> achieving the actual energy break even instead of laser energy break even.
Can someone elaborate on why laser energy break even was even a big deal? Why does that matter? Doesn't only total net energy matter?
Can someone elaborate on why laser energy break even was even a big deal? Why does that matter? Doesn't only total net energy matter?
Basically, they confirmed that it is possible to have a controlled fusion reaction where the reaction puts out more energy than was put into the reaction, a prerequisite step to being able to put out more energy than was put into the entire machine.
Everyone assumed that controlled ignition was possible, but it's still meaningful to be able to prove it experimentally, particularly since now they can probe the limits and understand how different factors affect the result.
Due to the amount of energy being put through them (particularly since it was pulsed), any imperfections would be amplified, quickly rendering the component unusable. They ended up developing an entire automated system for fixing these using an approach I can't recall.
So I guess the losses in terms of reaching break even (which this facility is not specifically aiming for, its main purpose is to ensure our hydrogen bombs still work) are the electricity-to-laser efficiency (IIRC these lasers are pretty old now and less efficient than modern lasers), making optics which can better tolerate the energy, getting the timing right so that the pellet is compressed equally (any imbalances manifest as reduced efficiency) and making better pellets (since of course, this is also an energy intensive process at the moment).
It's a small milestone, but it's a very important stepping stone if there's going to be any future for it. Getting it to the commercial power plant stage is a much more holistic problem that will probably take 10x more investment which no one wants to spend sight unseen.