The information you present is very interesting, thanks. But I have some suggestions for improving the presentation and helping viewers: 1) use a microphone to eliminate the echoing; 2) try to avoid "reading aloud" because it makes for unnatural, monotonous speech that is hard for listeners to parse; 3) shorten your sentences - the long sentences probably arise from reading text aloud, and make you either run out of breath towards the end of the sentence, or to unnatural and confusing breaks in the flow when you take a new breath in the middle of a sentence. HTH!
Do I really need to point out the MASSIVE glaring show-stopping fault in Xcimer's plan to "only fire at a single [fusion] pellet every few seconds"?? A power plant typically produces around half a gigawatt to a gigawatt of power to the grid, the Carnot efficiency of most plants is around 35%, meaning the plant's reactor is actually producing 1.5 to 3 gigawatts of thermal power to actually spin the turbines. There is a REASON every proposed hypothetical future laser ICF reactor assumes the laser will need to fire on at least 10 pellets per second (10 Hz), because 2 gigawatts of power (2 gigajoules per second) divided into 10 pellet implosions is actually doable; it means each implosion "only" needs to release 200 megajoules of energy. A reactor firing once every 10 seconds like Xcimer proposes will need to produce ONE HUNDRED TIMES AS MUCH energy as that per shot - 20 GIGAjoules per implosion. That's the equivalent of FIVE TONS of TNT going off with every target shot. Do you know how incredibly enormous a target chamber you will need to contain a five ton TNT blast is going to be, such that it isn't blown to smithereens and destroying the building it's contained in on the first shot?
I'm not a fan of inertial confinement approaches, and even less so of laser-induced implosion, but the comparison to the effects of five tons of TNT is not correct. The energy released in a TNT explosion goes into the production of a large amount of hot, high-pressure gas that indeed tends to push out and away any close, confining structure. The energy released by the fusion of a much smaller mass of D+T does not produce such tons of hot gas, but produces a lot of high-energy neutrons which can be absorbed in surrounding material (the liquid salt) and heat that material without blowing it up.
@@NiklasHolsti I will grant that the comparison is imperfect, but the blast wave and amount of either FLiBe or liquid PbLi vapor created with a 20GJ detonation is still going to be unbelievably huge and require an absolutely enormous target chamber, to say nothing of the hellacious effects on the final optics.
You cannot compare TNT explosions with explosions from fusion pellets. Most of the energy in DT fusion (4/5) is caried by neutrons traveling close to the speed of light. Because neutrons are uncharged they penitrate deep into the surrounding blanket material. Neutrons thermalize (slow down) by colliding with atoms inside the blanket. This increases the blanket's temperature. Some materials contract when heated, but if the blanket is made of FLiBe, increasing the temperature causes expansion. Either way, the pressure change due to a change in density would be insignificant and confined within the blanket material itself. If the reactor is going to be blown to smithereens, as Muonium1 seems to think it will be, then the explosive force needs to come from the outwardly directed mometum. However, compared to TNT explosions, an equivalent energy nuclear explosion only produces a tiny fraction as muh outwardly directed momentum. This is because momentum (mv) and kinetic energy (mv * v/2) are conserved, and nuclear reactions produce particles having more than a million times the kinetic energy that chemical reactions produce. Unless I am mistaken, the fusion energy from an Xcimer pellet might be measured in tons of TNT and still only produce a firecracker's worth of outwardly directed explosive force. :-)
@@michaeldeeth811 Another zero-content channel reply, what a surprise. 🙄 Where exactly do you think the energy of 20 gigajoules which is *deposited over about a microsecond* into thousand degree molten lead-lithium alloy is going to go? It's going to VAPORIZE large quantities of the metal and cause the formation of a powerful shock wave in the target chamber. It's literally a miniature thermonuclear bomb going off. 50% of a nuclear bomb's energy is emitted in the form of a blast / shock wave. So yes, you are mistaken. Very.
Ours is a paper bin sized device that inputs deuterium and outputs helium and electric current. Originally made at the Rutherford lab in 1969 . It cost just over $1000. I suggest we use it. The tokomaks are expensive failures. Christopher strevens
Many cynical opinions and quite justified but CFS has given a date and schedule to achieve this goal , it's not in government or corporations for this source of energy to eventuate . Just like a cure for cancer isn't in the interest of big influential corporations and their representatives in government
Im considering taking a job at Xcimer, thanks for the extra info around the topic and the competitors!
The information you present is very interesting, thanks. But I have some suggestions for improving the presentation and helping viewers: 1) use a microphone to eliminate the echoing; 2) try to avoid "reading aloud" because it makes for unnatural, monotonous speech that is hard for listeners to parse; 3) shorten your sentences - the long sentences probably arise from reading text aloud, and make you either run out of breath towards the end of the sentence, or to unnatural and confusing breaks in the flow when you take a new breath in the middle of a sentence. HTH!
It's probably been awhile since he has taken a communication course.
This channel has always been that way.
It's the same with almost all the presenters
Book names in the background?
Do I really need to point out the MASSIVE glaring show-stopping fault in Xcimer's plan to "only fire at a single [fusion] pellet every few seconds"?? A power plant typically produces around half a gigawatt to a gigawatt of power to the grid, the Carnot efficiency of most plants is around 35%, meaning the plant's reactor is actually producing 1.5 to 3 gigawatts of thermal power to actually spin the turbines. There is a REASON every proposed hypothetical future laser ICF reactor assumes the laser will need to fire on at least 10 pellets per second (10 Hz), because 2 gigawatts of power (2 gigajoules per second) divided into 10 pellet implosions is actually doable; it means each implosion "only" needs to release 200 megajoules of energy. A reactor firing once every 10 seconds like Xcimer proposes will need to produce ONE HUNDRED TIMES AS MUCH energy as that per shot - 20 GIGAjoules per implosion. That's the equivalent of FIVE TONS of TNT going off with every target shot. Do you know how incredibly enormous a target chamber you will need to contain a five ton TNT blast is going to be, such that it isn't blown to smithereens and destroying the building it's contained in on the first shot?
Such details never seem to worry the fusion community: it really is a load of hot air.
I'm not a fan of inertial confinement approaches, and even less so of laser-induced implosion, but the comparison to the effects of five tons of TNT is not correct. The energy released in a TNT explosion goes into the production of a large amount of hot, high-pressure gas that indeed tends to push out and away any close, confining structure. The energy released by the fusion of a much smaller mass of D+T does not produce such tons of hot gas, but produces a lot of high-energy neutrons which can be absorbed in surrounding material (the liquid salt) and heat that material without blowing it up.
@@NiklasHolsti I will grant that the comparison is imperfect, but the blast wave and amount of either FLiBe or liquid PbLi vapor created with a 20GJ detonation is still going to be unbelievably huge and require an absolutely enormous target chamber, to say nothing of the hellacious effects on the final optics.
You cannot compare TNT explosions with explosions from fusion pellets. Most of the energy in DT fusion (4/5) is caried by neutrons traveling close to the speed of light. Because neutrons are uncharged they penitrate deep into the surrounding blanket material. Neutrons thermalize (slow down) by colliding with atoms inside the blanket. This increases the blanket's temperature. Some materials contract when heated, but if the blanket is made of FLiBe, increasing the temperature causes expansion. Either way, the pressure change due to a change in density would be insignificant and confined within the blanket material itself. If the reactor is going to be blown to smithereens, as Muonium1 seems to think it will be, then the explosive force needs to come from the outwardly directed mometum. However, compared to TNT explosions, an equivalent energy nuclear explosion only produces a tiny fraction as muh outwardly directed momentum. This is because momentum (mv) and kinetic energy (mv * v/2) are conserved, and nuclear reactions produce particles having more than a million times the kinetic energy that chemical reactions produce. Unless I am mistaken, the fusion energy from an Xcimer pellet might be measured in tons of TNT and still only produce a firecracker's worth of outwardly directed explosive force. :-)
@@michaeldeeth811 Another zero-content channel reply, what a surprise. 🙄 Where exactly do you think the energy of 20 gigajoules which is *deposited over about a microsecond* into thousand degree molten lead-lithium alloy is going to go? It's going to VAPORIZE large quantities of the metal and cause the formation of a powerful shock wave in the target chamber. It's literally a miniature thermonuclear bomb going off. 50% of a nuclear bomb's energy is emitted in the form of a blast / shock wave. So yes, you are mistaken. Very.
Ours is a paper bin sized device that inputs deuterium and outputs helium and electric current. Originally made at the Rutherford lab in 1969 . It cost just over $1000. I suggest we use it. The tokomaks are expensive failures.
Christopher strevens
Many cynical opinions and quite justified but CFS has given a date and schedule to achieve this goal , it's not in government or corporations for this source of energy to eventuate . Just like a cure for cancer isn't in the interest of big influential corporations and their representatives in government
She doesn't read my texts..