Skip to main content

NIF results

Image
By scooby
NIF results published as a PRL http://physics.aps.org/articles/v7/13

Comments

Anonymous said…
At least the title is neutral and there aren't a hundred authors.
2/06/2014 7:22 PM
http://llnlthetruestory.blogspot.com/2013/06/what-waste.html said…
Haha! The previous poster is quite correct. While there are definitely issues with NIF, at least LLNL has papers in PRL.

It seems like the only thing Sandia is proud of is still the chili cookoff (they're so proud of it that they put it in their newsletter). But it has not generated any papers, awards, and is continuously ridiculed.

http://llnlthetruestory.blogspot.com/2013/06/what-waste.html

" Tim Shepodd (8223) liked the moniker and agreed to call it the “chili cookoff.” But there was no chili involved, and the only “cooking” had to do with the kind of chemicals not usually found on Sandia grounds. "
2/07/2014 1:22 AM
Anonymous said…

NIF goes in for the kill...Checkmate.

The machine works, it is making progress, and ignition is still possible. Give the NIF bashing a break.
2/07/2014 6:28 AM
Anonymous said…
Key words are, "high adiabat", that means they are not trying to compress the fuel (as they need to if they want to get densities high enough to ignite), they've spoiled the drive shape and exchanged density for volume and areal density. Interesting, but not a path to ignition or a breakthrough, and this exact scheme was discussed years ago as a "meet the milestone" move. But PRL-worthy, sure.
2/07/2014 6:52 AM
Anonymous said…
Interesting but a long way from ignition.
2/07/2014 7:10 AM
Anonymous said…
I found the article to be self-congratulatory and not of great use to the scientific community. So what if they designed a non igniting capsule that agrees with their codes. I suppose that sounds good to the LLNL management who relies on codes for their understanding of everything. It doesn't answer the question as to why the ignition designs with a million man hours of work into them failed. They also assume that because they can calculate these high adiabat capsules they can find a path to low adiabat ignition capsules that work. Won't they just fail and disagree with the simulations just like before? I think the assumption is that now they can finesse their way into ignition. Sound like another "tuning" campaign.
2/08/2014 7:00 AM
Anonymous said…
The main problem with the low adiabat designs seems to be that the central densities were never close to what they were expected to be. Multiple people came to this same conclusion in different ways, and if there's a simple reason why ignition was never less than 3 orders of magnitude away, it's because the densities were too low. If they can figure out how to use this high-adiabat data to learn why the low-adiabat densities were too low, they might make progress. But the program is unfortunately driven by incompetent people who think they are one tweak away from a big boom, and until those people go away or are pushed away they won't make progress.
2/08/2014 7:15 AM
Anonymous said…
February 8, 2014 at 7:00 AM said: "Sound like another "tuning" campaign."

But I think he mispelled "tinkering"
2/09/2014 12:30 PM
Anonymous said…
The incredible progress at NIf is finally starting to get some deserved attention, see http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/13/science/giant-laser-complex-makes-fusion-advance.html?hp&_r=0 .

LLNL has really turned the corner and appears to be moving forward again.
2/12/2014 6:55 PM
Anonymous said…
LLNL has really turned the corner and appears to be moving forward again.

February 12, 2014 at 6:55 PM

Based on NIF???!!!??? What a joke. I want what you're smoking.
2/12/2014 7:13 PM
Anonymous said…
It's the same story on the same shots, nothing new.
2/12/2014 8:14 PM
Anonymous said…
PRL trumped by Nature ! The bozos need to get their s**t together
2/13/2014 3:34 PM
Anonymous said…
I get the feeling that the applied physics community is circling the wagons on this. Their credibility is at stake and they are breaking out the lipstick.
2/13/2014 5:53 PM
Anonymous said…
"Based on NIF???!!!??? What a joke. I want what you're smoking.

February 12, 2014 at 7:13 PM"

You're a joke.
2/13/2014 6:38 PM
Anonymous said…
You're a joke.

February 13, 2014 at 6:38 PM

Excellent, insightful contribution. Thank you.
2/13/2014 7:16 PM
Anonymous said…
"Excellent, insightful contribution. Thank you.

February 13, 2014 at 7:16 PM"

And saying "NIF SUCKS" is an insightful contribution?
2/13/2014 8:01 PM
Anonymous said…
And saying "NIF SUCKS" is an insightful contribution?

February 13, 2014 at 8:01 PM

Funny, I read back over the entire thread and didn't see that anywhere. Smoking the stuff again, huh?
2/13/2014 8:32 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Plutonium Shots on NIF.

By scooby
Tri-Valley Cares needs to be on this if they aren't already. We need to make sure that NNSA and LLNL does not make good on promises to pursue such stupid ideas as doing Plutonium experiments on NIF. The stupidity arises from the fact that a huge population is placed at risk in the short and long term. Why do this kind of experiment in a heavily populated area? Only a moron would push that kind of imbecile area. Do it somewhere else in the god forsaken hills of Los Alamos. Why should the communities in the Bay Area be subjected to such increased risk just because the lab's NIF has failed twice and is trying the Hail Mary pass of doing an SNM experiment just to justify their existence? Those Laser EoS techniques and the people analyzing the raw data are all just BAD anyways. You know what comes next after they do the experiment. They'll figure out that they need larger samples. More risk for the local population. Stop this imbecilic pursuit. They wan...
155 comments
Read more

Trump is to gut the labs.

By scooby
The budget has a 20% decrease to DOE office of science, 20% cut to NIH. NASA also gets a cut. This will  have a huge negative effect on the lab. Crazy, juts crazy. He also wants to cut NEA and PBS, this may not seem like  a big deal but they get very little money and do great things.
124 comments
Read more

LLNL un-diversity

By scooby
Actual post from Dec. 15 from one of the streams. This is a real topic. As far as promoting women and minorities even if their qualifications are not as good as the white male scientists, I am all for it. We need diversity at the lab and if that is what it takes, so be it.  Quit your whining. Look around the lab, what do you see? White male geezers. How many African Americans do you see at the lab? Virtually none. LLNL is one of the MOST undiverse places you will see. Face it folks, LLNL is an institution of white male privilege and they don't want to give up their privileged positions. California, a state of majority Hispanics has the "crown jewel" LLNL nestled in the middle of it with very FEW Hispanics at all!
79 comments
Read more