Can something like the Arc reactor really be made feasable?

First of all welcome to CE

Next can you please be more specific and give us an insight into Arc Reactor

PS Iron Man is not my taste and Films are out of the box to me so no point in trying to illustrate from movies

jeffrey samuelFirst of all welcome to CE

Next can you please be more specific and give us an insight into Arc Reactor

PS Iron Man is not my taste and Films are out of the box to me so no point in trying to illustrate from movies

Hey Mr. Samuel. Thanks a lot! It's an honor being a part of the Crazy Engineers family.
Actually the Arc reactor is a fictional creation. It's a fictional clean energy source which is powered by Nuclear fusion. Harnessing energy from it can be a real problem as we all know how unstable fusion reactors are. But what are the chances if we use modes of generation like Piezoelectricity or a Plasma core?

Starkdisciple93Hey Mr. Samuel. Thanks a lot! It's an honor being a part of the Crazy Engineers family.

Search through CE. There is plenty of discussion on this in various threads.
Welcome.
Not enough being crazy. For CE you must be stark and raving. You seem to be half of that already (your screen name that is, not half mad)

bioramaniSearch through CE. There is plenty of discussion on this in various threads.
Welcome.
Not enough being crazy. For CE you must be stark and raving. You seem to be half of that already (your screen name that is, not half mad)

Haha! Thanks a lot! Am not used to such kinda replies when I ask such questions to the teachers or my fellow mates. And yeah, I went through a few of the threads concerning the highlighted topic, but all of them were on the "working" of the Arc reactor. No one tried to modify it and make it feasible for real.

The only thing is power used to setup any arc is high and so what ever power you generate 90 % of that has to be lost to charge the reactor and so I think it is not economical

jeffrey samuelThe only thing is power used to setup any arc is high and so what ever power you generate 90 % of that has to be lost to charge the reactor and so I think it is not economical

Actually sir, the whole concept of tokamaks and the fusion reactors is based on the Arc only. Even if 90% of it goes to charge the reactor itself, the output itself is so high (some thousand gigawatts) that even 10% can power up a colony for an entire month at the least.

Starkdisciple93Actually sir, the whole concept of tokamaks and the fusion reactors is based on the Arc only. Even if 90% of it goes to charge the reactor itself, the output itself is so high (some thousand gigawatts) that even 10% can power up a colony for an entire month at the least.

I am not really sure about this one thing for sure for a simple fusion reaction a 10^7 K temperature is needed and I am not sure we can contain this in any environment now

jeffrey samuelI am not really sure about this one thing for sure for a simple fusion reaction a 10^7 K temperature is needed and I am not sure we can contain this in any environment now

10^7 Kelvin is not a necessary condition. There are ways like Sonofusion, Muon catalysed fusion, or anti matter initialized fusion reactions which do not require a high threshold temperature kick start.

Sonofusion coupling is out of the list as coupling the energy from a collapsing bubble is next to impossible

Muon catalysed fusion has a barrier in the life span of Muon which is a 2 micro seconds only

How about if we use some existent technology to initiate the fusion reaction, and then the reactor will feed power to itself, like a chain reaction?

I think the existing set up is a fission driven fusion process The only hinderance is that both are uncontrollable resulting in pre dominant danger


Just like a Hydrogen bomb setup