Like Cogito said, fission increases the number of particles while fusion decreases it, generally making it more effective of converting mass to energy. The only thing more effective would be matter-antimatter annihilation since it actually destroys the particles.
The Arc Reactor is just a fusion reactor. But I suppose there would be more advanced technology in there to reverse-engineer than just nuclear fusion.
Originally posted by Astner
The Arc Reactor is just a fusion reactor.
True, but I was imagining an Arc reactor vs. one of the several fusion technologies currently being worked on, and thinking "phuck, this is better in every way".
Originally posted by DarkSaint85In theory, yeah, but hydrogen remains more plentiful than thorium and I believe should produce more energy and be safer/cleaner still (not a nuclear physicist)
OTOH, a working Thorium reactor would give cleaner energy without the radioactive waste, PLUS thorium is generally found in 'safe' countries.
Originally posted by riv6672
The arc reactor seems safest.
Again, not a nuclear physicist, but I don't think there's really any danger or way to weaponize a fusion reaction (designed to harvest energy, obviously does not apply to a thermonuclear bomb). The arc reactor can be directed as a weapon though, so... /shrug
Originally posted by Cogito
Again, not a nuclear physicist, but I don't think there's really any danger or way to weaponize a fusion reaction (designed to harvest energy, obviously does not apply to a thermonuclear bomb). The arc reactor can be directed as a weapon though, so... /shrug