[tsimionescu]

Agreed in principle. We clearly have different priors, but I think we agree on the general idea.

Basically, ITER/DEMO has a low chance of being economical even if it works physically. Helion and Zap have a higher chance of being economical if their approach works. I think we both agree on these points.

Where we differ is that I don't believe it's plausible that Helion or Zap's approach will work at all. But this is just a belief ultimately, I'm not basing it on any objective facts or anything like that.

[pfdietz]

On what do you base your feeling about Helion and Zap? Having examined the concepts in some detail, I have come to the opposite conclusion. Helion in particular has a combination of very clever ideas.

[devaiops9001]

Where I think Helion approach is missing something big is Helion attempts to "force" the plasma with magnets, contrast to Safire where the plasma forms self-containing magnetic fields. Plasma, like fire, which is a "cold plasma" in a way, is something found in nature. Leveraging plasma that has self-containing magnetic fields is "going with nature" rather than trying to run against it.

Suppose one were trying to take advantage of heat provided by fire, they would want to exploit how fire naturally behaves to get the benefit, rather than attempt to force fire to behave a certain way to get the benefit.

[tsimionescu]

Safire is pure pseudoscience. Helion is not.

And the only naturally occurring plasma hot enough for fusion is in the cores of stars, where gravity, not magnetic fields, keep it contained.

[devaiops9001]

Safire has had, for about eight years now, a working plasma fusion reactor that stays lit for hours on end. Helion does not.

>> the only naturally occurring plasma hot enough for fusion is in the cores of stars

Plasma that is artificially created is still plasma, not unlike how fire that is artificially created is still fire.

That plasma can be manipulated magnetically does not change. The Safire plasma has self-containing magnetic fields. Helion's plasma does not have this.

[tsimionescu]

They have a working plasma, yes, something smart children can do with a bit of tinkering. They do not, in any way shape or form, a self-sustaining fusion-producing plasma.

They are basically a cold fusion scam, except they are using a hotter plasma than the original cold fusion scammers. But, per their own claims (25,000 °C), nowhere near the temperatures required for fusion (million+ kelvin). They also claim that they are reproducing the conditions of the sun's atmosphere, which is again equivalent to admitting that they can't actually produce fusion power, since fusion doesn't happen in the sun's atmosphere.

Their website contains other bizarre claims, like claiming that they "use electricity to change the nuclei of atoms" and that they "transmute tungsten and iron into 17 benign stable daughter elements". They talk about cold fusion as if it exists as well.

These people either have no idea what they're talking about, or are active scammers. There is 0 chance they are anything else. Their device might heat plasma up to 25k C, but it does nothing else.

[devaiops9001]

>> They talk about cold fusion as if it exists as well.

"warm" fusion does exist, see https://brillouinenergy.com/ - some have insisted that Brillouin Energy is doing cold fusion, but I am not sure if cold fusion is an appropriate description. The Brillouin Energy team is completely external to the Safire team, though they may share some of the "controversial" views that the Safire team also holds about how electricity plays a greater role in chemistry than conventional thought. The awesomeness of the larger zeitgeist of science is that it is always changing.

As far as I know, and am interested to find out, Brillouin doesn't reach a temperature of 25,000 °C.

>> They have a working plasma, yes

The Safire plasma, on its face as shown by direct observation, behaves very differently than other plasmas, in a way that others were not able to make happen.

>> They do not, in any way shape or form, a self-sustaining fusion-producing plasma.

I think this here exemplifies how there is one set of words on the screen, and some here are reading some other set of words. This phrase you have presented has not been written anywhere else on this thread. I am not aware of any point where the Safire team wrote or uttered "a self-sustaining fusion-producing plasma".

Whatever ghost you thought you were arguing against, I don't think it exists.

That said, the Safire plasma, like other plasmas, produces heat that can be converted to electricity. Because the Safire plasma remains contained by its self-containing magnetic fields and does not require external magnets to force the plasma to stay contained, the *energy requirements of the external magnets are not required*.

Hence all that is required is the already modest amount of electricity to keep the plasma lit and a steady supply of hydrogen. Because the Safire plasma continues to run, and without the overhead of external magnets, abundant electricity can be harvested. This *does not mean* that Safire "puts out more energy than it takes in", this only means that the abundant electrical energy is being harvested from what *existing energy* is converted. This is *not* and also *no one claims* that this is somehow "free energy" nor "self-sustaining". Something that requires something external to it to continuously feed hydrogen is not self-sustaining. On this front, the Safire plasma team has only ever claimed (as far as I have seen) that they have a very efficient way to harvest usable electricity from Hydrogen ; the Safire team has never claimed that their Safire plasma chamber is or somehow could be "self-sustaining".

>> They talk about cold fusion as if it exists as well.

Cold fusion is a thing that scientifically exists. Perhaps what they have written in scientific terms, is some larger meme that you have confused the term "cold fusion" with, similar to "self-sustaining fusion-producing plasma" above.

>> These people either have no idea what they're talking about

The Safire team has created a novel plasma chamber where the plasma chamber has multiple layers and self-containing magnetic fields. If you have worked on a team that has created something similar, perhaps you know more about this topic than the Safire team, but if you haven't, they are speaking from real-world experience that they objectively do have.

Furthermore, please show me another team separate from the Safire team that has created a multi-layer plasma with self-containing magnetic fields documented to have done this before the Safire team on-record accomplished this. Pro tip: you can't.

[pfdietz]

> working plasma fusion reactor

What's most remarkable about this is that you've allowed yourself to be taken in by it. Show even the slightest level of skepticism, please.

[devaiops9001]

This thoughtful response here is in the spirit of forwardly affording you the benefit of the doubt that you yourself are not a cultist.

>> Show even the slightest level of skepticism

What is it, exactly, you want me to be skeptical about?

That they have a multi-layered self-containing plasma?

That the plasma in the Safire type 2 chamber is self-containing and does not require external magnets like a Tokomak reactor?

That in their plasma chamber fusion is occurring and heavier elements are forming?

The Safire team has been, for close to a decade now, forthcoming and transparent about their guesses, about what they are finding, how often they are finding it, what they think they know, what they are confident they know, so on and so on.

To be clear, the Safire type chamber containing this plasma, has ultimately one and only one at-the-crux differentiating feature, external magnets are not required like Tokomak. The Safire team does not claim to have "invented" the concept of a plasma chamber. Hot plasma does cause fusion to occur, this is not special nor novel (and Safire team did not "invent" nor advent this either). In a Safire plasma chamber the plasma is self-containing, that's the one differentiating thing, that's it.

About 10 years ago members of the Safire team (as it is now named) shared their findings in writings. In addition to their writings they shared several hours of raw video footage of plasma regimes they had in the lab of a Safire type 1 plasma chamber.

I have watched them, albeit remotely, over the years steadily progress from their experimental chambers, to their type 1 plasma chamber, to their type 2 plasma chamber. That plasma in their approach to a plasma chamber is self-containing has never seemed to be in dispute. Hell, I could probably get one of these running in my own industrial garage if I tried to, and I wouldn't be the first one to do this.

People I personally know have met these folks face to face at various conferences. What these people I personally told me was that these plasma tinkerers were no less mild-mannered, candid, forthcoming, willing to listen, and willing to answer than they present themselves online. What I and many others have seen out of them is consistency.

If you think there is some specific detail that is highly questionable, please point out to me what you think it is. I am more than willing to carefully consider what you have to share and disconfirm what seems to be reasonably true. If you have some new information to bring forth, please do.

The saying "old science dies hard" does come to mind here.

Please help me embody the skepticism you are asking of me, you can do this successfully by addressing the very specific details you are concerned about and also by not failing to make a sincere attempt to answer the questions that have been presented to you in this response.