how is it that we cannot create fusion reactors b/c we cant generate the power but we can create the H-bomb?

Question

The H-bombs can reach tempertures up to 200-300 million degrees celsuis. Why cant why create fusion reactors that can do the same?

Answer 1

H-bomb is uncontrolled fusion. the fusion reactor has to be controlled for producing energy.

Answer 2

Stark seems to use Palladium isotope from his missiles as the reactor's fuel. Once the reaction starts, the energy harnessed is enourmous at 3 GJ/s or equivalent to 3 GW. (That's more than twice energy required for time-travelling (which needed only 1.21 GW of power) in Back to the Future films). This power can be used to power up his suit for a long time for his enhanced reactor, not the first one. To make this extremely efficient power supply, I believe we can. And I believe it is possible. But I think that it can be done only in a few hundred years. The movie is purely fictional and I believe that the writer are just fantasizing about the perfect energy source. (Dreams mostly become true eventually). If we are living in 19th century, people won't believe you if you can send sound wave and pictures accross the globe. Now, it's possible. So what makes an arc reactor impossible? It can be done. But not in recent time.

Answer 3

Just to give you an example of how hard it is to control, the reactors we use now are fission reactors. These reactors are controlled by rods that can absorb radiation. In order for this process to work at a rate which we can control, our fission reactors are about 2.5% efficient. Pretty disgusting, huh? The reason is because if something happens, we would need a response time. If we increased the efficiency to, let's say, just 3% efficient, we would not be able to respond fast enough in an emergency and the reactor could easily have a meltdown.

Answer 4

The temperatures and pressures of a fusion reaction are like the universal solvent...a solvent that dissolves everything. What does one use to contain a universal solvent? Same thing for fusion when it reaches H-bomb proportions...what does one use to contain a nuclear fusion?

One of the reasons the world was ecstatic when news of a sustainable cold fusion reaction was released some years ago was that cold fusion could be contained...and controlled. That results because cold fusion, like the name implies, is relatively cold and won't vaporize everything around it. But, alas, the cold fusion dream was shattered when no one could replicate the cold fusion results...it had been a hoax.

The Sun sustains and contains the fusion reactions that create its light and heat because it has enormous gravity to hold the fusionable material close in. We on Earth have no clue how to create such gravitational pull artificially. So we have turned unsuccessfully to magnetism to try to contain and control fusion on Earth. The Livermore National Lab some years ago created a magnetic pinch device that could contain the fusion of lithium deuteride for milliseconds, but eventually that containment broke down. [See source.]

Answer 5

A magnetic field can hold a fussion reaction if that reaction is taking place inside an ionized gas (plasma). The problem is that holding a plasma with a magnetic field is a lot like holding an angry cat in your arms, the hotter it gets, the cat or the plasma, the harder it is to control, but you need a hot plasma for a cost-effective reactor. However, it's really a matter of brute force physics. If we spend enough money building prototype Tokamak reactors, we will eventually have a working generator.

Answer 6

To achieve fusion requires temperature, density and time.
The problem is that with an H bomb, the environment where the temperature, density and confinement time is achieved is blown to bits.
Fission is simple in comparison: just put enough fissile material in the same place (critical mass) and you have a chain reaction. It can be constant (nuclear reactor, where the neutron flux is kept constant over time, as many neutron used up as gets emitted per unit time) or uncontrolled (each neutron fosters the apparition of more than one fission capable neutron with each new fission).
We know how to create fusion: just clump enough hydrogen together. The trick, the real challenge is to make it outside of a mass that is as big as a star.

Answer 7

The problem is that when a gas (or anything) gets hot, it tries to spread out. That isn't a problem for a bomb, but we like power plants to stay put & in one piece.

The nearest working fusion reactor is the Sun, which is held together by gravity. But it's big, big and heavy.

Answer 8

The problem is producing a *controlled* fusion reaction that doesn't immediately vaporize its surroundings, so that the energy can be put to some use. Maintaining that control has so far proved extremely difficult. It takes a tremendous amount of energy (to produce a magnetic field to contain the plasma) and they still can't sustain the reaction for any useful length of time.

Answer 9

We can, and someday you will get to see that we can.
Please go to the Lawrence Livermore Laboratories website and find The National Ignition Facility. Its job is to publicly find the rules to ignite a continuous fusion reactor.

Answer 10

Like every other aspect of life. It's much easier to do something destructive, than to do something constructive. The terrorists have proven that.