It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Rethaya
I guess having a reactor in space might make dealing with any cooling issues easier. We could just redirect the waste heat that we don't need for power to the dark-side of the reactor, somehow.
originally posted by: MerkabaMeditation
if we used a pool of water like traditional nuclear sites to contain the energy then would the water not evaporate immediately at these extreme temperatures?
-MM
originally posted by: Bedlam
originally posted by: MerkabaMeditation
if we used a pool of water like traditional nuclear sites to contain the energy then would the water not evaporate immediately at these extreme temperatures?
-MM
Answer: don't confuse temperature with heat. It's tough for the layman, though.
originally posted by: MerkabaMeditation
originally posted by: Bedlam
originally posted by: MerkabaMeditation
if we used a pool of water like traditional nuclear sites to contain the energy then would the water not evaporate immediately at these extreme temperatures?
-MM
Answer: don't confuse temperature with heat. It's tough for the layman, though.
Frankely, I find your "answer" insulting as you insinuate that us "laymen" would not understand the difference between temperature with heat as you would and that is your answer;
you would look much better if you attempted to explain the difference instead of coming with such an elitist answer.
originally posted by: MerkabaMeditation
Well, here is a follow-up question from a "layman" to someone as intellectually superior as yourself ; if you place a red hot iron into a bucket of water it almost explodes and that iron is less than 1,000 degrees, so I'm guessing that 4 million degrees would completely evaporate any water in an instance. Is this little layman wrong?
-MM
originally posted by: Rethaya
originally posted by: Maverick7
Where we're making the mistake is trying to build it on Earth (beyond a model), and finding containment a major issue.
I guess having a reactor in space might make dealing with any cooling issues easier. We could just redirect the waste heat that we don't need for power to the dark-side of the reactor, somehow.
originally posted by: MerkabaMeditation
You seem to suppose that I would not understand the difference between temperature and heat...
originally posted by: MerkabaMeditation
Well, here is a follow-up question from a "layman" to someone as intellectually superior as yourself ; if you place a red hot iron into a bucket of water it almost explodes and that iron is less than 1,000 degrees, so I'm guessing that 4 million degrees would completely evaporate any water in an instance. Is this little layman wrong?
-MM
originally posted by: MerkabaMeditation
... you would look much better if you attempted to explain the difference instead of coming with such an elitist answer.
...should suffice based on some kind of merit which I suppose is your ATS score(?).
originally posted by: Bedlam
originally posted by: MerkabaMeditation
... you would look much better if you attempted to explain the difference instead of coming with such an elitist answer.
...should suffice based on some kind of merit which I suppose is your ATS score(?).
If you consider "elitist" and "some kind of merit" to be "took second semester freshman physics" then I suppose I'm guilty as charged. At least I *think* it was second semester. Might have been first.
Seriously, though, confusing temperature and heat is the reason you are having issues with this. A lot of people do, though.
My question is regarding how can we extract any kind of energy from 4 million degrees when all elements that it touches instantly evaporates.
originally posted by: MerkabaMeditation
a reply to: Bedlam
At 4 million degrees even metals evaporate - regardless if there is 1 gram or 1 kilo.
-MM