130
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] vk6flab@lemmy.radio 65 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It's charming that the article uses Fahrenheit as a scientific temperature scale, perhaps they should adopt bananas for distance in scientific reports too.

[-] yogthos@lemmygrad.ml 35 points 1 year ago

you gotta admire the dedication to using the most absurd measurement system though

[-] combat_doomerism@hexbear.net 10 points 1 year ago

farenheit isnt even that bad compared to the other imperial units, what are you talking about lmao

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] egonallanon@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago

We could use rankine just to confuse people more.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] HowAbt2morrow@futurology.today 26 points 1 year ago

At least it wasn’t measured in campfires or number of hotcakes.

[-] Aquilae@hexbear.net 16 points 1 year ago

Damn now I kinda wanna know how many campfires this is equivalent to

[-] fox@hexbear.net 18 points 1 year ago

A full burning campfire can hit 2000 F, so this would be about 90,000 of those

[-] Aquilae@hexbear.net 13 points 1 year ago

I don't think temperature works like that though lol

[-] quarrk@hexbear.net 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

180 million Fahrenheit converts to almost exactly 100 million Kelvin, so I imagine the journalist just converted from Kelvin to get that number. Anyway, using 2000 F ≈ 1,366.48 K gives about 73,000 bonfires.

Temperature does kinda work like this. The Boltzmann constant k_B has units of Joules per Kelvin (energy / temperature). An energy E can has an equivalent temperature T given by setting E = k_B*T. I think it’s good enough to state that 73,000 bonfires would be collectively 73,000 times hotter than one bonfire.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] fen@hexbear.net 11 points 1 year ago

that's honestly less campfires than I'd expect

[-] vk6flab@lemmy.radio 8 points 1 year ago

The ones hot enough for marshmallows?

[-] bobs_guns@lemmygrad.ml 6 points 1 year ago

It's a fuckton.

[-] CloutAtlas@hexbear.net 17 points 1 year ago

How many cubits was this sun? At least a furlong right? And how many hogsheads of fuel did it need?

[-] GalaxyBrain@hexbear.net 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The sun is 3,007,856,729.2152 cubits in diameter

[-] SpiderFarmer@hexbear.net 11 points 1 year ago

Could be a communication thing. As much as I love the metric system, for frontfacing stuff like articles, scientists have to sometimes use freedom units.

At least that was my experience with school.

[-] vk6flab@lemmy.radio 20 points 1 year ago

And that is precisely why the Mars Polar Lander failed.

https://everydayastronaut.com/mars-climate-orbiter/

Face it, the USA has defined the inch as 25.4 mm. It did so in 1933. The country is already metric, it's been metric for 92 years.

It's time.

[-] imogen_underscore@hexbear.net 9 points 1 year ago

isn't it used by science and the military already lol

[-] vk6flab@lemmy.radio 9 points 1 year ago

Yeah, it's just the rest of the country that needs being brought into the 21st century.

[-] GalaxyBrain@hexbear.net 11 points 1 year ago

That temperature is hotter than anyone could really imagine to the point that any scale is meaningless

[-] combat_doomerism@hexbear.net 3 points 1 year ago

farhenheit makes way more sense than the other imperial measurements imo

[-] trinicorn@hexbear.net 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

how so?

arbitrarily setting the freezing point of water to 32 and the boiling point to 212 and then filling in the rest from there isn't what I'd call "making sense"

I guess they're 180 apart but why 32, why not 0 and 180?

[-] combat_doomerism@hexbear.net 10 points 1 year ago

the freezing point was set to the freezing point of brine, not water. doesnt make a lot of sense, but it makes more sense than inches -> feet -> yard -> mile (not to mention league etc.) what the fuck is an inch? who fucking knows, maybe the distance between your knuckles on one of your fingers??? the point is not that farenheit is good, but that the rest of the imperial measurements are even worse

[-] trinicorn@hexbear.net 6 points 1 year ago

yeah, I mean some eutectic brine of ice, water, and camel piss salt seems pretty scienticious to me

if anything, three barleycorns laid end to end might be more sensible lol

[-] CloutAtlas@hexbear.net 8 points 1 year ago

As someone that learned Celsius first, I can intuit Fahrenheit pretty easily in a day to day setting. Can't imagine doing science with it though

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] DengistDonnieDarko@hexbear.net 44 points 1 year ago

how many football fields is this

[-] Torenico@hexbear.net 28 points 1 year ago

About twelve AR-15s

[-] tactical_trans_karen@hexbear.net 39 points 1 year ago

I want to see a demo where they approach it with all the trepidation and seriousness that such an advancement deserves, and pull out a perfectly golden toasted marshmallow.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] LaughingLion@hexbear.net 33 points 1 year ago

cool, this is the one funded by genshin impact lol

[-] AntiOutsideAktion@hexbear.net 28 points 1 year ago

dead-dove-2 all the comments are about the temperature units

[-] ClathrateG@hexbear.net 26 points 1 year ago

think of the crypto mining potential!

[-] yogthos@lemmygrad.ml 13 points 1 year ago

lol only way fusion would get funded in the US 🤣

[-] Saoirse@hexbear.net 22 points 1 year ago

Every time a headline comes out of China reporting major progress in fusion power generation I'm like lt-kitsuragi "God, please."

[-] CrawlMarks@hexbear.net 20 points 1 year ago

I feel like in the millions of degrees it is fine to use america numbers. Seeing it in C isn't gonna give anyone a more accurate understanding.

[-] GalaxyBrain@hexbear.net 14 points 1 year ago

Or we could use what everyone else uses

[-] CrawlMarks@hexbear.net 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

At 160 million we may as well just be using kelivn.

[-] GalaxyBrain@hexbear.net 24 points 1 year ago

Have you considered that it's never okay to use America anything including numbers?

[-] leftAF@hexbear.net 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Fahrenheit does have a wider range of whole numbers to express the temperatures in our daily climate. Unfortunately the digital thermostats I had for years, even one in Shanghai, would step in 0.5 deg increments regardless of it being in F or C. I assume it was using K internally throughout the system, so keeping it in F meant more granularity (68, 68.5, 69 being more specific temps than 20, 20.5, 21 could dial in). And it was noticeable enough to where I'd keep it in F (except one time when I was sick and wanted in between the two possible F setpoints).

[-] invalidusernamelol@hexbear.net 3 points 1 year ago

At that scale they're equal

[-] yogthos@lemmygrad.ml 5 points 1 year ago

lol yeah it's very hot

[-] Xavienth@lemmygrad.ml 3 points 1 year ago

You can divide by two and be roughly correct (÷1.8 even moreso). The offset is negligible.

[-] CrawlMarks@hexbear.net 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Dividing 160million by 1.8 is not gonna help me understand things any better I fear.

[-] shath@hexbear.net 10 points 1 year ago
[-] Sodium_nitride@lemmygrad.ml 3 points 1 year ago

The 1,000-second mark is considered a critical threshold in fusion research. Sustaining plasma for such extended durations is essential for demonstrating the feasibility of operating fusion reactors.

More doubling the previous record is impressive, so I'm not being cynical, but what's special about 1000 seconds? It's not as if the reactor achieved ignition.

This includes providing a clean and abundant energy source to address global energy demands and enabling ambitious endeavors such as deep-space exploration.

I hate how people about Fusion as if it is guaranteed to be some silver bullet to human energy problems. Fusion reactors use pretty exotic materials to build and are very large. And even when the first commercially viable fusion reactor goes online, it will still take a long time for fusion reactors to spread, since solar is so cheap and fossi fuels have an entrenched political regime behind them. Not to mention getting fusion to the global majority will be much harder than getting them solar energy.

As Song Yuntao, director of the Institute of Plasma Physics, emphasized, “Fusion reactions need to reach the order of thousands of seconds to sustain themselves. The latest record marks the first time humanity has simulated conditions necessary for operating fusion reactors in an experimental setup.”

So getting to ignition is based on sustaining the reaction for long enough? Or by "sustain" commercial sustenance is meant?

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 22 Jan 2025
130 points (99.2% liked)

technology

24256 readers
228 users here now

On the road to fully automated luxury gay space communism.

Spreading Linux propaganda since 2020

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS