Anonymously contributed:
The 192 lasers of the National Ignition Facility have so far failed to focus enough energy on a tiny fuel pellet to initiate nuclear fusion.
Click below to continue reading:
http://www.physicstoday.org/daily_edition/politics_and_policy/1.2657141
The 192 lasers of the National Ignition Facility have so far failed to focus enough energy on a tiny fuel pellet to initiate nuclear fusion.
Click below to continue reading:
http://www.physicstoday.org/daily_edition/politics_and_policy/1.2657141
Comments
Scooby's note: commenter: please wait for post to be published before commenting; do not comment in the suggested topics area.
Vic Reis
Time for bonuses, all around, for the managers who were such good liars they could fib to see NIF pushed through to completion with enormous cost overruns and long time delays. It's been a lab management "career builder" for decades.
Dr. Steven Koonin, DOE/ NNSA, Physics Today
It appears that Koonin finally "let the cat out of the bag" and then attempted to "stuff it back in" with his double-talk.
How about making a giant pit and throwing money in it? In 10 years it will do great things.
The point of NIF is to do physical studies (experiments) to understand small-scale ignition physics. The studies are now underway. NIF is now doing what it is designed to do.
All the attributes necessary to fully investigate the physical regime.
How about giving it some time?
Remember the LHC which run for about 5 days and then broke down and had to be repaired for over a year. Now it is running fine, albeit still at lower energy and is slowly ramping up.
Large machines like this are more complicated than just your regular PMT.
And all this griping of LLNL vs LANL is getting really old. It would help our future much more if we would be united instead of pointing fingers at each other.
November 24, 2011 9:22 AM
Do you not know that this has been going on since Teller, having been booted from Los Alamos for his arrogance, convinced Congress that the US needed another nuclear weapon lab in the early 50's? Think where the word would be if the thermonuclear design (the "super") had never been pursued.
November 23, 2011 12:06 PM
Small-scale ignition physics? Please! You are implying that NIF has achieved ignition, which it hasn't and won't. Is that you Moses trying to burn more money on this billion dollar fraud?
November 24, 2011 9:08 PM
The "whole NIF concept" (unspoken) was to do nuclear weapons physics studies under the false umbrella of fusion energy research.
No, In layman's terms, they are walking the path, they have not come to the end of the journey. The operational NIF laser and target diagnostics are allowing scientists to characterize this regime, as intended.
A very exciting time for those involved.
All can still place bets as to the outcome, but the important point is, the outcome is now being pursued and will occur.
There is not enough information available today to make this statement with certainty. Better to postpone it 100 years. At that time, the NIF results and the possible consequences will be determined.
Remember, Ben Franklin's toying with kites didn't lead to the light bulb for 100 years.
The Curies turn of the century isolation and study of radionuclides didn't yield a practical use until 1945 and power production until 1953.
Quantum mechanics lead to the laser and electronic circuits about 40 years after its discovery. The telescope that Galileo used to upset the theory of the heavens, is still leading to discoveries 500 years after its monumental discoveries.
Knowledge and innovation take their own sweet time. NIF is a fine instrument, wielded by fine minds. It may lead to something useful or may not.
November 27, 2011 6:56 PM"
I agree I do not think a valid opinion on NIF's success or failure could be made for another 100-500years. Even if NIF is declared a failure it will have paid a way for success of the followup machines, thus making NIF really a success. Look at how many times alternatives to classical mechanics failed until quantum mechanics came along, however it is these alternatives that paved the way for quantum mechanics. These are exciting times indeed.
While this may be correct, should the country pay billions for the project during an economic depression? Maybe yes or maybe no.
November 29, 2011 3:33 AM"
We are not in a depression and even if that does happen than yes we should put billions in to keep people working and investing for the future. Have you heard of the Hoover Dam?, lots of working people and great payoff for a long time. There is a chance NIF could lead to a knew energy source that could replace oil, that alone is worth trying. Ok your right we should billions more on Banker bailouts.
The Hoover Dam did something productive and supplied electricity to the western US. All NIF does is suck-up lots of power and produce nothing of real value! Some analogy.
December 1, 2011 5:26 PM
Surely you realize that Mcmillan and Knapp are LLNL people through-and-through??
November 30, 2011 11:58 AM
Don't forget the infamous Magnetic Fusion Test Facility (MFTF), X-ray Laser, and Brilliant Pebble Kool-Aid flavors that fizzled.
Not true.
MFTF was an incremental step in the advancement of magnetic confinement of plasma. It studied the characteristics of a magnetic plug at the end of a magnetic bottle to trap elevated temperature plasma on a large-scale, with significant advances in the technology of the application of superconductors to large electromagnets.
The plasma physics were judged to be not worth pursuing further experimentally on such a large scale under the reduced funding for magnetic fusion at the time, when the smaller parallel experiment TMX showed that adequate confinement of the plug region was unlikely to be achieved experimentally.
The technology of confinement systems, the large vacuum system,the neutral beams, the electromagnets and cryogenic systems were run successfully in a technology demonstration. This technology base is now one of the key steptones on which the more promising magnetic confinement technique, toroidal confinement, will be scaled up in an international collaboration in France,ITER, with operation beginning in 2025-2030. Again, not a reactor, but an experiment.
So MFTF was a successful scientific endeavor, it answered the question of whether scale-up of plasma confinement in a magnetically plugged solenoid was promising. The answer, not a promsing as other methods. It demonstrated the scale-up of key technologies that will be useful.
The point you miss is, if an outcome of an experiment is known, it is often not worth doing. Therefore, setbacks and failures are a necessary part of science.
Don't like it, stick with farming.
Oh wait, it too, has uncertainty.
F. Winterberg, Professor of Physics, University of Nevada.
F. Winterberg
F. Winterberg