• Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The whole point is that they put less energy into the target material than they got out of it, however much energy they had for the rest of the experiment isn’t relevant. The only part of this design that they are researching here is the fusion, everything else is supporting that research and is not been actively developed by this team.

      There are other teams working on other reactor designs which increase efficiency in other areas.

      It’s like saying that a rocket engine demonstration model doesn’t work because it doesn’t fly.

      • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        It’s a good example. I’d actually say test-firing a rocket and claiming you’re almost on the moon is still misleading, though.

        Energy in vs. energy generated at the target has no practical significance. It’s for marketing to funders.

      • PM_me_your_vagina_thanks@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        And the whole point of my comment is that people shouldn’t be wetting their pants thinking that fusion is right around the corner. This is just further proof of concept and does nothing to actually advance fusion power.

        • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s research research advances technology that’s how it works you don’t get big huge exciting developments most of the time you get iterative development if you want big and exciting well that’s not sciences job it’s not there to entertain you. I don’t know what you want.

        • that_one_guy@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Only appreciating the big flashy outcomes of science is exactly how you end up with no science funding. Iterating and improving something is important work that should be applauded.