Re:Nuclear physicist explains why fusion ignition is hailed ...
by delecti on Monday December 19, 2022 @01:32PM
(#34055716)
The existence of stars already did. This is more like "it's plausible to do so in a reactor that won't destroy itself". The "that won't destroy itself" part is what this demonstrates, but annoyingly reporting often shortens it to the "is plausible to do so" part.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Nuclear physicist explains why fusion ignition is hailed ...
by horsawlarway on Monday December 19, 2022 @02:13PM
(#34056271)
Except... correct me if I'm wrong here... The "reactor" did destroy itself.
> The fuel and canister get vaporized within a few billionths of a second during the experiment. Researchers then hope their equipment survived the heat and accurately measured the energy released by the fusion reaction.
It didn't necessarily blow up like a fusion bomb, but the energy was hardly produced in any sort of sustainable, ongoing form that we can harvest.
Worse - it's not even just the chamber that essentially destroys itself - the lasers that create the event also damage themselves: https://lasers.llnl.gov/news/controlling-backscatter-damage-...