Light emission is a significant energy loss mechanism. . Though mentioning Lorentz make me think that you are considering cyclotron radiation. I don't know the percentage , but it is low and Bussard was not concerned about it.
Bremsstruhlung radiation is a different matter. It can be very painful or even devastating, at least for high Z fuels like boron. That is why considerations of diluting the boron with excess hydrogen and dynamic distribution of electron speeds in the Polywell are critical elements in profitable aneutronic fusion possibilities. This was, I believe, Rider's primary criticism for p-B11 fusion. The fusion power could never reach the Bremsstruhlung losses. This is well accepted physics, but it does not account for the two above considerations.
VISIBLE light radiation occurs at energy levels associated with orbital changes of electron orbits - as electrons fall to a lower energy orbits, they emit light, often at visible wavelengths. Once you reach plasma where the electron KE is so much that they cannot be considered as orbiting (captured by) nuclei; when they lose energy by curving around a nucleus, or magnetic field (cyclotron radiation), the energy released is more in the UV or X-ray range. Only when these energy drops are small enough is the light emission in the visible spectrum, and this mostly occurs after the recombination events which occur at rates dependent on several factors and accounts for only a tiny (?) fraction of the collisional events. Sometimes the shorter light wavelengths can be converted to longer (less energetic) wavelengths through fluorescence or other mechanisms (?) but this is probably not amenable to significant energy manipulation or recovery.
As mentioned there has been significant efforts to decrease radiation production (Bremsstruhlung). Efforts to recover the energy of the X-rays have not been pursued much in the Polywell community. First off, the KE of the ions in the Polywell is due to electrostatic (electrodynamic if you prefer) forces represented by the potential well, which in turn is due to the injection of high energy electrons. This allows for claimed non Maxwellian thermalized plasma which is a desired component. The Polywell is an accelerator/ amplifier powered by high energy electrical potentials, not collisional heating as in Tokamaks, or any other thermalized approach. Capturing / reflecting x-rays would have to incorporate these thermalizing concerns, so, I suspect, are inappropriate for the Polywell.
Recovering the energy of the x-rays is another matter. Generally, the x-rays give up their energy as heat in the walls, and coolant layers. This heat can be converted to useful (recycled) energy through a steam cycle at perhaps ~ 30% efficiency. This is not enough to overcome the losses as envisioned by Rider, but it brings things closer. Eric Lerner's scheme of converting x-rays to electricity through a bulky photovoltaic process might recover 80-90% of the energy. But this becomes increasingly bulky as machine size increases, and has to consider intervening materials like walls, and coolent layer absorption. It may work for a small device like the Dense Plasma Focus, but is more problematic for machines like the Polywell with magrids, direct conversion grids, etc. In the DPF low x-ray absorption materials like beryllium needs to be used, and there are other tradeoffs that have to be made to work.
In short, I do not see an ability or desire to reflect x-rays, which is a difficult process at best (consider the Chandra x-ray telescope). Recovering the x-ray energy is already at a baseline of ~ 30% if a steam cycle is used. The coolant is necessary for other waste heat anyway , the question is if it is worth running a steam turbine, or just dumping the heat- if direct conversion of the alpha particles delivers sufficient power. Higher conversion efficiency of the x-ray output would be desirable as it could deliver more useful output energy, and perhaps avoid a steam plant. Lerner's patented scheme is the best alternative that I know of, though whether it can be made to work is an open question.
http://www.physicsessays.com/doc/s2005/ ... encies.pdf
Dan Tibbets