CommentHigh Risk High Gain vs. Certain Fail No Gain (Score 3, Interesting)33
Over the last decades I have lost count of the number of startups that funded with the intent to bring fusion reactors to commercial reality. Yet they all end up like this. Who funds these things?
I personally have participated in VC funded startup and met with dozens if not hundreds of funding organizations large and small. VCs, institutions, investment funds, investment bankers, corporate and you name it. They vary in their orientation and approach and technical acumen a lot but they all do due diligence. More than once I have been interviewed by highly credentialed academics on the tech I am asking funding for because if the investor is interested and don't understand, they hire that expertise. At the teeniest tiniest inconsistency or weakness they discover it gets reported and the money backs out. "Call us later when you get to break even"
So the track record here on fusion technology is pretty much 0% for quite a while. The technical theories have to be quackery. I don't know what they are in individual cases but WTF the money flows into them nonstop. Yes I get it. If it "works" then the potential gain is staggering. But where do they get mainstream physicists to sign off on this or do they just skip that part or maybe just not care? Or are the quacks just that good at selling their novel new idea in high-energy physics that somehow nobody else has realized until now? Any insights on this welcome. Been wondering about this for a while.