Well, the first use - as hinted in the article I read - would be for use in naval ships to get rid of the military's reliance upon oil.

An *afforadable* *commercial* application would rewrite world politics and economics. I do really hope that its true.

Goldfinger,

Correct, of course. But there hasn't really been an application of fusion that's practical for *anything,* so far. Between the article and my conclusion is the surmise that, once invented, it would quickly increase in efficiency, like other similar sources; but could go either way, as you point out.

Fusion uses a fuel almost as cheap and plentiful as dirt (relative to other sources, anyway), and could probably be made free of significant waste. One hopes that, once the process was controlled, these benefits could be realized.

"Do we believe this?"

Is there a precedent for such announcements being false?

Yes. Fusion being claimed as a viable energy alternative has been being done since the 1980s, and has always proven to be false. Look up the Fleischmann–Pons experiment. I'm to lazy to find a link.

You can get cold fusion in your garage kits, however commercially useful systems that produce more than they used have been 10 years out for the last 30 years.

The Pons-Fleischmann experiment has over shadowed successful cold fusion experiments because of the unrepeatable claim of producing more energy than used. The Japanese have been actively working in this area ever since then, but haven't gotten enough energy out to get the publicity.

Too tired to look for an interesting link other than how a company convinced others to fund it:
http://blogs.wsj.com/venturecapital/2014/08/14/vc-funding-y-combinator-power-up-nuclear-fusion-co-helion-energy/?KEYWORDS=fusion

http://www.smbc-comics.com/?id=1868

Really, this seems unlikely to work. I hope it will work, of course, but I can't expect it to.

It's just Lockheed Martin drumming up attention/advertising for itself. If they really were close to developing anything they would present their project to the public.

"If they really were close to developing anything they would present their project to the public. "

Isn't that what they're doing? It also said they have a patent pending, which is another form of presenting it to the public. I'm too lazy to go find it, though.

I think what Putin is saying is that if the company had actually achieved this breakthrough - it's such a huge finding they would give a demonstration. Not just release a statement saying that they have the biggest scientific breakthrough in 60+ years.

That's possibly true, awgray. What I wondered was why, if they feel so certain, they are ten years away from commercialization. It certainly seems long.

On the other hand, I'm not sure what a public demonstration of fusion would look like. "Look! There's a black box. Inside, fusion is happening -- we promise. Now look -- this dial shows that it is putting out more energy than we are putting in!"? Such "demonstrations" have too long a history to be worthwhile. But showing it to experts might certainly make sense.

Commercialization involves a lot of steps, especially where energy generation comes in. There will be many regulatory agencies they have to step through, plus dozens of safety tests and whatnot, let alone the factory and tooling to create something completely new. 10 years to commercialize a brand new tech makes sense to me, as does the 1 year to prototype.

As a scientist, a demonstration among technical experts would be extremely useful as they could actually interpret what they were seeing. I've been part of these, and it's extremely interesting. An Apple style demonstration before reporters or random Joe's would just be a puff piece that would be useless.

Reading the article explains why there was no public demonstration. No reactor exists yet. The scientists probably figured out how a certain process or machine works, and that small part now may allow fusion power. The reactor will be built, so says the article, in a year or so.

I hope it really works. If a fusion plant is real life is a great as one in SimCity then a lot of the world's problems will be solved or mitigated.

"No reactor exists yet. The scientists probably figured out how a certain process or machine works, and that small part now may allow fusion power. The reactor will be built, so says the article, in a year or so."

That's the point. Announcing this without proof is stupid. This type of 'breakthrough' has been announced multiple times before, and no one has ever followed through or shown proof. The fact that their stocks dropped after the announcement shows that no one cares without a working prototype.

And by working prototype we mean one built according to their specs by a team of unassociated experts and rigorously tested, because we care about it being real. Lockheed Martin didn't think this through. It is interesting though, since technically, if their plan worked, they'd have a patent. Maybe it's a good time to talk about patent law, and the obsolescence thereof?

" It is interesting though, since technically, if their plan worked, they'd have a patent."

They've applied for one. Were you under the impression that patents are granted overnight?

"There's a black box. Inside, fusion is happening -- we promise."

They're doing even less than that now and you seem willing to take their word for it. All they've done is make an announcement. If they could do fusion they would do it or at least explain how they've made this breakthrough. They're doing none of this.

"That's the point. Announcing this without proof is stupid. This type of 'breakthrough' has been announced multiple times before, and no one has ever followed through or shown proof. The fact that their stocks dropped after the announcement shows that no one cares without a working prototype."

So what are you saying, it's a hoax? The figured something out related to miniaturization of some process or machine involved in making a fusion reactor. Nuclear fusion is, obviously, a pretty goddamn hard thing to understand, let alone do. Would we even recognize proof of what they've discovered if we were shown it? And why would Lockheed Martin divulge it in any more detail than what's been given? I bet Boeing or the Chinese would be happy to free-ride off of the research Lockheed's spent who knows how many millions developing.

As for no one ever following through, I doubt that's true. Science advances by people following through and building off the discoveries of others. We're certainly closer to fusion power than we were thirty years ago, even if it's still fifty or a hundred years away still.

The stock price is hardly determinative. As you may have noticed, stocks have been going through a rough patch lately.


I really find the negativity here baffling.

"I really find the negativity here baffling."

lol

Okay. Let's go through this again.

Fusion power is a big deal. It's important. There is money in it. Money, in science, almost exclusively attracts charlatans. It's an easy con. Fusion power even has a long history of cons. The claimants are not demonstrating anything, not releasing anything, and not saying anything.

There is no reason to believe them, and every reason not to.

I'll repeat my earlier question - is it okay for Lockheed to have sole control over the theoretical fusion reactor if it works?

Lockheed Martin is a lot of things, but it's not some fly-by-night con operation. I believe they figured something out like they say. All the release really talks about is miniaturization. They may be able to build a reactor the size of a truck but still not be able to get yields that make it profitable, for example. But it's certainly newsworthy and an example of the field's progress.


"is it okay for Lockheed to have sole control over the theoretical fusion reactor if it works?"

If they successfully create such a reactor after investing time and money in its development then yes. We have to let people make money off their inventions otherwise people won't invent things.

"Lockheed Martin is a lot of things, but it's not some fly-by-night con operation."

No, they're far worse than that. But you'll believe whatever any evil corporation says. Everybody else gets nothing but cynicism and contempt.

"We have to let people make money off their inventions otherwise people won't invent things."

Right, because people don't have a motivation for doing anything except if they get to monopolize profits. Like, why would anybody want to create a revolutionary breakthrough in energy?

People have been doing research on fusion a lot longer than Lockheed Martin has, and unlike the latter, have actually released public details of their experiments.

But there is a sucker born every minute.

Even for a communist, that's a remarkably economically illiterate thing to say.

Yes, every new comment you read is the worst or most "insane" comment you've ever read. *Yawn*.

Invictus, I don't understand how you can sometimes seem like a rational, mature person, and other times say stupid shit like that.

At least Putin's consistent. He's also actually correct sometimes. *cough*

How disappointed am I, they announce this ground breaking on a day when I was due to release my ground breaking fast food meal you can have any time any place any where and here's the rub, the more you have of it the more weight you lose.
I am gonna to have to wait a week before I announce it now so I can hit those front pages....

Quick, change your name to Monsanto or ExxonMobil and Semck & Invictus will lap it up.

@phil,

"not releasing anything"

Why are you content to continue to base your opinions on blatant falsehoods? Lockheed has applied for a patent -- contra your earlier assertion -- and thus are releasing something, which you have to in order to apply for a patent.