Skip to main content

Ignition?

Without major hardware additions, will NIF ever reach ignition, or did they believe early on, it would take at least ~400 lasers to reach the ignition goal?

Comments

Anonymous said…
They wanted a 10 MJ laser originally. I think that was called the LMF, laser micro fusion facility. Long history.
Anonymous said…
Lux, ignition is to be found. Explore the realm and the realm will reveal riches. In the end the legacy of NIF will not only be ignition but the thousands of trained minds that will be lead stockpile stewardship for the multiple generations. Perhaps on upgrade will be will be necessary just as rigging on a ship sailing across the Atlantic for the first time needs to be changed but any day we will hit land and we are too far out to see to return now. Ed Moses is the Capt Cook of our times. Amazing, fabulous.
Anonymous said…
Totally agree with 8:44 AM. Also note that ARPA-E has funded Rochester LLE Omega to do ignition at <1 MJ, so it is not only possible that NIF can ignite, but smaller machines as well. The key thing is to continue funding these efforts.
Anonymous said…
The number of months that passes before someone posts another NIF post is definitely increasing. A good sign.
Anonymous said…
5/13/2020 4:41 PM

I also agree with 8:44 AM especially the bit about Capt Cook as after all Ed Moses had to be sacrificed on scientific shores by primitive people. The analogy is exact and one to one.

Ok if you don't buy the above argument, we are going to spend 3 Trillion dollars to keep people home I think we can spare a few billion for people to play with lasers. It keeps people paid, it keeps LLNL science going, it will kill a few people, so what is not to like? With trillions and billions to spend why not let some people play in sandboxes?
Anonymous said…
"I think we can spare a few billion for people to play with lasers"

I don't know if you are being sarcastic or not, but I agree fusion research should continue. How the funding is divided up is another question that requires impartial peer review.
Anonymous said…
People in the know say that the laser energy needs to be a thousand times larger.
Anonymous said…
"Impartial peers" don't exist.
Anonymous said…
"Impartial peers" don't exist.

5/14/2020 5:14 PM

Everything is political, fusion science is similar to the how critical literature departments work.

"I don't know if you are being sarcastic or not, but I agree fusion research should continue. How the funding is divided up is another question that requires impartial peer review.

5/14/2020 3:41 PM"

If you give away trillions of dollars it is no longer possible to be cynical. A few billion for NIF would be fine in this case.
Anonymous said…
But, but, what about Z?
Anonymous said…
Echo chambers do exist but not "Impartial peers", probably true.
Anonymous said…
People in the know say that the laser energy needs to be a thousand times larger.

5/14/2020 4:40 PM

Name one.
Anonymous said…
Actually, people in the know say it will take 2-3 times more laser energy, or maybe less with direct drive.

The review this year should clarify a lot for the ignition program.
Anonymous said…
"People in the know say that the laser energy needs to be a thousand times larger."


Reply

"Name one."

How about name ALL that claimed or agreed NIF would have enough energy for ignition as constructed first.
Anonymous said…
I think 1000 times more energy is a bit of exaggeration. With mix and 3D effects it’s probably 10x. I think I saw a NIF presentation that showed that type of scaling with HYDRA calculations.
Anonymous said…
Actually, NIF has proven beyond a doubt that the only people "in the know" about ignition are experienced nuclear weapon designers.
Anonymous said…
According to my history knowledge, the weapons designers were not in favor of NIF. I heard they were told to get onboard. You would never hear Seymour Sack or any of the old timers say anything good about NIF. The laser people gradually took over LLNL. It was a big mistake and now it’s looking like LLNL, with its emphasis on weapons, not laser science, is better positioned for the future.
Anonymous said…
According to my history knowledge, the weapons designers were not in favor of NIF. I heard they were told to get onboard.

5/17/2020 1:59 PM

"I heard..." does not equal "knowledge."
Anonymous said…
"I heard..." does not equal "knowledge."

5/17/2020 5:11 PM

But it is more likely to be knowledge than " I have heard nothing". Not to mention that " I heard" could also mean I know for sure but I am not going give away who I am and what I know, as saying bad things about NIF could be considered by some as a bad move.
Anonymous said…


What is more probable.

NIF, achieving ignition

You dying of Covid-19.

Look at how much money we have spend on the lockdown, I think we can spend a few billion more on NIF.

Popular posts from this blog

Plutonium Shots on NIF.

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...

Trump is to gut the labs.

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.

LLNL un-diversity

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!