Well, if the definition of "net energy" keeps expanding to include more of the experimental infrastructure, that is progress and we are just splitting hairs about wording - which is a real waste, considering they are one of the few groups with consistent tangible experimental improvements.
In 2021, that was 1.3 megajoules, or net in comparison to the energy absorbed by the fuel. This is a bigger milestone at 2.5 megajoules, since it is in reference to the energy in the lasers themselves.
> that is progress and we are just splitting hairs about wording - which is a real waste
we (those who don't have deep expertise) trying to understand what is "breakthrough" and "net energy" in this case comparing to previous claims. Your explanation added some value on this, thank you.
I have been following this work for a few years but I am no expert. Both numbers, and both explanations as to their significance, are from the articles linked in this thread. The next step will likely be net energy in respect to the entire system - or unqualified net energy. From there it is work on improving efficiency and scaling to commercial usefulness, which of course might be just as hard.
In 2021, that was 1.3 megajoules, or net in comparison to the energy absorbed by the fuel. This is a bigger milestone at 2.5 megajoules, since it is in reference to the energy in the lasers themselves.