In Pursuit of Ignition on the National Ignition Facility

Point out news stories, on the net or in mainstream media, related to polywell fusion.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

Skipjack
Posts: 6805
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:29 pm

Re: In Pursuit of Ignition on the National Ignition Facility

Post by Skipjack »

paperburn1 wrote:March 2014
The country's defense ministry said an Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM), which has a minimum range of more than 3,400 miles, was launched.
The missile is primarily designed for nuclear weapons delivery and it was fired at Russia's Kapustin Yar test range east of the Ukrainian border.
Sounds like the Russians are still actively involved in "Testing"
Testing a missile is not the same as testing a nuclear warhead. Both the US and Russia have signed a test treaty.

paperburn1
Posts: 2484
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 5:53 am
Location: Third rock from the sun.

Re: In Pursuit of Ignition on the National Ignition Facility

Post by paperburn1 »

well Not as simple as that stated.
Without divulging any great details , nuclear weapons have a shelf life. There is a huge inspection, testing, preventive maintenance program that goes along with the warhead.
So the short version of this if your testing new launch vehicles you have a active warhead program in place.
I am not a nuclear physicist, but play one on the internet.

ladajo
Posts: 6258
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: North East Coast

Re: In Pursuit of Ignition on the National Ignition Facility

Post by ladajo »

Skipjack wrote:
ladajo wrote:Skip, your incessant anti-NIF blathering is fine if you had a real reason for it. You don't really.

Personally, I prefer to test nuclear weapons the NIF way, vice popping them off for real. That in itself makes it worth it.
And if you don't think nuclear weapons testing is important, then you are begging for being labelled niave and an uninformed idealist.
I think solving the energy problem is more important for national security that nuclear weapons testing. The Russians are doing fine without it.
The primary reasond no one has tried to fire nukes over the last decades is beacause while they have levels of uncertainty about their kit, they ALL know that the US kit works and works well. As soon as the US introduces doubt about ability, others will act.

I guess you are leaning towards niave. Look around the world. Tzar Vladimir saw absolutely no deterrence for his land grab. One he has planned for years. China sees none for nine dash line. It is not about kit in these cases it is about will. Thanks to Obamacoward on the will front.
If they thought the kit was no good, they would'nt give a crap at all about will.

Wake up and smell reality. Other nations seek to take your stuff and control your life for the gain of the elite that run them. NIF is about deterence. And personally, again, I am much happier to do it that way than to periodically crap up my planet.
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)

jcoady
Posts: 141
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 4:36 pm

Re: In Pursuit of Ignition on the National Ignition Facility

Post by jcoady »

Here is a link to another talk at PPPL about nuclear weapons.

http://www.pppl.gov/events/colloquium-r ... -terrorism

ladajo
Posts: 6258
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: North East Coast

Re: In Pursuit of Ignition on the National Ignition Facility

Post by ladajo »

In my own opinion I think we are greater risk for nuclear use than at any time in the last decades. Part of my view is based in the low political risk calculus for state use of tactical weapons. Especially in a maritime context.
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)

Skipjack
Posts: 6805
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:29 pm

Re: In Pursuit of Ignition on the National Ignition Facility

Post by Skipjack »

Yes, but the energy problems are part of the reasons why we might have a nuclear war in the first place. It is all about oil, gas and coal right now. Even the whole Crimea mess is about the gas pipeline going from Russia through Ukraine. And if you don't understand that, then you are the one who is naïve.
The nuclear weapons that we have are plenty good as a deterrent right now and as I said the Russians have tested their nukes in just as long and seem to be doing fine without a NIF.

ladajo
Posts: 6258
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: North East Coast

Re: In Pursuit of Ignition on the National Ignition Facility

Post by ladajo »

I am glad you are so in deep with the Russians that you know the state of their nuclear arsenal.

I am sad that once again you indicate how niave you are.

You really should look up what the Russians are dependent on the Ukraine for. Some was in Crimea. Some was not. The Russians could give a crap about the gas pipeline. They care more about the arms industry. In fact, one thing they really care about is what nuclear capability they have left. And they are EXTREMELY concerned that ALL their heavy boosters come from the Ukraine. And part of that concern is how old the inventory they have is. Gas. Right. That goes right out the window with the West now ever more determined to cut off need for Russian gas.

Tzar Vladimir is not done. He either gives up Crimea and hopes for the best, or he takes the whole enchilada. Because if he does not, he royally screwed his ability to build high end arms.

For the Russians holding the power in Russia, it is about the money, and always has been. And arms is big money.

Wake up. Reality is knocking.

If the Russians were doing fine, do you really think they would have grabbed Crimea and threatened others? They are not done yet. And they are far from "doing allright".

Maybe Austria is on the short list after the land bridge is done. Russians have a long memory, and Austria is not a happy thought for them.
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)

Skipjack
Posts: 6805
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:29 pm

Re: In Pursuit of Ignition on the National Ignition Facility

Post by Skipjack »

ladajo wrote:I am glad you are so in deep with the Russians that you know the state of their nuclear arsenal.
Well they have obviously not done any nuclear tests, or we would know about it. A facility of the size and cost of the NIF would also be hard to keep a secret.
So enlighten me.

ladajo wrote: I am sad that once again you indicate how niave you are.
Ad hominem!
ladajo wrote: And they are EXTREMELY concerned that ALL their heavy boosters come from the Ukraine. And part of that concern is how old the inventory they have is. Gas. Right. That goes right out the window with the West now ever more determined to cut off need for Russian gas.
Let me see:
Khrunichev
RSC Energia
TsSKB-Progress
etc. etc
I think they have enough access to heavy booster manufacturers.

ladajo
Posts: 6258
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: North East Coast

Re: In Pursuit of Ignition on the National Ignition Facility

Post by ladajo »

The Russian's have been trying to build something like NIF. They can't afford it, and don't have the knowhow. As of now, they are limited to code and maintenance. Every day that goes by, pushes them further down the path of uncertainty for viability. You probably don't know, but these weapons do not store well over the long term. And oh by the way, Russia is bound by the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. Or did you forget?

They really are in a bind over warheads and boosters.
Of late they have been working furvently to build their own boosters. But, they have not yet carried that through. Crimea will put more pressure on them to do so.

The ability to push satellites and other loads is on a short final if they can not make amends to Ukraine.

It also would not surprise me if the Khazaks looked to get out of the deal with Russia on the launch site. My contacts there have indicated they are having lots of thoughts about Russia with the Crimea bit. Nothing positive.

As for my observation of your niavity, it is based on your statements as you made them, therefore not an Ad Hominem. You think that we can do away with nukes. I would love to think so as well. However, your niaveness shows as you don't see that as long as the other guy has them, you would be an idiot to get rid of your own. We are painted into a corner on this one. The only hope is that those with intent, see that there are some that keep the weapons as a balancing point. And if those with intent gave them up, so would most likely the balancers.

Putin's Pyrrhic Victory

A New Hope, Not so much.

Oh, the Russians really are dependant on Ukraine and Kazakhstan
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)

ladajo
Posts: 6258
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: North East Coast

Re: In Pursuit of Ignition on the National Ignition Facility

Post by ladajo »

The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)

Skipjack
Posts: 6805
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:29 pm

Re: In Pursuit of Ignition on the National Ignition Facility

Post by Skipjack »

ladajo wrote: You probably don't know, but these weapons do not store well over the long term.
Well, I want to see how much the NIF really helps with that. Some aspects of it, but most of them it wont.
ladajo wrote: And oh by the way, Russia is bound by the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. Or did you forget?
Which I mentioned earlier, Mr Condescending.
ladajo wrote: Of late they have been working furvently to build their own boosters. But, they have not yet carried that through. Crimea will put more pressure on them to do so.
The ability to push satellites and other loads is on a short final if they can not make amends to Ukraine.
Again, this is ridiculous. The majority of the Russian launcher industry is in Russia. I gave a few examples in my previous post, but you chose to ignore it.
ladajo wrote: It also would not surprise me if the Khazaks looked to get out of the deal with Russia on the launch site. My contacts there have indicated they are having lots of thoughts about Russia with the Crimea bit. Nothing positive.
Actually Russia has been trying to get out of it as well. They are building a new Launch site on Russian soil, have been building it for a while. Clearly, you don't know much about Russias space capabilities.
ladajo wrote: As for my observation of your niavity, it is based on your statements as you made them, therefore not an Ad Hominem. You think that we can do away with nukes.
You really don't know how to make a convincing argument. You also clearly lack reading comprehension.
I did not say we can do away with nukes. I say that we can do with testing them as much or as little as the Russians do. Anything that applies to us, applies to Russia as well and for some reason I think that our stockpile is in a better condition than Russias.

ladajo
Posts: 6258
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: North East Coast

Re: In Pursuit of Ignition on the National Ignition Facility

Post by ladajo »

The majority of the Russian launcher industry is in Russia.
You are wrong. Obviously you did not look at the links I provided you which discuss ad naseum the Russian dependence on former satellite countries, primarily Ukraine and Kazahkstan.
They are building a new Launch site on Russian soil, have been building it for a while.
Again, you clearly did not read the links I gave you. Key words from you, "building it for a while". There is a reason for that. And it is not up and running yet, nor will it have the ability to match the throw energies that Baikonur does.
Well, I want to see how much the NIF really helps with that. Some aspects of it, but most of them it wont.
You demonstrably do not know what NIF really does, nor how it is integral to Stockpile management, even after so many posts discussing it and providing you reference material.
What do you base your opinions on? Provide some proof please for your assertions "Some" and "won't".
Which I mentioned earlier, Mr Condescending.
You were the one who implied that Russia seems to not need to do testing. I merely pointed out why they do not do testing.
I say that we can do with testing them as much or as little as the Russians do
And this is my whole point. The Russians have no effective nor reliable means to check on stockpile integrity.
We do. It is called NIF. As a result, our stockpile IS in better condition than Russia's.
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)

Skipjack
Posts: 6805
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:29 pm

Re: In Pursuit of Ignition on the National Ignition Facility

Post by Skipjack »

ladajo wrote:
The majority of the Russian launcher industry is in Russia.
You are wrong. Obviously you did not look at the links I provided you which discuss ad naseum the Russian dependence on former satellite countries, primarily Ukraine and Kazahkstan.
They don't. They talk about some temporary dependence for some launch vehicles and some ICBMs (notably old outdated models that were scheduled to be decommissioned anyway, but are kept in service a bit longer (2018, which is just 4 years from now). I am sure they will be fine until then. Their most active launch vehicles and their new ICBMs are unaffected. The rest I am sure is manageable for the near term.
Same goes for the new Vostochny Cosmodrome which will be ready in 2018 as well, could probably be ready earlier with more funding (Seeing SpaceX being much faster with building launch infrastructure this seems to be a valid assumption).
ladajo wrote: You demonstrably do not know what NIF really does, nor how it is integral to Stockpile management, even after so many posts discussing it and providing you reference material.
What do you base your opinions on? Provide some proof please for your assertions "Some" and "won't".
No, but you seem to be oblivious to the fact that the NIF can not test every aspect of a nuclear warhead.
ladajo wrote: And this is my whole point. The Russians have no effective nor reliable means to check on stockpile integrity.
We do. It is called NIF. As a result, our stockpile IS in better condition than Russia's.
And, if the Russians are fine with that, why aren't we? Slowly phase out the oldest warheads that are currently in storage (and not deployed anyway). The rest is still plenty good to obliterate any enemy and half of the rest of the globe. I honestly am fine with being able to obliterate one enemy. The rest will die too, anyway. So why bother?

CharlesKramer
Posts: 149
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 4:20 pm

Re: In Pursuit of Ignition on the National Ignition Facility

Post by CharlesKramer »

http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2015/ph241/baumer1/
"At the beginning, NIF was expected to achieve ignition with room to spare. But as of February 2015, the best results at NIF are a factor or three short of achieving the Lawson criterion. [9] How did NIF end up missing its ignition target by an order of magnitude? Part of answer lies in the fundamental fluid dynamics of Rayleigh-Taylor instabilities."

"useful power output from fusion will require more than mere ignition - a fusion gain of ~100 will be required for a reactor to be economically viable....to the necessary laser cooling time, mean that the maximum rate of firings at NIF is ~1 per day. This would need to increase by many orders of magnitude, to a repetition rate of 10s of shots per second in a power plant setting. [11]"
This one is a bit more optimistic...
http://helian.net/blog/2015/03/21/inert ... st-mortem/
things didn’t go as planned. The actual fusion yield achieved in the best experiment was less than that predicted by the best radiation hydrodynamics computer codes available at the time by a factor of about 50, give or take. The LLNL paper in Physics of Plasmas discusses some of the reasons for this, and describes subsequent improvements to the codes that account for some, but not all, of the experimental discrepancies.

...

Finally, the results of the NIC in no way “proved” that ignition on the NIF is impossible... In other words, while the results of the NIC are disappointing, stay tuned. Pace Dr. Bodner, the scientists at LLNL may yet pull a rabbit out of their hats.
================================
Linkedin: www.linkedin.com/in/charleskramer

Post Reply