Not that I know of. You can obviously just neglect most energy costs when considering “ignition” and the proclaim you’ve achieved ignition. These may legitimately be significant advances but it doesn’t mean we’re ready to start thinking about actually sustaining fusion energy at scale.
So the thing you’ve heard about wasn’t the first “ignition” (almost certainly the wrong word, it’s not a flame) it was just the first fusion reaction that output more energy than was directly input. This is confusing to readers because there was actually a ton more energy required, but the lasers that directly impacted the material had less energy than was released, but total energy needed was much higher than was created. Also, that test was, as far as I’m aware, more suitable for a weapon style design, not a reactors that can sustain itself and create electricity. It was basically a capsule shot by a bunch of lasers, not in a reactor.
Is this picture from Canada, or do they sell Hawkins Cheezies anywhere else? They were my favourite snack as a kid, but I think they might only exist here in Canada?
If you ask a scientist what pi is, they will tell you it equals 3.14159. If you ask a mathematician, they will tell you pi equals the circumference of a circle divided by its diameter. If you ask an engineer, they will say “about 3, but let’s round it up to 5 to be safe.”
I’d replace scientist to something more precise like physicist because usually people consider mathematicians as scientists even if it depends on definitions.
science_memes
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.