2 ms·
This is the real key. A LOT of people (and digging through their comment history, many of them) are MCF people who somehow poo-poo this result but then go on to
by noobermin 4y ago
This is the real key. A LOT of people (and digging through their comment history, many of them) are MCF people who somehow poo-poo this result but then go on to extol how MCF schemes or companies are still a safer bet...even when none of them have even achieved any level of Q, heck they didn't even beat NIF's old result.
If this result is "useless" and "shouldn't be news," then the whole field of MCF and all the start-ups are even more "useless" and should be even less as news, because a small non-zero number is still larger than zero.
- toomanyrichies 4y agoFor those who were wondering what "MCF" is (like I was), the above author is likely referring to "magnetic confinement fusion"[1]. Contrast MCF with "inertial confinement fusion"[2] (ICF), a different (and apparently competing) approach taken by the National Ignition Facility in this latest announcement. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_confinement_fusion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_confinement_fusion 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertial_confinement_fusion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertial_confinement_fusion