70
Scientists replicate fusion ignition
(www.afr.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 07 Aug 2023
70 points (91.7% liked)
Technology
34973 readers
189 users here now
This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.
Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.
Rules:
1: All Lemmy rules apply
2: Do not post low effort posts
3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff
4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.
5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)
6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist
7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
I know a little about stuff.
Similar to the 2022 firing, The fusion charge itself was net energy positive. That is, the fusion production was greater than the input of laser shot used, which means they're closing in on optimal ignition.
However: the total cycle energy was terrible. The lasers NIF uses are quite old due to the speed of government and the sheer size of the project, plus thermodynamics hates an engineer's guts. so their total real input electrical energy to generate such a laser pulse of a few joules was hundreds of thousands of times greater than the actual fusion output.
This is great for understanding the physics of conditions that fusion requires, but terrible for generating power.