• Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    1 year ago

    Haven’t we already confirmed ignition and just entered the “how do we sustain this at scale?” phase of the development?

    • Cethin@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      So the thing you’ve heard about wasn’t the first “ignition” (almost certainly the wrong word, it’s not a flame) it was just the first fusion reaction that output more energy than was directly input. This is confusing to readers because there was actually a ton more energy required, but the lasers that directly impacted the material had less energy than was released, but total energy needed was much higher than was created. Also, that test was, as far as I’m aware, more suitable for a weapon style design, not a reactors that can sustain itself and create electricity. It was basically a capsule shot by a bunch of lasers, not in a reactor.

    • Mo5560@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Haven’t we already confirmed ignition?

      Not that I know of. You can obviously just neglect most energy costs when considering “ignition” and the proclaim you’ve achieved ignition. These may legitimately be significant advances but it doesn’t mean we’re ready to start thinking about actually sustaining fusion energy at scale.