I think it’s still research stage and it’s debatable whether to call this ‘solar’, but https://www.ucdavis.edu/curiosity/news/anti-solar-cells-phot...:

“a specially designed photovoltaic cell could generate up to 50 watts of power per square meter under ideal conditions at night, about a quarter of what a conventional solar panel can generate in daytime”

The idea is to capture the energy that escapes into space when solar panels cool down during the night.

If you want to debate names, I like "fusion collectors" instead of solar.

Surplus solar and wind can charge batteries. Would this not count as time shifted solar?

Haha indeed. I edited my comment to be a bit more clear. Though I think solar furnaces do work at night.

I have fun news for you https://x.com/bennbuilds/status/1767961251186163857

So batteries are too expensive, but space launches aren't? Even assuming the light can be sufficiently focused to bypass the inverse-square law, it'll still need precision manufacturing to actually deliver the power to the panels reliably. And that's assuming mirrors are enough, and you don't need space-side solar panels and microwave/laser beams (which will be even more expensive than hundred-mile-focus mirrors).

Push am (ever so slightly) larger fraction of the sun's energy output into our atmosphere, what could possibly go wrong!

I know, the amount of net electricity per added total energy might end up no worse than in a fusion power best case scenario, but still... When you add the climate effect of re rocket launches required I don't think it could ever become worthwhile.