# The Truth on Nuclear Fusion You Already Have The Lie **URL:** \ **Category:** Macro Economic Trends and Risks\ **Created:** [December 27, 2022, 12:49am UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/the-truth-on-nuclear-fusion-you-already-have-the-lie/85176 "2022-12-27T00:49:50Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Leap1](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/motleyfoolfree/user_avatar/discussion.fool.com/leap1/32/72176_2.png) [@Leap1](https://discussion.fool.com/u/Leap1)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2022, 12:49am UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/the-truth-on-nuclear-fusion-you-already-have-the-lie/85176/1 "2022-12-27T00:49:50Z")
My sister’s and BIL’s Christmas Eve party for wayward Jewish doctors had an eye opener from two people there. One of the people was my second BIL an MIT Physicist who was saying things about the nuclear fusion that wasn’t. The other is a top global climate change information expert dealing in operations to mitigate climate change. He disseminates information to many different industries. Both of them are in the know but frankly the entire elite scientific world is in the known. The press are probably in the know and may be avoiding discussing this further. Guessing why the public would be angry to hear this stuff in many quarters and want to abandon funding many projects. Turns out the nuclear fusion was counted as energy in v energy out…as you’d expect. But the energy in was counted as the laser beam energy to create the fusion…v…the energy out from the fusion. The problem is the energy into the lasers was close to 100 to 1 more than the energy out of the lasers. My BIL is saying there is no way for laser beams to succeed in creating nuclear fusion as a means of worthwhile electrical power. That will depend on plasma fields and super conductors. We are a long way off from nuclear fusion. The event last week was very very minor. The other person of interest I spoke to was out of the Rand Corporation. We spoke up the point of their clearance. China does block our signals in an all out war over Taiwan…we block theirs…stop…stop stop…no further discussion…my question…"we do have something that goes much further? The answer a simple nod yes. The person has seen Rand’s war gaming for several years now. ---
**Author:** ![pauleckler](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/motleyfoolfree/user_avatar/discussion.fool.com/pauleckler/32/2906_2.png) [@pauleckler](https://discussion.fool.com/u/pauleckler)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2022, 5:13pm UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/the-truth-on-nuclear-fusion-you-already-have-the-lie/85176/2 "2022-12-27T17:13:46Z")
Now that nuclear fusion has been achieved–releasing massive amounts of energy, the logical next experiment is can it propagate to new fuel. If yes at some point it becomes an engineering problem. ---
**Author:** ![DrBob2](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/motleyfoolfree/user_avatar/discussion.fool.com/drbob2/32/3456_2.png) [@DrBob2](https://discussion.fool.com/u/DrBob2)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2023, 7:29pm UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/the-truth-on-nuclear-fusion-you-already-have-the-lie/85176/3 "2023-01-09T19:29:36Z")
Stop me if you’ve heard this one before. > **[Iter nuclear fusion project reaches key halfway milestone](https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/dec/06/iter-nuclear-fusion-project-reaches-key-halfway-milestone)** > > After a series of set backs the international project is back on track, say scientists, giving tentative hope for a major new source of clean power by 2025 > **[International nuclear fusion project may be delayed by years, its head admits](https://www.theguardian.com/science/2023/jan/06/french-nuclear-fusion-project-may-be-delayed-by-years-its-head-admits)** > > Facility still far from being able to show feasibility of generating plentiful, carbon-free energy despite recent breakthrough in US ITER’s previously stated goal was to create the plasma by 2025. But that deadline will have to be postponed, Pietro Barabaschi – who in September became the project’s director general – told Agence France-Presse during a visit to the facility. The date “wasn’t realistic in the first place”, even before two major problems surfaced, Barabaschi said. DB2 ---
**Author:** ![Leap1](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/motleyfoolfree/user_avatar/discussion.fool.com/leap1/32/72176_2.png) [@Leap1](https://discussion.fool.com/u/Leap1)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2023, 8:12pm UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/the-truth-on-nuclear-fusion-you-already-have-the-lie/85176/4 "2023-01-09T20:12:01Z")
DB2, My BIL MIT physicist is saying it is all years off. Paul, My BIL has been maintain for a long while now it is only an engineering problem. The physics is well understood. ---
**Author:** ![pauleckler](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/motleyfoolfree/user_avatar/discussion.fool.com/pauleckler/32/2906_2.png) [@pauleckler](https://discussion.fool.com/u/pauleckler)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2023, 2:53am UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/the-truth-on-nuclear-fusion-you-already-have-the-lie/85176/5 "2023-01-10T02:53:17Z")
The hydrogen bomb proved the physics was correct. The practical power source problem remains a challenge. But production of surplus energy indicates progress. ---
**Author:** ![Leap1](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/motleyfoolfree/user_avatar/discussion.fool.com/leap1/32/72176_2.png) [@Leap1](https://discussion.fool.com/u/Leap1)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2023, 3:32am UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/the-truth-on-nuclear-fusion-you-already-have-the-lie/85176/6 "2023-01-10T03:32:17Z")
> [@pauleckler](#): > > But production of surplus energy indicates progress. It was minor because it was not a surplus. The energy into the lasers was not counted. The comparison the newspapers were reporting was the energy out of the lasers and then out of the reaction. The energy into the lasers was close to 100 to 1 more than the energy out of the lasers.