Go heavy on the math. To understand magnetic fields you will need calculus - it doesn't go to arbitrary 3d volumes until the 3rd course. Extra dimensions beyond that could be temperature, time, and field strength. You will also need to pair that with statistics. Material science may be interesting too.
@@foley2k2meh, those are just partial differential equations. Don't scare 'em too much, differential just means something changes while another thing changes.
@@illinoisenergyprof6878 Can you please give us your perspective of what the Max-Planck-Institute for Plasmaphysics achieved with their Wendelstein 7-X Stellerator? I heard in early February, that they achieved fusion over 45 minutes, where the entire reactor was in a steady state. I would like to see a breakdown of the advantages and disadvantages of the Tokamak type and Stellerator type reactors from your perspective, because I haven't seen something like that before.
Hello professor this is a great video. I am an electrical engineer in the nuclear industry. I was always wondering about the direct use of lithium 6 deuteride as a nuclear fuel in a reactor ( using the jetter's cycle + the post cycle) when it's bombarded with neutron .Is it possible that type of reactor could work?
The public owes you a double thanks, both for your Sterling work in pure scientific research and in its communication to us, thank you sir thank you so much
Excellent summary. News accounts of the Natl Ignition facility were so obviously misleading. It was good to hear you clear it up. I would have mentioned that the laser lab was not built for fusion energy. Fusion was just an after thought. I would also have liked to hear your thoughts on Helion which seems to promise more than it can deliver. Also, please let us know if you have any stake in the companies you advise for.
No ownership stakes in any fusion companies. When I do mention a company that I have even a small financial interest in -- like the graphene company Lyten -- I also mention my involvement. Several fusion companies do fund my research of course, but I also mention that. I agree with you about NIF's purpose.
Nice work. It was kinda disappointing to have to explain to people who saw this big announcement (more energy out than in) that the actual total energy input was almost two orders of magnitude greater than what they got out.
Yea, but it was still a huge breakthrough! They know the lasers and setup, is what I like call, proof of concept. It was to show that a controlled reaction with net gain is possible. Everything used to make this happen was not designed to be efficient, it was designed to work, be upgradable, testable, and configurable. I agree with your point that we still are not there YET! I put this in the category of the first fission reactor concept for a controlled reaction in the 1942 during ww2 and the Manhattan Project.
It’s write there in the summary too 😂 I had people telling me I don’t get physics and was being obstinate. This was obviously a PR announcement right when gas was going through the roof.
I've Always enjoyed your lectures Professor. You have a true gift to take nominally complex energy topics and present them in a way that a wider audience can understand and be inspired by. Thank you for taking the time to share this gift with all of us.
when i was in grade 6 i did a school project about how fusion is around the corner . so now i am 62 years old and fusion is still around the corner. so that was 50 years ago.
This looks like its from 2003 and would be shown in school, but the fact it's 2023 and is very new is a weird thing indeed. Super interesting and very informative
1:07: Minor correction: the core of The Sun reaches the highest densities possible in The Solar System, but there's so much heat pushing apart the outer layers that the outer layers of The Sun have densities lower than even our atmosphere. This means that in spite of containing the most density inducing conditions possible in The Solar System in its core, that dense core is such a small fraction of the volume of space that we call The Sun that the extremely non-dense outer layers bring the average density of the entire object down enough to make it the least dense singular object in the solar system.
Yes but you're totally missing the point that of course the highest density is at the center where.. wait for it.. the fusion happens, ie the topic of this video.
@@HandFromCoffin His point is that this wasn't stated in the video. He's "missing the point", because the point wasn't said. Most of the viewers probably don't care, so it's not a strictly relevant detail, but it doesn't take more than 2 extra words to clarify this.
I also paused a moment here figuring out what was meant. Plasma density in the core of the sun is much more impressive than the plasmas we can confine steady-state at human scale. Could've been clearer, but doesn't undermine the presentation too much.
Thank you for your wonderful, informative content sir. Your nuclear power videos tend to be the basis of my pro-nuclear proselytizing efforts (to much lesser effect than yours). I still think we should be pressuring political leadership to fund large scale modular nuclear reactors of the kind you have described until fusion technology becomes commercially viable. However, the idea of scaling down the tokamaks and utilizing liquid metal poles to absorb the plasma flux is genius in it's "simplicity". Good luck and thank you for making this accessible to the general public.
I love the way you explain things. If I had you as my professor I most likely didn’t drop out. Here in Europe, we mostly get professors lecturing about all the science, without showing any enthusiasm at all.
Very exciting. Unfortunately, the "we're almost there" storyline has been abused my whole life. You're the first person I actually trust due to your videos on many subjects being truth based as far as I can see. If the carbon hysteria ends up finally delivering this civilization/humanity changing technology then it at least achieved that. [edit: You're not done making videos by the way. I believe you've stated neutrinos are the most dangerous element of the fusion process. Does this manage them better? And how do you actually utilize flowing lithium? (without giving up trade secrets) Does the flowing lithium remove the heat from the mechanism? And is that where most of the energy is produced? Keep up the great work!]
you know, your voice is really calming and pleasent to listen to. Sometimes i wonder what my life would have been if i pursued an education in Physics or Chemistry. That was my 2nd choice right after Electrical engineering!
I had a chance to talk with one of your students while they were interning at a company I worked for over a summer. I was thrilled to meet someone actually helping with this wall project. I watched your videos and read about it and then I'm talking to a college kid who worked with you on it. Very neat.
What a pleasure to see you again Professor Ruzic! Loved your explanation of the ignition process. If you can - and it doesn't detract from your busy schedule - I would be happy as the size of the world to watch more of your video - Science, Power Generation, Cosmology, Society - and what else in your in-deep knowledge. As an example, there are many scientific and technical aspects of the tool and equipment utilised for the war, that would be nice to know the viewpoint of a Scientist on them. Thank you for this update on the fusion breakthrough at the INF...
I have been waiting for you to do this video for the past 6 months!!! People would look at me in disbelief when I would mention the true energy consumption associated with achieving that reaction. David, thank you so much!!! Looking forward to hearing from you again.
I appreciate showing the personal bias up front. Even as a kid I noticed that sources claiming to be unbiased were merely blind to their bias, which usually led to having far more bias.
Glad to see a new video from you, Prof. Ruzic! I always love sending your videos on fission reactors to people in the anti-nuclear crowd who say nuclear power is unsafe and should be banned. Now I have something to send to those who argue nuclear fusion is a pipe dream and will never work in reality. You're one of the best I've seen at explaining these topics in a way that's both interesting and clear for anyone to understand. Keep up the great work!
About a half hour before this dropped, I was talking to my friends about fusion energy and how it's been 30 years away for 40-50 years. I was very glad to see an update with good news.
I always learn something watching these videos. I need to find an excuse to take one of his classes. I’d love to see a new series where he reacts to movies 😅
since fusion is still years away, could you talk about any real world projects for next-gen fission reactors? are any countries actively pursuing this on a significant scale?
He has a number of videos on next-gen fission reactors. If you want designs that are actively been pursued I recommend: Natrium reactors- ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-47jP4YlqPZ4.html SMR- ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-TYnqJ4VnRM8.html Micro Reactors- ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-7gtog_gOaGQ.html
Yes, there are many. Next-gen fission will provide every advantage that fusion promises for some distant future. Terra power, Terrestrial Energy, Moltex Power, ThorCon power, Seaborg Industries, Exodys Energy, Copenhagen Atomics to name just a few.
...and THAT'S why I love this channel! Would you make a complementary video on aneutronic fusion, such as those proposed by LPP fusion and HB11 Energy?
Yay! 🎉 Your videos are always fascinating! If YT really cares about FORCING all of us plebeians to stop competing with the Billionaires for Earth's recources, they really need to put your videos in front of more people! PLEASE!
Ask people working in the Government sector. They don't work ammu less than the people working in private. The only difference is that they are not pressured or forced into a crunch m
@@420sakura1 In government sector they trying to make the impresion that they work hard... and that is very easy to achive. In private sector they want you to work smart not hard...
The LSTNuclear Fusion Reactor is the way to go. It improves on the projectile fusion technology from First Light Fusion with better collision arrangement and much higher rail gun speed. The apparatus is put inside a non-destructed container containing water and air. The water is turned into pressured steam to drive turbines.
Thanks for the technical update on the state of fusion research. I hope practical fusion pans out but for most of my life it always seems to be a decade or two in the future. Hopefully your work will prove me wrong. As others have posted I'm glad you mentioned the gross energy needed for the NIF experiment. I agree it was a fantastic scientific achievement, but probably not a route to practical fusion electrical power generation.
I've been watching your videos for a couple of years now. Ever since I was a kid I've been fascinated by nuclear energy. Just got my bachelor's in mechanical engineering and hoping to get my Masters in Plasma engineering at the University of Illinois. You are an inspiration professor!
"On Demand" energy. Im glad you said this specifically. All the solar and wind people forget this fact and its why nuclear energy (be it fusion or fission) is unavoidable as a solution to the worlds energy needs if we want to stop using fossil fuels. Solar and wind are an important part too, but cannot be the only part. And dont get me started on grid scale batteries. They are too resource intensive to make at that scale, hugely inefficient at that scale, astronomical maintenance costs at that scale, and would have lifetime of months in a heavy use sub station. Thats not even getting into the waste, mining damage, competing for resources with EVs, and lithium fires in critical sub stations.
@@chapter4travels As critical as electricity is, having diversity of sources is a good thing. Say, for instance, we were 100% nuclear but they discovered a complex bug in the software controlling 30% of the worlds reactors that forced them to be shutdown until it was patched. That would be devastating and cost money and lives. Having different sources helps prevent these type of scenarios. And while there is enough Uranium to last centuries, and spent fuel reprocessing is also bringing some awesome potential, it is still a finite resource and augmenting it with solar is a good thing. IMO a 75% nuclear 25% renewable mix would be optimal.
@@hgbugalou 1. We have billions of years worth of fissile fuel, not centuries. 2. Right now we get less than 1% of our global energy from solar. Getting to 25% would be a massive buildout of panels and transmission lines that would be completely redundant waiting for some mysterious computer glitch. Never mind each reactor has redundant systems and overlapping coverage from other reactors. I like solar too, I live off-grid and all my electricity is from solar but I also understand its limitations. Solar has no place on a national grid and neither does any other low-density, intermittent electricity source.
Can you please give us your perspective of what the Max-Planck-Institute for Plasmaphysics achieved with their Wendelstein 7-X Stellerator? I heard in early February, that they achieved fusion over 45 minutes, where the entire reactor was in a steady state. I would like to see a breakdown of the advantages and disadvantages of the Tokamak type and Stellerator type reactors from your perspective, because I haven't seen something like that before.
Sure. W7-X made a confined plasma for over 45 minutes. We do that on our stellarator, HIDRA for even longer, but their is much much hotter. That was a remarkable achievement. However, their plasma did not make fusion energy, but it does show the advantage of a stellarator. A video on comparing different magnetic confinement systems is a great idea.
@@illinoisenergyprof6878 thanks for the response. I knew it wasn't net positive, as they themselves say it's too small for that. Kind of like JET and ITER in that regard as far as I understand it. Btw, could you also add that system, where they shoot the plasma toroids at each other and have direct EM coupling into the spools? Forgot what it's called, but I got conflicting information on its feasibility.
@@Keiranful That is a fascinating system, and I think there is a commercial outfit who is trying that. The hard part is not letting them flop over before they combine. Cool idea though!
@@illinoisenergyprof6878 I just remembered the name of the company, Helion Energy, though I can't find the name for their reactor type, just a description.
Awesome explanation!!!! We are hitting a technology singularity. Fusion energy, Quantum Computers, and AI, are all at a similar point in development. They are are showing great potential and are all in full R&D development by private companies! Those three technologies will be part of the backbone of our technology explosion for the next 50 years or more... My .02c
I remember a talk from a very well known specialist with more than 35 years of experience in operating nuclear plants and when ask about fusion reactors Prof. Homer J. Simpson calls it "boooooring".
Love your Videos! I have a question as I'm unclear on how exactly we get the energy out of the reactor. Do we use the extra heat through the molten metal to run a steam turbine? Thanks for all you do!
It’s so strange to me that there has been such a deep-rooted interest in fusion energy when fission energy (traditional nuclear) is already here but is generally ignored because of the cost. I love the idea of nuclear fusion someday providing us with the energy to send our species into the next generation of technology, but we’ve got to get there first, and the best energy source we have is constantly depreciated for economic reasons. Unless they get the construction cost/time for fusion much, much lower, it’ll be an impossible sell in the modern economic system.
Like what the prof said in another video, "Society can only get better when older generations plant trees whose shade they may never enjoy.", talking about the investment return on fission.
Great video, just a small correction even a super high power hairblow dryer could by powered for 30minutes with 3 million joules not just 4 minutes. A high power hair dryer uses 1800 watts or joules/second. So it could run for 3.000.000 / 1800 = 1.666 seconds or 28 minutes.
