Talk:Heavy ion fusion
 | A fact from Heavy ion fusion appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 21 April 2021 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
Did you know nomination
edit- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Vaticidalprophet (talk) 07:14, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- ... that although John Foster long-ago described heavy ion fusion as "the conservative approach" to a working fusion reactor, no large-scale system has ever been built?
Source: burke, 59
- Reviewed: Lucia Votano
Created by Maury Markowitz (talk). Self-nominated at 20:48, 24 March 2021 (UTC).
This substantial article is new enough and long enough. The hook facts are cited inline, the article is neutral, and I detected no copyright or other policy issues. A QPQ has been done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:51, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
Failed to obtain cited data from reference
editIn order for the fusion reactions to produce enough energy to match the original energy of the laser, it will have to produce at least 4 MJ, and for practical reasons, at least three times that, implying the ratio of input laser energy to output fusion energy,[c] or gain, has to be on the order of hundreds or thousands. To date, the record on NIF is 1.3 MJ of fusion from 2 MJ of laser output,[5] from 422 MJ of electricity, so it is extremely unlikely the current approach could ever be used for power production.[6]
The values 4 MJ, 2 MJ and 422 MJ is not obtainable from the cited references. The sandias web page does not give these numbers and the paper linked from the sandias web page 404's. I discovered this when going through the edits of 198.102.151.242, which seems to be occasionally vandalizing (e.g. in this edit) · · · Omnissiahs hierophant (talk) 19:14, 8 January 2022 (UTC)