When I say producing net energy I mean getting out more useful energy than we put in.
At the lowest level, the energy we received comes from the fact that the two nuclei fused have a lower energy state than they had individually and the remaining energy causes heat via the emission of neutrons
Heat is the transfer of energy due to a temperature differential. I think you may want to review the highschool physics textbook.
you may want to review the second law of thermodynamics
> CtrlAltmanDel nitpicks anon291’s use of "causes heat," arguing that heat is energy transfer due to temperature differences. This critique feels overly pedantic, as "heat" is commonly used to describe energy released in fusion (even if "thermal energy" might be more precise).
I don't know if I should trust the machine god or the snarky commenter with a vapid one liner here. You're both very confident.
Neither of these are worthy of your trust. Even if they had agreed.
Yeah, so we'll just get a reduced dimension model that we don't know how it works.
Sounds good.
I've been studying plasma physics and from what I understand perfect control isn't necessary as long as you can control it long enough to get useful power. If the plasma dissipates you just restart. But ideally it's controlled enough that while it is in there, it's producing net energy