• sit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    3 days ago

    Didn’t read the article.

    I have no clue wtf that technology is in detail but wouldn’t it be easy to have a longer reaction time by supplying enough energy? The news should not be how long the reaction lasted but how long it lasted selfreliant.

    • vithigar@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      60
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      I read through it for the details.

      It was net negative, requiring 2MW of power to maintain hydrogen plasma in a state analogous to fusion. The major achievement of this particular experiment was doing so without energies equivalent to a fusion reaction damaging the containing assembly.

      It was purely a test/demonstration of the containment of fusion-like conditions.

        • Omega_Jimes@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          2 days ago

          You need to be the right amount of high to properly understand fusion. Too far either way, and it doesn’t make sense.

          • Cocodapuf@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 days ago

            Eh, fusion isn’t that complicated. You push things together and heat them up until they get even hotter on their own. That’s all that’s happening.