Reply To: Physics Nobel to Big Bangers

[Brian H]

vansig wrote:

this is getting pretty close to the defination of theoretical break even.

Although not continuous, the principle of dynamic equilibrium easily translates to plasma focus, when you consider it to be a sequence of repeating cycles. Q shouldn’t really be that hard to understand.

but you also have: gain

let’s not redefine/muddle the terms. they’re supposed to be mathematically concise.

i understand gain more in terms of each individual fusion reaction, where it should be the simple ratio of
(energy out) / (energy in).

if you think about it, if ANY fusion occurs, at all, this should be >1. which is why, i think its more useful to have
Q = (energy out – energy in) / (energy in), per cycle.
You can get fusion in a basement fusor, but the total fusion energy is far less than the electrical power used to force it to happen.