4 ms·

It (combined with the ignition last year, which this shows wasn’t a fluke) definitely WAS a “leap of some kind.” Showing fusion ignition shows potential scalabi

• NotYourLawyer 4y ago
  If you scale up a process that only returns 1% of the energy you put in (which is the case here based on how inefficient the laser is), you’re still not gonna come out ahead.
  • tanseydavid 4y ago
    1% or did you mean to say 101% -- they demonstrated a net gain didn't they?
    • lolinder 4y ago
      As I understand it they demonstrated a net gain relative to the energy output by the laser, but not relative to the energy put into the laser. 1% is correct for the actual efficiency given the cost to generate the laser. (Yes, that distinction does seem important and wasn't brought out by the news reports.)
  • Robotbeat 4y ago
    The scaling is non-linear, which is exactly why ignition is important. By showing that fusion heat is actually leading to more fusion reactions, to get double the amount of energy out of each shot, they won't have to double the amount of laser light. In other words, higher gain should be relatively straightforward scaling of the system. (Also, the laser inefficiency is a complete red herring as they just used plain old flash lamp pumped lasers, not the much more efficient lasers we could have used and which are available now, with efficiencies about 10-20 times that of those used.) They achieved a 1.5x gain. To get useful electricity out (without heroic efforts) will require a gain of 20-50.