If I wanted to power shark head lasers, should I use nuclear fission or nuclear fusion?

[shortylickens]

If so, why?

 

[SKORPI0]

Fusion>Fission.... everyone know this. Of course proper mechanisms to controlling fusion reactions needs to be developed.

http://www.diffen.com/difference/Nuclear_Fission_vs_Nuclear_Fusion

The energy released by fusion is three to four times greater than the energy released by fission.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/energy/a8914/why-dont-we-have-fusion-power-15480435/

 

[ctbaars]

^ skorpio is 100% correct. More available fuel. Much cleaner, environmentally friendly. The only draw back may be power density. While hydrogen fusion is >> any fission per "atom", fuel density and machinery is likely a problem unless, of course, we go Steam-Punk.

Edit: Nice links

 

[Thebobo]

And its always good to be environmentally friendly when you are firing off your shark head lasers.

 

[ctbaars]

Yes it is Thebobo. Really, shortylickens should really have the sharks with electromagnetic rail-guns shooting Payara. Lasers are so yesterday.

 

[sdifox]

wind

 

[Thebobo]

Fusion>Fission.... everyone know this. Of course proper mechanisms to controlling fusion reactions needs to be developed.

http://www.diffen.com/difference/Nuclear_Fission_vs_Nuclear_Fusion



http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/energy/a8914/why-dont-we-have-fusion-power-15480435/

Interesting I remember reading Time Life books and Popular science mags some 40 years ago that said Fusion is 10 years away. They also said biological computers, forgot what they called them, were not far off.

 

[sdifox]

Interesting I remember reading Time Life books and Popular science mags some 40 years ago that said Fusion is 10 years away. They also said biological computers, forgot what they called them, were not far off.

If only we put real money into fusion research.

 

[dullard]

Interesting I remember reading Time Life books and Popular science mags some 40 years ago that said Fusion is 10 years away. They also said biological computers, forgot what they called them, were not far off.

When someone says it is 10 years away in journalism, that means only if it actually works, and if we give it unlimited money, and we get people who know how to bring products to market rather than some inventor who's sole life purpose is to tweak his baby project.

When someone says it is 20 years away in journalism means that it probably will never happen no matter what.

 

[dullard]

I say go with fission. While fusion may be theoretically better, you need these sharks to be deadly now. Plus, it is bad design to implement so many unproven technologies at once. To be realistic we need to limit the shark modifications to only a few critical changes at a time. Then you can come out with shark laser 2.0 later. The shark secondary dorsal fin chafing issue is far more critical than the power source right now.

 

[SMOGZINN]

Do you want radioactive mutant sharks? Because that is how we get radioactive mutant sharks.

 

[BxgJ]

Do you want radioactive mutant sharks? Because that is how we get radioactive mutant sharks.

Yes, yes we do.

 

[Red Squirrel]

I'd just tape some electrodes to the shark body, a cathode and anode. The salt water would be the electrolyte. Essentially they'd be swimming inside the battery that is powering it. Unlimited POWER!

 

[BarkingGhostar]

If only we put real money into fusion research.

I'm sure if we did and got it inplemented as a utility world wide then someone would come and blow up all of those fusion plants just to blame Dr. Manhattan.

 

[GagHalfrunt]

If so, why?

Neither. You cover the sharks with tiny turbines that spin as they pass through the water, they power generators and the sharks swimming motion charges the lasers. Hydroelectric shark lasers, for a greener tomorrow.

 

[twinrider1]

Definitely use a molten salt reactor. Here is Bruce Hoglund explaining in great detail. Do NOT skip to 50:38.

 

[Ruptga]

They also said biological computers, forgot what they called them, were not far off.

Those are children, but I don't see what the big deal is. Wolfram Alpha is about as easy to talk to and it shits its pants less often.

 

[Thebobo]

Definitely use a molten salt reactor. Here is Bruce Hoglund explaining in great detail. Do NOT skip to 50:38.

Of course everyone skips to 50:38.

Was that George Lucas? Sure looked like him.

 

[Exterous]

Neither. You cover the sharks with tiny turbines that spin as they pass through the water, they power generators and the sharks swimming motion charges the lasers. Hydroelectric shark lasers, for a greener tomorrow.

While I appreciate your environmentally friendly approach I would be concerned about recharge time. My enemies are numerous so I'm going to need those lasers to fire quickly and often. Once they're dead their carbon footprint drops off pretty quickly so I think that still might be a better option in the end anyway

 

[SKORPI0]

Who needs lasers when you can have sharks with missiles, now.

https://horrorpedia.com/2014/07/14/...e-griff-furst-cast-plot-review-trailer-promo/

 

[tynopik]

neither, you want use what NASA uses to power deep space probes: a Radioisotope thermoelectric generator (RTG)

(technically it uses fission, but not in a conventional sense)

 

[Charmonium]

If you want something you could use today, go with a thermionic converter powered by radioactive decay. It's what NASA used for most of its probes.

But if we're talking completely pie-in-the-sky theoretical, I'd go with a microscopic black hole. Something big enough that it wouldn't evaporate too quickly. That's what the Romulans used for their cruisers.

 

[GagHalfrunt]

While I appreciate your environmentally friendly approach I would be concerned about recharge time. My enemies are numerous so I'm going to need those lasers to fire quickly and often. Once they're dead their carbon footprint drops off pretty quickly so I think that still might be a better option in the end anyway

If you have that many enemies you need to re-evaluate your lifestyle and resort to SoMD.

 

[Rubycon]

Subatomic particle stream excimer. [SAPSE]
Of course.

 

[Exterous]

If you have that many enemies you need to re-evaluate your lifestyle and resort to SoMD.

Hey its not my fault so many people are wrong and resistant to re-education!