That's not the sick burn you think it is

What a mess of an article. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Gizmodo is a far cry from the days of paying $5000 for the iPhone 4.

Fusion is what happens on the sun

Not what we do on earth

That's fusion reactors not solar energy on the surface of the earth

Light. Zero mass. Lots of energy.

Einstein's most famous equation (E=mc^(2)) limits energy density of any fuel to 9 x 10^(10) MJ/kg

And that would be an antimatter reactor. Physics means no fuel can have infinite density.

the main difference is those were bombs. we've been sending nuclear materiel into space for ages. voyager 1 is still kicking thanks to a rtg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_space

Even if you could somehow do that, if you include the true total lifetime cost, it'd require huge subsidies to remain competitive.

I think you’re right about shape, but I thought the overall orientation/direction was as I said - I’m very happy to be corrected if I’m wrong.

So take the profit margin out of it. Nuclear power should be run entirely by the government/military

[removed]

False, at current energy use levels.

Potentially possible, if we have massive crash-course investment in transmission, infrastructure and a corresponding (and profoundly improbable) society-wide massive decrease in the average per-capita energy consumption of western countries.

In other words, not possible

Solar energy is hydrogen fusion, deuterium–tritium fusion is about 338,000,000 MJ/kg.

But we don't have the technology to create miniature suns in our rockets.

BTW, U-235 fission has an energy density of about 144,000,000 MJ/kg.

source

Another source puts the energy density of the sun's core around 6.43 x 10^(8) MJ/kg, or 643,000,000 MJ/kg.

The second source is titled The Source of Solar Energy.

Privatizing profit and socializing cost and hiding true costs are an ugly thing indeed and something that nuke power is entirely dependent upon.

The fact that there has never been a accident with a payload containing fissile material.

Ah…the “s-word” rears its ugly, stupid head yet again

Does anyone know what the total mass of the exhaust* (momentum generator) would be in a nuclear rocket versus a chemical one?

And what would that exhaust* be?

*I'm not sure what the correct term is, maybe propellant?

[removed]

"Wind powered travel to Mars." M'kay.

Renewable sources can likely support about 40 percent of future energy demands.

I mean they make jet engines for airliners. You can fly one without having to affording the whole plane..

Nuclear reactors use light as the energy for power.

Coal generators use light as the energy for power.

Natural gas generators use light as the energy for power.

Geothermal generators use light as the energy for power.

Light is the way energy is transferred from one atom or molecule to another atom or molecule.

Heat is light.

For example:

Coal is burned, the chemical reaction creates lots of photons. Those photons get absorbed by water molecules. The water molecules become excited. Excited water molecules move faster. Faster moving water molecules have more kinetic energy. Steam is the result. High velocity steam spins a turbine. The turbine spins a magnetic field inside an coil. This produces electricity.

Energy density is really a measure of the number and energy of the photons generated by a certain fuel. Light is not the fuel (hint: fusion).

How many megajoules per kg is it?

Solar power is neither infinite in energy density, total amount of energy or duration of energy.

Not sure what you mean by "Solar is infinite."

Uhhh, that is exactly what happened.