Great news that report is received with positive reaction and peer-review is OK. Though latter does not surprise me given Nebel's obviously careful approach.
On a risk-weighted basis the chances of "success" would have to be 0.1% or less for this project (funded for next stage) not to look attractive when compared with ITER. I know this is a silly comparison, but still...
Whereas a 10% success possibility (which might perhaps be justified by current knowledge?) makes funding of more research look very compelling.
As with ITER, even if the practical engineering details, or not currently understood scaling issues, of these devices make net power fusion uneconomic - and that cannot be known yet - there are other possible uses & spin-offs of the work
And on any cost/benefit analysis I know which project wins! Let us hope more funding gets agreed soon, and that it is enough for serious progress to be made.
Best wishes, Tom
Someone has the date of release of Information - Lets POOL !
I used to do Predictify, but when I get out of my narrow fields of specialism, I'm hopeless at predicting things.b2f wrote:GWW57
Wow, right on target......do you play the market or lotteries (proceeds could go to emc2..)
BTW, you are now being investigated for insider information.....
b2f
http://www.predictify.com/
I used to be an Editor of the Bioinformatics journal, so I guess I have a good feel for how long referees can take, even if this is a different field of science.
Gary