There is plenty of evidence. This is your ignorance speaking here.

I feel very comfortable saying in 5 years Helion won't have anything.

Because HackerNews was soooo confident that a startup style skunkworks initiative would lead to over-unity fusion in 5 years[1]...in 2014.

Then they were soooo confident that MIT was going to blow past ITER to over unity fusion[2] ... in 2020.

It's 2025, and the latter project is still running but now predicting it'll finish it's big reactor post-2030.

Helion are currently now reporting no new results, but claiming they'll hit net-energy in 2028 somehow despite little technical detail. After claiming they'll show net-energy fusion in 2024.[3]

So there's my evidence. Where's your evidence?

It should be noted that I'm not actually against private fusion research - more research is great. But the unfounded confidence with which HackerNews users make predictions of the obvious superiority and success of private industry in achieving fusion has a track record of "we still don't have fusion" despite company's dating back as early to early last decade when we're mid-2020s now.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8458339

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24629828

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helion_Energy

▲

Animats 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

The problem with Helion is that their "Polaris" device isn't working yet. That was supposed to do some fusion and recapture some energy, even if not breakeven. It was supposed to be operational by now.

Success with Polaris would be a big deal. Helion isn't mentioning it much any more. Not good. December 2024 discussion on Reddit.[1] Discussion in the last month on Reddit.[2] Video from Helion that mentions mostly Trenta, the previous machine.[3]

Yet they're pouring concrete for the next machine.

Uh oh.

[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/fusion/comments/1hlojqu/any_news_on...

[2] https://www.reddit.com/r/fusion/comments/1lv4e2h/what_has_ch...

[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nuB3bIsJeJA

▲

pfdietz 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I like how your mode of argument would have led you to confidently assert SpaceX was going to fail. Please conduct some QA on your logic, mkay?

Who here is "soooo" confident Helion will succeed? One can be excited about a company without thinking they're a sure thing. The world is going to spend maybe a quadrillion dollars on energy in this century, so even low odds bets can be very worthwhile.

Those two HN links there were to stories about companies other than Helion. I agree the DT efforts are dubious.

Helion has been reporting results, btw. Have you been reading? Maybe you're complaining they haven't finished all of the next machine yet? "They didn't snap their fingers to make their machine, therefore they're frauds!" isn't a good look.

https://x.com/helion_energy?lang=en

▲

DangitBobby 4 days ago | parent [-]

SpaceX had a ton of help from NASA.

Also:

> Fusion generates electricity by ramming atoms into each other, releasing energy without emitting significant greenhouse gases or creating large amounts of long-lasting radioactive waste. But despite billions of dollars of investment, scientists and engineers still have not figured out a way to reliably generate more energy with fusion than it takes to create and sustain the reaction. Helion is still working on how to do that with its current prototype, called Polaris, which is housed in Everett, Washington, where it plans to build components for the machine to be built at Malaga, called Orion.

1. https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/helion-energy-starts...

▲

pfdietz 4 days ago | parent [-]

And Helion has built upon "a ton" of work from predecessors as well.

The quoted argument is basically "it hasn't happened yet, therefore it can't happen". Why does this argument not also apply to SpaceX, for all the things they've been the first to do?

I get that skepticism is warranted, but please don't cross the line into blatant technical nihilism.

	▲	DangitBobby 4 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Skepticism is more than warranted. I would be skeptical that they could put out a working reactor in 3 years even if they had already established the technical and commercial feasibility in a lab setting!
	▲	matthewdgreen 4 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		I’m curious if you’d make a bet on this and how much you’d wager?