangerous for life? Or are you talking about converting fusion to electricity so we can power white light "bulbs" for plant needs?

What do you mean?

I mean that with unlimited energy one can synthesize almost anything a human needs to stay alive including nutrients.  No old-fashioned sun required.

[darkangel11]

Countries aren't overpopulated it's just people who like convenience. They prefer to live in crowded places because it's easy to get everywhere.
I live in a small town where most people have a big garden in the back of the house and a driveway for a couple cars in front. When I ask some of my friends who live in one bedroom apartments if they would sell it and buy a small house instead they all say no. Because they would have to get a car to move around they would have to drive to work they would have to cut grass and do garden work, stores are far  away they would need a bigger fridge and a freezer and worry about heating. They choose to live in overpopulated places! To battle it you have to battle mentality.

[KingScorpio]

How to live comfortable in an over populated environment?

be the capitalist and exploit those who are less

[BADecker]

Ultimately, the planet's human population would be limited by the limit on the conversion of available sunlight to food.

Not with nuclear fusion.

Are you talking about allowing fusion energy that is good for life, but shielding from fusion energy that is dangerous for life? Or are you talking about converting fusion to electricity so we can power white light "bulbs" for plant needs?

What do you mean?

I mean that with unlimited energy one can synthesize almost anything a human needs to stay alive including nutrients.  No old-fashioned sun required.

You know this? Or you are hopeful?     

[styca]

Ultimately, the planet's human population would be limited by the limit on the conversion of available sunlight to food.

Not with nuclear fusion.

Are you talking about allowing fusion energy that is good for life, but shielding from fusion energy that is dangerous for life? Or are you talking about converting fusion to electricity so we can power white light "bulbs" for plant needs?

What do you mean?

I mean that with unlimited energy one can synthesize almost anything a human needs to stay alive including nutrients.  No old-fashioned sun required.

You know this? Or you are hopeful?    

If we do get commercially-viable fusion, then yes, it is essentially limitless free clean energy. Assuming everyone gets access to it and it's not just held back by the powers that be.

Fusion is essentially the opposite of the nuclear power that we have now, fission.

Fission creates hugely dangerous waste, is non-sustainable because it uses unstable heavy elements as source material, and can have runaway chain reactions, as we have seen.

Fusion sticks small atoms together to create energy. Its srouce is deuterium, which can be extracted from water. Its waste product is mostly helium, non-radioactive and safe. Chain reactions are impossible because you need a constant input of new fuel.

[tvbcof]

I mean that with unlimited energy one can synthesize almost anything a human needs to stay alive including nutrients.  No old-fashioned sun required.

You know this? Or you are hopeful?    

If we do get commercially-viable fusion, then yes, it is essentially limitless free clean energy. Assuming everyone gets access to it and it's not just held back by the powers that be.

 - snip - stuff that anyone who matters already knows...

40 years ago when I was a kid 'they' were getting to the point of having energy neutral reactions in toroid containers as I recal.

I would suggest that if the technology _were_ perfected it would probably be 'held back by the powers that be' for the very purpose you mentioned.  I certainly don't rule out that exactly this has happened.  For all the (fairly well controlled) talk about 'sustainable energy' it is very very rare for people to mention nuclear fusion at all.

To say the truth, I would have my own fears for the planet if fusion were perfected and made available.  This stems back to a time decades ago when I was much more aligned with the 'globalist eugenicist' crowd...because they control education, publishing, etc, and it's what I was indoctrinated with.  Both then and now I was prone to draw a mapping between population densities of organisms and thermodynamics.  I didn't learn this, or to be interested in this, it school though.  I was a science geek from about age 8 or 10 and took and extracurricular interest in such things.

[styca]

40 years ago when I was a kid 'they' were getting to the point of having energy neutral reactions in toroid containers as I recal.

Yes, it's a famous joke that commercial fusion is always just a few years away. And with reason, we've had a lot of false dawns over the decades.

Having said that, development is certainly continuing. ITER is being built in Europe, plus just recently we have the UK announcing plans for a £200m tokamak... and just a couple of days ago news of the US navy filing a patent for a compact fusion reactor.

[BADecker]

40 years ago when I was a kid 'they' were getting to the point of having energy neutral reactions in toroid containers as I recal.

Yes, it's a famous joke that commercial fusion is always just a few years away. And with reason, we've had a lot of false dawns over the decades.

Having said that, development is certainly continuing. ITER is being built in Europe, plus just recently we have the UK announcing plans for a £200m tokamak... and just a couple of days ago news of the US navy filing a patent for a compact fusion reactor.

And that's nothing. The Association for the Prevention and Relief of Heart Disease (which became The American Heart Association) was started in 1915. They have had over 100 years to get rid of heart disease. And they still haven't done it. In fact, heart disease has been on the rise.

It's like this with all kinds of big projects and cures and junk. Just give us the money and we will do this and that. What a joke.

[tvbcof]

And that's nothing. The Association for the Prevention and Relief of Heart Disease (which became The American Heart Association) was started in 1915. They have had over 100 years to get rid of heart disease. And they still haven't done it. In fact, heart disease has been on the rise.

It's like this with all kinds of big projects and cures and junk. Just give us the money and we will do this and that. What a joke.

Consider the MS foundation (multiple sclerosis):

One Dr. Alan MacDonald found visible worms in the cerebral spinal fluid of every sample of MS victims he could get his hands on.  His discovery is one of the most censored things I have ever seen, and it was vanished from Jewtube long before this kind of censorship was a thing there...it's super common now of course.  I found a copy which is currently up and linked to it below.

Inside the worms are Borrelia Burgdorferi species bacteria.  Now Borrelia Burgdorferi and related species are a VERY VERY interesting bacteria indeed in a number of ways...

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHVXJpDBcmU

Anyway, what did the MS Foundation who have collected many millions of dollars over many decades of apparently not doing shit have to say about this research?  Exactly nothing last time I looked.

[af_newbie]

I mean that with unlimited energy one can synthesize almost anything a human needs to stay alive including nutrients.  No old-fashioned sun required.

You know this? Or you are hopeful?    

If we do get commercially-viable fusion, then yes, it is essentially limitless free clean energy. Assuming everyone gets access to it and it's not just held back by the powers that be.

 - snip - stuff that anyone who matters already knows...

40 years ago when I was a kid 'they' were getting to the point of having energy neutral reactions in toroid containers as I recal.

I would suggest that if the technology _were_ perfected it would probably be 'held back by the powers that be' for the very purpose you mentioned.  I certainly don't rule out that exactly this has happened.  For all the (fairly well controlled) talk about 'sustainable energy' it is very very rare for people to mention nuclear fusion at all.

To say the truth, I would have my own fears for the planet if fusion were perfected and made available.  This stems back to a time decades ago when I was much more aligned with the 'globalist eugenicist' crowd...because they control education, publishing, etc, and it's what I was indoctrinated with.  Both then and now I was prone to draw a mapping between population densities of organisms and thermodynamics.  I didn't learn this, or to be interested in this, it school though.  I was a science geek from about age 8 or 10 and took and extracurricular interest in such things.

If you knew how the fusion works on the Sun, you'd know that to make fusion on Earth you need to supply the energy to start the process.

On the Sun, that energy is supplied by the gravitational forces, which creates extreme temperature and pressure at its core.  The hydrogen is already there so the Sun gets these two ingredients for free.

There is net energy produced on the Sun, however, it is just dissipated in an uncontrollable fashion.  To do the same on Earth and recapture that produced energy is a technological challenge.  We might never develop the net gain fusion reactors on Earth.

To get hydrogen we need energy, to start the fusion we need energy.

You have unlimited (for as long as Earth is spinning) energy at Earth's core.  Other than that, these nuclear fusion companies are just burning investor's money, IMHO.

[BADecker]

I mean that with unlimited energy one can synthesize almost anything a human needs to stay alive including nutrients.  No old-fashioned sun required.

You know this? Or you are hopeful?    

If we do get commercially-viable fusion, then yes, it is essentially limitless free clean energy. Assuming everyone gets access to it and it's not just held back by the powers that be.

 - snip - stuff that anyone who matters already knows...

40 years ago when I was a kid 'they' were getting to the point of having energy neutral reactions in toroid containers as I recal.

I would suggest that if the technology _were_ perfected it would probably be 'held back by the powers that be' for the very purpose you mentioned.  I certainly don't rule out that exactly this has happened.  For all the (fairly well controlled) talk about 'sustainable energy' it is very very rare for people to mention nuclear fusion at all.

To say the truth, I would have my own fears for the planet if fusion were perfected and made available.  This stems back to a time decades ago when I was much more aligned with the 'globalist eugenicist' crowd...because they control education, publishing, etc, and it's what I was indoctrinated with.  Both then and now I was prone to draw a mapping between population densities of organisms and thermodynamics.  I didn't learn this, or to be interested in this, it school though.  I was a science geek from about age 8 or 10 and took and extracurricular interest in such things.

If you knew how the fusion works on the Sun, you'd know that to make fusion on Earth you need to supply the energy to start the process.

On the Sun, that energy is supplied by the gravitational forces, which creates extreme temperature and pressure at its core.  The hydrogen is already there so the Sun gets these two ingredients for free.

There is net energy produced on the Sun, however, it is just dissipated in an uncontrollable fashion.  To do the same on Earth and recapture that produced energy is a technological challenge.  We might never develop the net gain fusion reactors on Earth.

To get hydrogen we need energy, to start the fusion we need energy.

You have unlimited (for as long as Earth is spinning) energy at Earth's core.  Other than that, these nuclear fusion companies are just burning investor's money, IMHO.

We don't have any proof that the sun operates on fusion principles. Its operation fits that of an electric plasma, better.

[tvbcof]

40 years ago when I was a kid 'they' were getting to the point of having energy neutral reactions in toroid containers as I recal.
...

If you knew how the fusion works on the Sun, you'd know that to make fusion on Earth you need to supply the energy to start the process.

 - snip - stuff that everyone who matters already understands (as either correct or incorrect.)

Ya, that's how almost all reactions work geenyus.  So what?

[af_newbie]

40 years ago when I was a kid 'they' were getting to the point of having energy neutral reactions in toroid containers as I recal.
...

If you knew how the fusion works on the Sun, you'd know that to make fusion on Earth you need to supply the energy to start the process.

 - snip - stuff that everyone who matters already understands (as either correct or incorrect.)

Ya, that's how almost all reactions work geenyus.  So what?

Energy from fusion < (Energy required to produce hydrogen + Energy required to start fusion)

[tvbcof]

40 years ago when I was a kid 'they' were getting to the point of having energy neutral reactions in toroid containers as I recal.
...

If you knew how the fusion works on the Sun, you'd know that to make fusion on Earth you need to supply the energy to start the process.

 - snip - stuff that everyone who matters already understands (as either correct or incorrect.)

Ya, that's how almost all reactions work geenyus.  So what?

Energy from fusion < (Energy required to produce hydrogen + Energy required to start fusion)

Go back to injuneering school please.

Anyway, once you are disabused of your rather comical mis-understandings of physics, chemistry, thermodynamics, and basic system analytics:

PETN needs a particular form of energy from a blasting cap to detonate it.  Again, so what?


Edit:  Of course the fusion reaction underway in our sun is not net positive energy.  The reaction only sustains because of energy from God which 'produces hydrogen'.  Just ask BADecker as our resident authority on all things God.

More seriously, the high energy consumption of tokamak reactors was, as I recall, associated with maintianing the magnetic field needed to contain the plasma.  Early experiments required an input of energy to achieve this, and they also did not focus on extraction of energy.  That would come later.

Note that the early diesel engines did 'work', but they did not generate enough power to overcome their own internal friction.  Once the principle was demonstrated they rapidly developed into very useful and serviceable devices indeed.

[af_newbie]

40 years ago when I was a kid 'they' were getting to the point of having energy neutral reactions in toroid containers as I recal.
...

If you knew how the fusion works on the Sun, you'd know that to make fusion on Earth you need to supply the energy to start the process.

 - snip - stuff that everyone who matters already understands (as either correct or incorrect.)

Ya, that's how almost all reactions work geenyus.  So what?

Energy from fusion < (Energy required to produce hydrogen + Energy required to start fusion)

Go back to injuneering school please.

Anyway, once you are disabused of your rather comical mis-understandings of physics, chemistry, thermodynamics, and basic system analytics:

PETN needs a particular form of energy from a blasting cap to detonate it.  Again, so what?


Edit:  Of course the fusion reaction underway in our sun is not net positive energy.  The reaction only sustains because of energy from God which 'produces hydrogen'.  Just ask BADecker as our resident authority on all things God.

More seriously, the high energy consumption of tokamak reactors was, as I recall, associated with maintianing the magnetic field needed to contain the plasma.  Early experiments required an input of energy to achieve this, and they also did not focus on extraction of energy.  That would come later.

Note that the early diesel engines did 'work', but they did not generate enough power to overcome their own internal friction.  Once the principle was demonstrated they rapidly developed into very useful and serviceable devices indeed.

Hmm.  Not sure if you are completely sane or just pretending to be.

If you can get naturally occurring hydrogen gas from the ground or elsewhere as you can get oil, then we can talk about comparing a diesel engine to a nuclear fusion reactor.

Until then it is money burning operation.

Useful nuclear fusion reactors will always be 40 years away, LOL.

https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/current-and-future-generation/nuclear-fusion-power.aspx

[styca]

We don't have any proof that the sun operates on fusion principles.

We really do. 93% (or thereabouts) of your body by weight is made from elements that are the product of fusion in stars (the rest being hydrogen). Fusion is how stars work. It's why they are stars.

If you can get naturally occurring hydrogen gas from the ground or elsewhere as you can get oil, then we can talk about comparing a diesel engine to a nuclear fusion reactor.
Until then it is money burning operation.

Fusion works because if you force two atoms together, the output is one new atom and a shit-ton of energy (the actual figure may be more or less than one metric shit-ton, but it's still a lot).
The main isotope of hydrogen used for fusion is deuterium, which can be extracted from seawater. Tritium I think is also used, but can be 'bred' inside the reactor. The energy source is cheap and for all practical purposes infinite.