It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why nothing new in nuclear tech, we had it for almost 60 years

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 05:02 AM
link   
Why nothing new in nuclear tech, we had it for almost 60 years and nothing new has been made to advance us forwards?

Maybe power stations but even then its a long time of virtually nothing in advancements.

i really do think alot of technology is being held back now days and controlled, why i dont know maybe they want to ride the money horse on existing technology before release new stuff, i reallydo think money has ruined alot of possible leaps in human advancement of technology.




posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 05:11 AM
link   
You can't develop much nuclear weapon technology without testing, and there is an international test ban treaty in effect.

Besides, nuclear weapons are really rather simple, and there isn't really much room for development in such things.



posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 05:21 AM
link   
Uh, what the hell do you mean 'nothing new'?

Theres plenty of advances that have been made and are still being made beyond what nuclear technology was 60 years ago.

Thats like saying 'why no new advances in cars since the Model T ford'. Cars still tend to have four wheels, seats, a steering wheel and internal combustion engines. That doesn't mean there have been no advances.



posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 05:29 AM
link   
I'd call the nuetron bomb a big step up from the old a-bomb or nuclear reactors.

Neutron Bomb Info

Also reactors have become much more advanced though mosting in military technology. Most Naval nuclear engineers are very familiar with the compact size and insane energy output of these secret reactors. What isn't secret is that they are very advanced, what is secret is how they pull it off.

Nuclear tech is indeed advancing...



posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 05:43 AM
link   
What about all the current research into Nuclear Fusion? That technology was completely unknown 60 years. Although it is not efficient yet, the process does work now. How fusion works.



posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 07:54 AM
link   
Umm....There have probably MILLIONS of new advancedments. We are just not told because the government is so stupid they think something might happen, or we'll overthrough them, or they think they'll cause a "panic''



posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 09:53 AM
link   

Also reactors have become much more advanced though mosting in military technology. Most Naval nuclear engineers are very familiar with the compact size and insane energy output of these secret reactors. What isn't secret is that they are very advanced, what is secret is how they pull it off.


As a DEP recruit in the Navy preparing to enter the nuclear field, I know what you mean by how secret the reactor technology is. I tried to get some information about the design/operation of the reactor a couple weeks ago from my recruiter and all I got were a few simple diagrams and a description of the legal doses of radiation the Navy allows their reactor operators to be exposed to. I also found out that I'll be required to get a top-secret security clearance before they allow me any access to the technology whatsoever.

I'm glad the technology is kept secret to such a degree, that keeps it out of the hands of the people who could misuse it and also serves to ensure the superior tactical position of the U.S. Navy. It also goes to show that there have definitely been advancements in the field, otherwise keeping the technology a secret would be pointless.



posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 10:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by lordlefty
You can't develop much nuclear weapon technology without testing, and there is an international test ban treaty in effect.

Besides, nuclear weapons are really rather simple, and there isn't really much room for development in such things.


umm... if I remember correctly, the us never signed that treaty. They arent testing, but if they wanted to, nothing is preventing them from starting again.



posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 10:21 AM
link   
i think they signed it to not create such a fuss with other countries....they signed it alright

but they still do research on it no matter what



posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 10:38 AM
link   
I wonder why everyone startes about new nuclear weapons.

E=mc2 can be used for a lot of applications. not only weapon systems and you are asking something new...

What about in space application for nuclear propulsion.
now going to be used in the JIMO project from nasa and as a part of the Project constillation.

Only problem is that they are currently using unstable elements. Plutonium and uranium.

these can be used for weapons for as if they going to use elements which can not be used for weapons the
use will be increased.



posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 10:49 AM
link   
Kano

Nice come back. I'm pretty sure they made lots of advances, but I also think they're dedicating less effort in that field that they were years ago. Just because the people aren't aware of it, it doesn't mean that they didn't made any advances in nuclear tech.


jhh

posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 09:44 PM
link   
What about steam engines?

235 years and it is the only way used to generate massive amounts electricity. Except wind is starting to become popular. But besides internal combustion engines, there has been no advancements in producing mechanical or electrical power.



posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 09:50 PM
link   
The future is in fusion not fission. If am of the understanding that many advances have been made in this area but once again I do not trust them to tell the public everything that is known.



posted on Mar, 1 2004 @ 12:47 AM
link   
No advancements, except massive GE gas turbines!

The conversion of thermodynamic heat in powerplants into useful electricity is now far more efficient than decades ago and is starting to approach theoretical limits.

The large scale turbines are very high-tech.

In nuclear power plants, if people had the balls to build something new, the engineers could today make something far more advanced than before.

In particular the helium gas pebble reactors are great.

Extremely safe and very efficient. No superheated pressurized water running around your core. Inherently safe by the laws of physics.

Simple to operate.



posted on Mar, 1 2004 @ 01:02 AM
link   
If you can convert matter into energy (they are after all, one and the same thing - in different forms), why not convert energy back into matter? E=MC2 can go both ways. Gathering the energy and storing it is the question.



posted on Mar, 1 2004 @ 02:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by EmbryonicEssence
If you can convert matter into energy (they are after all, one and the same thing - in different forms), why not convert energy back into matter? E=MC2 can go both ways. Gathering the energy and storing it is the question.


You can convert energy into matter. In theory. However no technology exist that can do so.

Manipulation energy at that level and with perscision is quite a task.


jhh

posted on Mar, 1 2004 @ 09:45 AM
link   
Gas turbines are not efficient enough to ever be run in power plants. I did see one along a pipe line but only because they were pushing natural gas. Which is probably what will keep gas turbines from ever taking over. The natural gas supply cannot support many of these plants. In areas where these plants have been built, natural gas is now just as expensive as electricity for heating.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join