NPR

Guy Smiley wrote: Tue Dec 13, 2022 8:31 pm It's weird... the breakthrough was achieved at a facility set up to test the validity of nuclear weapons and used relatively low powered lasers that can't deliver the sustained energy required to push the reaction further...

but they did it. Leaving aside the energy required to run the lasers, the fusion reaction delivered more energy than it took to establish. That's a first.

fishfoodie wrote: Tue Dec 13, 2022 9:13 pm

Guy Smiley wrote: Tue Dec 13, 2022 8:31 pm It's weird... the breakthrough was achieved at a facility set up to test the validity of nuclear weapons and used relatively low powered lasers that can't deliver the sustained energy required to push the reaction further...

but they did it. Leaving aside the energy required to run the lasers, the fusion reaction delivered more energy than it took to establish. That's a first.

That's the bit that sounds like Mafia accounting to me ?

My Physics is rusty, but am I correct in assuming that what they're saying is that, the energy delivered by the lasers to the tiny fuel pod, was "x", & the heat produced by the subsequent fusion was, "y"; & that because y > x, it's all champagne corks popping, & please renew our grants; while ignoring the value of "z", the power necessary to produce "x" ?

EnergiseR2 wrote: Tue Dec 13, 2022 10:37 pm Not convinced. Has a sinclair C5 vibe to it. Had the scientist announcing it a beard?

Raggs wrote: Tue Dec 13, 2022 10:21 pm I'd have thought that larger, more powerful lasers are potentially more efficient too. Usually just making things bigger like this will increase efficiency, but you needed that net positive first, otherwise you're just growing the negative.

Has a stellerator/tokamak style reactor produced a positive yet?

fishfoodie wrote: Tue Dec 13, 2022 9:13 pm

Guy Smiley wrote: Tue Dec 13, 2022 8:31 pm It's weird... the breakthrough was achieved at a facility set up to test the validity of nuclear weapons and used relatively low powered lasers that can't deliver the sustained energy required to push the reaction further...

but they did it. Leaving aside the energy required to run the lasers, the fusion reaction delivered more energy than it took to establish. That's a first.

That's the bit that sounds like Mafia accounting to me ?

My Physics is rusty, but am I correct in assuming that what they're saying is that, the energy delivered by the lasers to the tiny fuel pod, was "x", & the heat produced by the subsequent fusion was, "y"; & that because y > x, it's all champagne corks popping, & please renew our grants; while ignoring the value of "z", the power necessary to produce "x" ?

Biffer wrote: Wed Dec 14, 2022 11:26 am This is my wheelhouse, it's what I do for a living. I get to hear all sorts of mad talks from scientists and the engineers I work with do some pretty amazing things. I'll chuck the wild / cool stuff in here every now and again.

For example, I heard someone talking about quantum radar a while back. Makes your stealth technology completely useless

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/quantum ... detection/

I also know some folk looking at quantum gravimetry from space

https://ggos.org/item/quantum-gravimetry/

This is basically star trek sensors. I kid you not.

PornDog wrote: Wed Dec 14, 2022 11:45 am

Biffer wrote: Wed Dec 14, 2022 11:26 am This is my wheelhouse, it's what I do for a living. I get to hear all sorts of mad talks from scientists and the engineers I work with do some pretty amazing things. I'll chuck the wild / cool stuff in here every now and again.

For example, I heard someone talking about quantum radar a while back. Makes your stealth technology completely useless

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/quantum ... detection/

I also know some folk looking at quantum gravimetry from space

https://ggos.org/item/quantum-gravimetry/

This is basically star trek sensors. I kid you not.

I always wondered about stealth tech - surely the counter is just more computing power. The more computing power you have the more you can investigate the smaller items that show up on your radar rather than just dismissing them. So you can then figure out that that albatross sized thing that's flying at 500 knots isn't actually an albatross. With the speed of advancement of computing power and the corresponding reduction in cost, I always figured stealth had a pretty short lifespan.

PornDog wrote: Wed Dec 14, 2022 12:15 pm Fair enough, I thought it just reduced the cross section to the size that was auto dismissed by radar computers (like flocks of birds are detected, but dumped from the system before they show up on displays) - which I guess you could classify that as "background noise".

Certainly back in the F-117 days they would talk about using flight plans that deliberately flew equidistant from known radars, because getting too close they would greatly reduce the effectiveness of their stealth. The pitch was always about reducing the cross section to that of a large bird.

I thought that even going back and crunching the raw data after a known stealth plane fly over should be able to reveal a good amount of info to aid in future detection.

Those are all assumptions I've made on limited understanding of course.


As an aside, this is an interesting article on how the Serbs shot down the F-117 - https://theaviationgeekclub.com/an-in-d ... ied-force/

Biffer wrote: Wed Dec 14, 2022 11:26 am This is my wheelhouse, it's what I do for a living. I get to hear all sorts of mad talks from scientists and the engineers I work with do some pretty amazing things. I'll chuck the wild / cool stuff in here every now and again.

For example, I heard someone talking about quantum radar a while back. Makes your stealth technology completely useless

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/quantum ... detection/

I also know some folk looking at quantum gravimetry from space

https://ggos.org/item/quantum-gravimetry/

This is basically star trek sensors. I kid you not.

S/Lt_Phillips wrote: Wed Dec 14, 2022 3:03 pm

Biffer wrote: Wed Dec 14, 2022 11:26 am This is my wheelhouse, it's what I do for a living. I get to hear all sorts of mad talks from scientists and the engineers I work with do some pretty amazing things. I'll chuck the wild / cool stuff in here every now and again.

For example, I heard someone talking about quantum radar a while back. Makes your stealth technology completely useless

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/quantum ... detection/

I also know some folk looking at quantum gravimetry from space

https://ggos.org/item/quantum-gravimetry/

This is basically star trek sensors. I kid you not.

Awesome, keep this stuff coming! Obviously a head-wreck for someone without a degree in something like astrophysics (i.e. me), but very cool to read about this stuff.

inactionman wrote: Wed Dec 14, 2022 4:01 pm

S/Lt_Phillips wrote: Wed Dec 14, 2022 3:03 pm

Biffer wrote: Wed Dec 14, 2022 11:26 am This is my wheelhouse, it's what I do for a living. I get to hear all sorts of mad talks from scientists and the engineers I work with do some pretty amazing things. I'll chuck the wild / cool stuff in here every now and again.

For example, I heard someone talking about quantum radar a while back. Makes your stealth technology completely useless

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/quantum ... detection/

I also know some folk looking at quantum gravimetry from space

https://ggos.org/item/quantum-gravimetry/

This is basically star trek sensors. I kid you not.

Awesome, keep this stuff coming! Obviously a head-wreck for someone without a degree in something like astrophysics (i.e. me), but very cool to read about this stuff.

Seconded.

I did a year at DERA bending bits of metal in the mid 90s, and some of the research the other groups were doing around the Cody Gate site looked so much more interesting.

Biffer, do you work at a place next to a large supermarket and across a roundabout from a petrol station? If so, I know a couple of people there, I've only had very superficial talking shop conversations with them but one is sponsored for a PhD in this stuff (not the quantum bit, as far as I'm aware)

inactionman wrote: Wed Dec 14, 2022 4:01 pm

S/Lt_Phillips wrote: Wed Dec 14, 2022 3:03 pm

Biffer wrote: Wed Dec 14, 2022 11:26 am This is my wheelhouse, it's what I do for a living. I get to hear all sorts of mad talks from scientists and the engineers I work with do some pretty amazing things. I'll chuck the wild / cool stuff in here every now and again.

For example, I heard someone talking about quantum radar a while back. Makes your stealth technology completely useless

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/quantum ... detection/

I also know some folk looking at quantum gravimetry from space

https://ggos.org/item/quantum-gravimetry/

This is basically star trek sensors. I kid you not.

Awesome, keep this stuff coming! Obviously a head-wreck for someone without a degree in something like astrophysics (i.e. me), but very cool to read about this stuff.

Seconded.

I did a year at DERA bending bits of metal in the mid 90s, and some of the research the other groups were doing around the Cody Gate site looked so much more interesting.

Biffer, do you work at a place next to a large supermarket and across a roundabout from a petrol station? If so, I know a couple of people there, I've only had very superficial talking shop conversations with them but one is sponsored for a PhD in this stuff (not the quantum bit, as far as I'm aware)

TB63 wrote: Wed Dec 14, 2022 8:03 pm

inactionman wrote: Wed Dec 14, 2022 4:01 pm

S/Lt_Phillips wrote: Wed Dec 14, 2022 3:03 pm


Awesome, keep this stuff coming! Obviously a head-wreck for someone without a degree in something like astrophysics (i.e. me), but very cool to read about this stuff.

Seconded.

I did a year at DERA bending bits of metal in the mid 90s, and some of the research the other groups were doing around the Cody Gate site looked so much more interesting.

Biffer, do you work at a place next to a large supermarket and across a roundabout from a petrol station? If so, I know a couple of people there, I've only had very superficial talking shop conversations with them but one is sponsored for a PhD in this stuff (not the quantum bit, as far as I'm aware)

You're making it sound like he's deve!oping the anti McStealthBurger....

Biffer wrote: Wed Dec 14, 2022 8:26 pm

inactionman wrote: Wed Dec 14, 2022 4:01 pm

S/Lt_Phillips wrote: Wed Dec 14, 2022 3:03 pm


Awesome, keep this stuff coming! Obviously a head-wreck for someone without a degree in something like astrophysics (i.e. me), but very cool to read about this stuff.

Seconded.

I did a year at DERA bending bits of metal in the mid 90s, and some of the research the other groups were doing around the Cody Gate site looked so much more interesting.

Biffer, do you work at a place next to a large supermarket and across a roundabout from a petrol station? If so, I know a couple of people there, I've only had very superficial talking shop conversations with them but one is sponsored for a PhD in this stuff (not the quantum bit, as far as I'm aware)

No.

inactionman wrote: Wed Dec 14, 2022 8:38 pm

Biffer wrote: Wed Dec 14, 2022 8:26 pm

inactionman wrote: Wed Dec 14, 2022 4:01 pm

Seconded.

I did a year at DERA bending bits of metal in the mid 90s, and some of the research the other groups were doing around the Cody Gate site looked so much more interesting.

Biffer, do you work at a place next to a large supermarket and across a roundabout from a petrol station? If so, I know a couple of people there, I've only had very superficial talking shop conversations with them but one is sponsored for a PhD in this stuff (not the quantum bit, as far as I'm aware)

No.

OK

Biffer wrote: Wed Dec 14, 2022 8:45 pm

inactionman wrote: Wed Dec 14, 2022 8:38 pm

Biffer wrote: Wed Dec 14, 2022 8:26 pm

No.

OK

don’t mean to be abrupt but I’ve had my knuckles rapped previously for talking about stuff in public forums without permission. It’s not secret squirrel stuff or anything, and not defence, they’re just fucking paranoid. Big science research and technology organisation.

PornDog wrote: Wed Dec 14, 2022 11:45 am I always wondered about stealth tech - surely the counter is just more computing power. The more computing power you have the more you can investigate the smaller items that show up on your radar rather than just dismissing them. So you can then figure out that that albatross sized thing that's flying at 500 knots isn't actually an albatross. With the speed of advancement of computing power and the corresponding reduction in cost, I always figured stealth had a pretty short lifespan.

fishfoodie wrote: Wed Dec 14, 2022 9:04 pm

PornDog wrote: Wed Dec 14, 2022 11:45 am I always wondered about stealth tech - surely the counter is just more computing power. The more computing power you have the more you can investigate the smaller items that show up on your radar rather than just dismissing them. So you can then figure out that that albatross sized thing that's flying at 500 knots isn't actually an albatross. With the speed of advancement of computing power and the corresponding reduction in cost, I always figured stealth had a pretty short lifespan.

Awhile ago I watched an old series about the Cold War; & there were a few really interesting episodes about MAD, & Star Wars, & when the US was trying to convince the USSR to agree to not develop anti-ICBM defenses; the Soviet's were outraged; their attitude was that defense is always moral; offense is immoral* !!

The Irony then was the recent interview with the Ex-Soviet General admitting that McNamara was completely correct, & they would have been better off agreeing, to not develop these anti-missile systems, because all doing that achieves, is make your opponent build more missiles, & more, anti-anti-missile systems; & these are a shitload cheaper than the defensive systems !!!

For ICBMs, the bus might carry 3-5 actual MIRVs, but it'll have twenty decoys, that look enough like a MIRV, that by the time your systems can tell the difference, they'll be outside the time they had to respond, & they'll be vaporized.

If you develop a system detecting stealth bombers, they'll swamp you with a hundred drones, that have the same radar cross section, & you'll have to build more systems, & more missiles, etc, etc

In the technology race between arrows & armor; arrow always wins !

The US is the richest, most technologically advanced Country, & spends more on weapons systems than anyone else on the planet, & even they don't have the defensive capacity to protect themselves from a backward shit hole like North Korea !

* The Irony is strong at the moment

Biffer wrote: Wed Dec 14, 2022 9:08 pm

fishfoodie wrote: Wed Dec 14, 2022 9:04 pm

PornDog wrote: Wed Dec 14, 2022 11:45 am I always wondered about stealth tech - surely the counter is just more computing power. The more computing power you have the more you can investigate the smaller items that show up on your radar rather than just dismissing them. So you can then figure out that that albatross sized thing that's flying at 500 knots isn't actually an albatross. With the speed of advancement of computing power and the corresponding reduction in cost, I always figured stealth had a pretty short lifespan.

Awhile ago I watched an old series about the Cold War; & there were a few really interesting episodes about MAD, & Star Wars, & when the US was trying to convince the USSR to agree to not develop anti-ICBM defenses; the Soviet's were outraged; their attitude was that defense is always moral; offense is immoral* !!

The Irony then was the recent interview with the Ex-Soviet General admitting that McNamara was completely correct, & they would have been better off agreeing, to not develop these anti-missile systems, because all doing that achieves, is make your opponent build more missiles, & more, anti-anti-missile systems; & these are a shitload cheaper than the defensive systems !!!

For ICBMs, the bus might carry 3-5 actual MIRVs, but it'll have twenty decoys, that look enough like a MIRV, that by the time your systems can tell the difference, they'll be outside the time they had to respond, & they'll be vaporized.

If you develop a system detecting stealth bombers, they'll swamp you with a hundred drones, that have the same radar cross section, & you'll have to build more systems, & more missiles, etc, etc

In the technology race between arrows & armor; arrow always wins !

The US is the richest, most technologically advanced Country, & spends more on weapons systems than anyone else on the planet, & even they don't have the defensive capacity to protect themselves from a backward shit hole like North Korea !

* The Irony is strong at the moment

You’d need the same physical cross section to fool quantum radar like that.

Kawazaki wrote: Thu Dec 15, 2022 7:17 am Reminds me of the arguments that the moon landings were faked. Somebody did the sums and it would have actually been just as expensive to fake it than to just do it.

Biffer wrote: Thu Dec 15, 2022 11:51 am

Kawazaki wrote: Thu Dec 15, 2022 7:17 am Reminds me of the arguments that the moon landings were faked. Somebody did the sums and it would have actually been just as expensive to fake it than to just do it.

It would also have been technically impossible with the computing power of the time and without some of the CGI tech that's been available in the last ten or fifteen years.

Kawazaki wrote: Thu Dec 15, 2022 3:53 pm

Biffer wrote: Thu Dec 15, 2022 11:51 am

Kawazaki wrote: Thu Dec 15, 2022 7:17 am Reminds me of the arguments that the moon landings were faked. Somebody did the sums and it would have actually been just as expensive to fake it than to just do it.

It would also have been technically impossible with the computing power of the time and without some of the CGI tech that's been available in the last ten or fifteen years.

That kind of answer adds grist to the mill of the conspiracy theorists.

Guy Smiley wrote: Thu Dec 15, 2022 5:13 pm Slight change of tack here...

Biffer, your contributions on all things science are nearly always both fascinating and easily digested. Please keep it up when you feel so inclined

Biffer wrote: Thu Aug 10, 2023 8:17 pm https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-66407099

When We find this, it's fucking huge. Another fundamental force rewrites everything we know in the same way Einstein rewrote Newton.