3 ms·
raziel below has an excellent response. To add to their comment, I'll say the difference here is the precision needed for LIGO is with a more or less static equ
by noobermin 6y ago
raziel below has an excellent response. To add to their comment, I'll say the difference here is the precision needed for LIGO is with a more or less static equipment you can tweak. This requires plasma stability during a dynamic, very chaotic system. You do tweak the static parts, the laser and related apparatus, the target and what holds it in place, various diagnostics, but the actual process itself is a very dynamic explosion that it itself is hard to understand or predict fully a priori, and certainly not to the degree we understand gravitational waves at the point of detection at LIGO.
I mean, as I said elsewhere, the reason we don't have fusion for any fusion experiment is plasma instabilities, at this point that fact is like saying the reason ice cream melts in the sun is because it's hot. It's a fact of all fusion experiments. The only system we know of that can achieve net gain fusion we know of is gravitational confinement which uses a big mass to contain the hot plasma, also known as a star.