Slashdot Mirror


World's Most Powerful Laser

mattlary writes "The Rochester Democrat and Chronicle reports that the University of Rochester plans on building the world's most powerful laser. The plans include upgrading the University's Omega laser with a pair of petawatt lasers. Sounds a lot like Real Genius to me."

218 comments

  1. But can you by kent_eh · · Score: 5, Funny

    But can you strap it to the head of a frikkin' shark?

    --

    ---
    "I can't complain, but sometimes still do..." Joe Walsh
    1. Re:But can you by DragonPup · · Score: 3, Funny

      That depends on if the laser is waterproof. Unless you also develop an evil landwalking shark...

      --
      "Useless organic meatbag" -HK-47
    2. Re:But can you by NevermindPhreak · · Score: 1

      i had to mod you up. i was going to sy the exact same thing, espically when i saw that no posts had yet been made, but by the time i had clicked on "read more" you had already posted. :P

    3. Re:But can you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      It's great that the first sharks post always gets modded way up... but really. Do we need to see the exact same comment on every LASER story?

      Also, Kent gave it to me in the pooper last night.

    4. Re:But can you by the+uNF+cola · · Score: 4, Funny

      evil landwalking shark


      Lawyers?

      Sorry.. too easy :)
      --

      --
      "I'm not bright. Big words confuse me. But Wanda loves me and that should be enough for you." - Cosmo

    5. Re:But can you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are aware that if you moderate and then post, it takes away your moderation. Read the faq.

    6. Re:But can you by kent_eh · · Score: 2, Funny

      *knock* *knock*
      Yes?
      Landshark!

      /SNL

      --

      ---
      "I can't complain, but sometimes still do..." Joe Walsh
    7. Re:But can you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hay and dose IT RUN LLLIIIINNNNUUUXXXX? aha har aharr harr harr!!!!1

    8. Re:But can you by Unregistered · · Score: 1

      no, the RIAA

    9. Re:But can you by NevermindPhreak · · Score: 1

      you know, i knew that, but i was too tired to remember. sorry. :(

  2. AXJ's laser by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Is built out of many larger lasers!

    PROPS TO GABE AND SANTA

    1. Re:AXJ's laser by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If PONCH had a Petawatt Lazer he could blast his way out of a paper bag.

      PROPS TO MAUS

      In Soviet Russia Natilie Portman has petrified statue of YOU!

    2. Re:AXJ's laser by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh.. considering that a laser is a couple of mirrors, wouldn't the most powerful laser be those two most powerful -- pointed at each other? Granted, it would only exist while the end with the weakest "100% reflective" mirror blasts open...

  3. But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is it more powerful than the one from Revenge of The Nerds?

  4. Had to say it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds like something Dr. Evil would want.

    1. Re:Had to say it... by NineBall · · Score: 2, Funny

      Mini-me, stop humping the "LASER"

      --
      You may not agree with what I'm saying but I'll kill you for my right to say it
  5. It won't be real genius.. by rusty0101 · · Score: 2, Funny

    .. without the pool party though.

    --
    You never know...
    1. Re:It won't be real genius.. by marbike · · Score: 1

      Or the phase conjugate tracking system.

      "I mounted the optics for your phase conjugate target tracking system! Look at this mirror!"

      Knight deflating Kent was the best part of that film.

      --
      it is better to light a flame thrower than curse the darkness. -Terry Pratchett Men at Arms
    2. Re:It won't be real genius.. by Carnivorous+Carrot · · Score: 2, Informative

      > Knight deflating Kent was the best part of that film.

      No, the cute, nerdly love interest with the dark hair and the full lips was the best, indeed only decent, part of that movie.

      --
      "Has [being a kidnapped teenage girl, raped repeatedly for months] changed you?" - Katie Couric to Elizabeth Smart
    3. Re:It won't be real genius.. by MoOsEb0y · · Score: 1

      what about a giant container of jiffy pop in the middle of a house? :)

    4. Re:It won't be real genius.. by bynaar · · Score: 1

      [Chris is holding a lab beaker with pink liquid in it.] Chris Knight: Here Mitch taste this. Too sweet? Mitch: No...what is it? Chris Knight: I don't know, I found it in one of the labs. [Mitch starts to wipe out his mouth.] Chris Knight: I'm just kidding. It's yogurt.

    5. Re:It won't be real genius.. by Erbo · · Score: 1
      You mean Jordan? I actually knew someone a lot like that in college...she wasn't a girlfriend, but she was a good friend.

      BTW, the same actress that played Jordan, Michelle Meyrink, also played Gilbert's girlfriend Judy in Revenge of the Nerds. She had a pretty good geek-girl groove going there for awhile...

      --
      Be who you are...and be it in style!
  6. What would Chris Knight say? by Scot+Seese · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Do you have that dream where you see yourself standing in sort of sun god robes on a pyramid with a thousand naked women screaming and throwing little pickles at you?"

    --
    THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.
    1. Re:What would Chris Knight say? by grasshoppa · · Score: 2, Funny

      "Why am I the only person who has that dream?"

      Or, my personal favorite bit of the movie:

      "Moles and trolls, moles and trolls, work, work, work, work, work. We never see the light of day. We plan this thing for weeks and all they want to do is study. I'm disgusted. I'm sorry but it's not like me, I'm depressed. There was what, no one at the mutant hamster races and we had one entry into the Madame Curie look-alike contest and he was disqualified later. Why do I bother?"

      --
      Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
    2. Re:What would Chris Knight say? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      "Don't eat that. Eating that can cause very large breasts. Oh my God, I'm too late!"

  7. what if by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    we put that "la-zer" on the moon ?

    1. Re:what if by whiteranger99x · · Score: 1

      chairface

      Damnit, then Chairface will finally beat the tick by writing his name on the moon!! :P

      --
      Join the TWIT army now!
    2. Re:what if by Chronowerx · · Score: 1

      We call it... The Alan Parsons Project... Mwah ha ha ha ha...

    3. Re:what if by uncoveror · · Score: 1

      That has been done, but the Martians did it, not us. Check it out!

      --
      The Uncoveror: It's the real news.
  8. And... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you think that HEMP weapons are cool? Ill stick to lasers, thank you :)

    1. Re:And... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hemp? I think you mean HERF, as in HERF gun. Or is there some sort of use of hemp that I don't know about?

    2. Re:And... by B3ryllium · · Score: 1

      Lasers don't work very well in standard atmospheric conditions, they aren't like in the movies (I'll use my laser blaster!). HERF weapons use EM Pulses, and thus are vastly more cool. Especially if the need arises to fight a Robot Army. See: Animatrix

    3. Re:And... by NineBall · · Score: 1

      Whatever happened to good old fashioned ICBMs, that's what I want to know.

      --
      You may not agree with what I'm saying but I'll kill you for my right to say it
    4. Re:And... by loadquo · · Score: 1

      Laser is a coherent beam of EM waves. And this one seems to be pulsed.... just not on the right frequency to knock out electronics IFAIK.

      Sorry just being hideously pedantic.

    5. Re:And... by B3ryllium · · Score: 1

      Shut up, man, or I'll zap your computer with a flashlight. ;-)

  9. The Building Size by Discoteck · · Score: 2, Redundant
    I am wondering where they are going to put the additional two lasers. I have been inside of the building and it is already the size of a football field.
    UR is planning for an 82,000-square-foot addition to the back of the laser lab. The town of Brighton Planning Board is having a special meeting at 5:15 p.m. May 19 at the laser lab. The meeting will include a tour for board members and neighboring residents and a discussion of expansion plans.

    Ok then I actually read the article and saw that they were in fact planning on building an addition to the lab. It is good to know!
    I don't think it would fit on any shark =)
    --
    /.................../ \\ /...................../
    1. Re:The Building Size by KDan · · Score: 1

      You can always strap a shark to some part of it just for the heck of it.

      Daniel

      --
      Carpe Diem
  10. NOPE PETA WON'T DO IT by snuffdiddy23 · · Score: 2, Funny

    PETA would never put there name on something to harm the animals, especially the fuzzy ones.

    1. Re:NOPE PETA WON'T DO IT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      How would this harm them? For all we know the sharks might turn around and vaporize all of us, that'd be PETA's fucking dream come true.

    2. Re:NOPE PETA WON'T DO IT by DragonPup · · Score: 4, Funny

      Then we will send the landwalking sharks with the attached lasers to destroy PETA. 2 birds, one stone.

      --
      "Useless organic meatbag" -HK-47
    3. Re:NOPE PETA WON'T DO IT by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 1
      PETA would never put there name on something to harm the animals, especially the fuzzy ones.

      That's why they're calling this a "petawatt laser". They're trying to get some buy-in from PETA on this scheme. The animal rights group is holding out for the more explicit moniker "PETA/Laser", though.

    4. Re:NOPE PETA WON'T DO IT by Soul-Burn666 · · Score: 1

      Don't you mean: 2 problems, one big friggin' laser!

      --
      ^_^
  11. petawatt may sound good ... by kaamos · · Score: 1, Troll
    ... But can you justify using that much power (albeit in a very short burst) that could warm those without a roof over their head? Can you justify burning all that coal or making that much radioactive waste? Give me room-temperature supraconductors any day of the week, but Why The Hell would I want to know how it feels to be like on the surface of the sun .. ? o_O

    --
    In Canada, we don't fancy things like socks
    1. Re:petawatt may sound good ... by kaamos · · Score: 1
      and for those of you wondring if I RTFA, I did, and let me point out one passage :

      Nuclear fusion is what powers stars, including the sun, and is the principle behind hydrogen bombs. Scientists have been trying for decades to replicate and control fusion for use as a cheap, pollution-free power source.

      I grasp that this may trigger a power source simmilar to that of the sun - described later in the article - but how the hell can they harness that ? Gives me a cold-fusion-in-the-Saint kinda vibe...

      --
      In Canada, we don't fancy things like socks
    2. Re:petawatt may sound good ... by darkwiz · · Score: 5, Interesting

      A watt is a unit of power, not energy.

      This laser (I can tell you without reading the article, as the laws of physics prevent the presumption) is only on for an EXTREMELY short duration, probably on the order of billionths of a second (that's 10E-9, for UK readers).

      A peta-joule (as someone else pointed out) would be a LOT of coal. A petawatt for an extremely short duration isn't that much energy. Probably less than the entire university consumes for 1 second (I don't have accurate numbers on their power consumption, so don't micro analyze this statement).

      The only use for such a short duration but high power laser is in physics experiments, and typically involves only a few dollars of electricity, so nearly no appreciable amount of coal or waste of any kind.

      I'll pass on the political discussion though.

    3. Re:petawatt may sound good ... by Tim+C · · Score: 5, Interesting

      but how the hell can they harness that

      In a word, magnets. The idea behind fusion, essentially, is that you raise a (hydrogen) plasma to sufficient temperature and pressure, and it will undergo fusion. If you get the conditions just right, it'll then continue to fuse once you've ignited it, thus supplying you with energy.

      What you may not appreciate is that a plasma is electrically charged, and can therefore be contained using a suitable magnetic field. Arguably the most promising containment setup at the moment is the tokamak (from the Russian for bottle, iirc), which is a torus-shaped machine. Electromagnets around the torus create a circular magnetic field, which keeps the plasma contained in a ring. (My apologies if my information is out of date, I quit my PhD in plasma physics 4 years ago...)

      Despite what the article says, however, fusion is not entirely pollution-free. One of the byproducts is a fairly large supply of neutrons. These neutrons are absorbed by the reactor, which will slowly but surely become radioactive. Therefore, you will eventually be left with radioactive waste to dispose of. You won't get anything like the quantity you get with fission, though, and fusion certainly doesn't produce any "conventional" pollution.

    4. Re:petawatt may sound good ... by shibbydude · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Are you the kind of person who always lectures people about how they shouldn't use thier lawnmowers because there is a war going on?

      The energy used in this laser, as you said used "in a very short burst", would power a city, although just for a few milliseconds. Multiply that by the thousands of people in the city and you may not even have enough electricity to run my webserver for ten seconds (slashdotted or not). Warm those without roofs? What powers the sun? And what are the researchers trying to produce? Fusion. And what does the sun do? Even if you are an idiot the answer is warm us. So the researchers are investing money and power to hopefully make large advances in WARMING THE ROOF-LESS.

      Have you ever read the artical? Ever?

      --
      We're only gonna die from our own arrogance, that's why we might as well take our time...
    5. Re:petawatt may sound good ... by Makoss · · Score: 1

      First off "petawatt" says NOTHING about the power output of the laser, only the intensity. Well. . . .to a degree, there IS a minimum time interval that the laser could function, and thus a minimum required total power output, but it's the weekend, I'm ignoring that. What do you mean "warm those without a roof over their head" ? Isn't that what global warming's all about? ;-p Heck yeah room temperature superconductors would be nice, if they were not uber-expensive I'd go so far as to say "nice" = "revolutionary". But you can't just pull the "superconductor research" slider all the way to the left and hit next turn a few times. . . . Though I do think, that as a whole, more resources need to be devoted to research, of every sort. SUrface of the sun? Bah, you mis-understand, they after the ocnditions of the core. It's about 3 orders of magnitude warmer there. How the hell would they harness that? That's their job, not yours. People once wondered the same about any number of things, ya know, like. . . .fire. Or say, nuclear fission. People are smart, they'll figure it out, have some faith in science.

      --
      Building a better backup.
      Zettabyte Storage
    6. Re:petawatt may sound good ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It may be a lot of power, but it's not a lot of energy. The way they currently make really high-power lasers is to make really, really short pulses. Power = Work / Time. One watt is one joule for one second. To raise the power, you make make Work larger, or you can make Time shorter.

      In this case, the pulse width is under half a picosecond. If you divide 1 joule by a tiny number, like 1e-12, then the Power side of that equation gets very large, like 1e12 (a whole terawatt!).

      So, while the power rating seems huge (over 1000 times the electrical generating capacity of the entire US), the generators can keep that rate going for a long time, while the laser can't. The actual energy in the laser pulse was only about 600 joules -- say, ten seconds of light from a 60-watt bulb. No need to worry about great piles of coal ash or tons of nuclear waste.

      Here is a much more detailed story.

    7. Re:petawatt may sound good ... by Tim+C · · Score: 4, Informative

      Indeed.

      A few years ago, I started a PhD in plasma physics, studying the high speed electron transport effects in short pulse, high intensity laser-plasma interactions. You are of course quite correct in your assertion that this sort of laser fires extremely brief pulses.

      In plamsa physics, such a pulse is used to rapidly (read, near-instanteously) heat the surface of a target. The rapid heating causes the surface to ablate, which in turn causes the rest of the target to be compressed and heated. Get it right, and fusion ocurrs.

      Quite apart from the physical reasons why you'd use a short pulse, the ultimate goal here is to create a viable method of producing energy. The more energy you put in at the start (by using a "long" laser pulse), the more you have to get out in the long run to make it worthwhile.

      When I was still on my PhD (before I got bored and quit), we had a working z-pinch in the basement. As dramatic as it would have been for the lights to dim, there were no outward signs when it was fired :-)

    8. Re:petawatt may sound good ... by NedTheNerd · · Score: 1

      I can only imagine how long it would take to charge something like that :D

    9. Re:petawatt may sound good ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It might make you feel better to know that most power in Upstate New York comes from nuclear and hydroelectric plants.

    10. Re:petawatt may sound good ... by dhovis · · Score: 4, Informative
      One of the byproducts is a fairly large supply of neutrons. These neutrons are absorbed by the reactor, which will slowly but surely become radioactive. Therefore, you will eventually be left with radioactive waste to dispose of.

      I think they plan on dealing with this by using vanadium alloys. If you start with the most stable form of vanadium (V51) and bombard it with neutrons, the first neutron absorbed will cause a quick beta decay to Cr52. Fortunately, chromium has the same crystal structure as V, so you won't weaken the alloy much. Cr can absorb another 3 neutrons before it beta-decays to Mn55, which has a different crystal structure, so at that point, you might start causing enbrittlement of the alloy. However, Mn55 can absorb 5 more neutrons before you end up with an element that has a worrying half life (Co60).

      So by picking your materials correctly, you can potentially avoid some of the problems associated with neutrons.

      --

      --
      The internet is the greatest source of biased information in the history of mankind.

    11. Re:petawatt may sound good ... by terrab0t · · Score: 3, Funny

      "My apologies if my information is out of date, I quit my PhD in plasma physics 4 years ago..."

      That's still more recent than the last time I did plasma physics... which was never.

      "...fusion certainly doesn't produce any "conventional" pollution."

      You mean like cows? Good. One nuclear fart and we're all goners.

    12. Re:petawatt may sound good ... by Maimun · · Score: 2, Informative
      Arguably the most promising containment setup at the moment is the tokamak (from the Russian for bottle, iirc), which is a torus-shaped machine.

      No, the Russian word for bottle is "butil`", with soft "l" at the end. That is, IIRC, Russian is not my first language. But tokamak is not bottle in Russian for sure.

      According to this link

      http://ippex.pppl.gov/fusion/glossary.html

      Tokamak is an acronym derived from the Russian words toroid-kamera-magnit-katushka, meaning "the toroidal chamber and magnetic coil."
    13. Re:petawatt may sound good ... by Zebede · · Score: 1

      Check out this article over at LLNL for a bit more info. Apparently their 1.25 petawatt laser only takes 600 joules to fire for half of a picosecond.

    14. Re:petawatt may sound good ... by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 1

      EXTREMELY short duration, probably on the order of billionths of a second (that's 10E-9, for UK readers).

      That's 1E-9 for software-developer readers.

    15. Re:petawatt may sound good ... by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 1

      You won't get anything like the quantity you get with fission, though, and fusion certainly doesn't produce any "conventional" pollution.

      But there will be vast landfill sites filled with helium atoms!

    16. Re:petawatt may sound good ... by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      "But can you justify using that much power (albeit in a very short burst) that could warm those without a roof over their head?"

      I'm sure the laser could heat them up very much indeed.

      "Can you justify burning all that coal or making that much radioactive waste?"

      Because where's the fun in housing the homeless if you don't also require them to freeze in the dark?

      "Give me room-temperature supraconductors any day of the week,"

      And where would you get the electricity to put over those superconductors, hm?

      "but Why The Hell would I want to know how it feels to be like on the surface of the sun"

      Because the surface of the sun keeps us warm and has been putting out energy for millions of years.

    17. Re:petawatt may sound good ... by uberdave · · Score: 1

      No, see, the beauty of this system is we all get to fly around in blimps.

      "Hey, there, Blimpy-Boy" - H. Simpson

    18. Re:petawatt may sound good ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      As dramatic as it would have been for the lights to dim, there were no outward signs when it was fired

      Obviously it should have been redesigned so it would work properly.

    19. Re:petawatt may sound good ... by Alsee · · Score: 1

      don't micro analyze this statement

      Ok, but may I peta analize it? :)

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
  12. OH come on! by graveyhead · · Score: 1, Informative

    Haven't the comic stylings of Chris Knight, Mitch Whazzisname, and freaky guru Lazlo taught us anything? This can only lead to a house full of popcorn :)

    --
    std::disclaimer<std::legalese> sig=new std::disclaimer; sig->dump(); delete sig;
    1. Re:OH come on! by agentq · · Score: 1

      It was Mitch Taylor. Me? I should win about 36.8% of the prizes. Including the car.

    2. Re:OH come on! by rickwood · · Score: 1
      You know, agentq, there are plenty of decaffeinated brands on the market that are just as tasty as the real thing.

      Seriously, though, Lazlo does have all the best lines doesn't he? Consider...

      [Chris Knight runs up to and throws his arms around Lazlo Hollyfeld]

      Chris: Lazlo, buddy!

      Lazlo: Aaaahhh!

      I've seen this movie dozens of times, and this scene makes me laugh every time. Okay so I'm lame, but damn it, geeks have to stick together!
  13. National Ignition Facility, Livermore by NetDrain · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here's some information about NIF, Lawrence Livermore's laser facility: http://www.llnl.gov/nif/ The lasers here use more than 1000 times the possible electric output of the United States in one burst (through capacitors.) (1.8MJ) Lawrence Livermore dismantled their Petawatt laser to build NIF, which is bigger and shinier, and therefore much, much better. : ) (It's also not finished yet-- 5 years, or so)

    Here's a site that explains how it works: http://www.llnl.gov/nif/nifworks/index.html

    The article does mention NIF, but only at the bottom, briefly. It is not to be overlooked. I've been through the facility -- it's absolutely massive. Full of wondrously expensive and very shiny toys.

    1. Re:National Ignition Facility, Livermore by NineBall · · Score: 1

      Just sounds like a glorified Z-machine to me.

      --
      You may not agree with what I'm saying but I'll kill you for my right to say it
    2. Re:National Ignition Facility, Livermore by NetDrain · · Score: 1

      Heh, go to Sandia's webpage and check where they're located -- in addition to a New Mexico facility, it's Livermore. In fact, all the buses in the area say LLNL/Sandia. They both have tons of very interesting projects.

    3. Re:National Ignition Facility, Livermore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try making those links clickable next time moron.

      Lawrence Livermore's laser facility

      how it works

      Now that wasn't too difficult was it?

    4. Re:National Ignition Facility, Livermore by CoughDropAddict · · Score: 1

      The lasers here use more than 1000 times the possible electric output of the United States in one burst (through capacitors.) (1.8MJ)

      Excuse this physics initiate, but wouldn't the possible electric output of the United States need to be measured in Watts, not Joules? Given enough time, I bet the US could generate 1.8MJ of electrical energy.

    5. Re:National Ignition Facility, Livermore by NetDrain · · Score: 2, Informative

      Ahhh, you're right, mostly. The lasers are mostly instantaneous, so watts, being jouls over time, aren't entirely necessary -- it's not sustained. But joules are the output of power. All the banks of flashbulbs they use to amplify each individual beam are rated in joules. The output would be greater than the US's if it was sustained, of course -- the same goes for the petawatt lasers that Lawrence Livermore dismanted a few years back to start on NIF.

      Also, each laser is 1.7-1.8MJ, putting the total system to over 330MJ...

      Anyway, I heartily recommend reading the about page -- it's full of some very interesting things.

    6. Re:National Ignition Facility, Livermore by SEWilco · · Score: 1
      The lasers here use more than 1000 times the possible electric output of the United States in one burst (through capacitors.)

      After we build airplanes out of black-box material, we obviously have to rebuild our power plants to use capacitors so we have 1,000 times more power available.

  14. Close to me by saabmp3 · · Score: 5, Informative

    U of R is right down the street from me (I go to RIT). I read this story yesterday and hear that it stil has to get approval from the town to build this thing. I bet that they will get it as it brings in alot of money from the goverment, but it's not defenite for sure yet. BEN

    1. Re:Close to me by TedCheshireAcad · · Score: 2, Funny

      We should collaborate....we build the Big Fuckin' Mirror, and together, UR and RIT can give UB the what's up.

    2. Re:Close to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I wouldn't advertise that you go to RIT if I were you. I mean, unless your out of the closet.

    3. Re:Close to me by kinzillah · · Score: 1

      muahahahaha! I say we build some sort of diffuser and give UB a campus wide strobe effect >:D

      --
      Douglas P. Price
    4. Re:Close to me by snilloc · · Score: 1
      The town will approve this in a heartbeat. UR (+med center) is one of the biggest employers in Rochester. They are the 800lb gorilla.

      (Thus sayeth the UR grad, 2001)

  15. Watchout! by bazik · · Score: 5, Funny

    With this "laser" the University of Rochester might hold the world ransom for.... ONE MILLION DOLLARS!

    --


    --
    One by one the penguins steal my sanity...
  16. Yes you can by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    /me hands kent_eh a roll of duct tape.

  17. Dude! by w3weasel · · Score: 1

    give me shot from that hemp weapon!

    --

    Just as irrigation is the lifeblood of the Southwest, lifeblood is the soup of cannibals. -- Jack Handy

  18. What about.. by ewhenn · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...that laster the US defense dept. has that they have used to shoot down projectiles with? Could this possibly be used and in part funded by the defense dept.? The next evolutionary step for military lasers?

    1. Re:What about.. by Reloaded · · Score: 0

      Did anybody else wonder what the effects of shooting one of these lasers at a human being would be? I dont think the effects have been seen in any video games to date >:)

    2. Re:What about.. by PissedOffGuy · · Score: 1

      Could this possibly be used and in part funded by the defense dept.? The next evolutionary step for military lasers?

      maybe. but then again, the article (if you read it) talks only about how its to be used for nuclear fusion research, an interesting topic on its own.

      i was pleasantly surprised that the poster talked about real genius and didnt snipe at the missile defense system, but alas of course it was only a matter of time before people would troll about it.

    3. Re:What about.. by Reblet · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well, actually, this not the kind of lasers you're interested in if you want to shoot down rockets. A laser this strong would heat up a small patch of the rocket for only a very short time (maybe triggering some fusion reaction along the way), and would hardly result in the desired effect. You'd rather want an industrial laser which the yuse to cut metals, which would literally cut the missille, and probably ignite any flammable materials inside (i.e. the warhead or the propellant).

    4. Re:What about.. by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

      You mean the THEL (Tactical High Energy Laser)? It's quite a bit smaller, and is chemical based.

      http://www.defense-update.com/directory/THEL.htm

    5. Re:What about.. by surprise_audit · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but if you're shooting it at a ballistic missile, a small hole would be sufficient, as shown by the loss of the shuttle Columbia.

    6. Re:What about.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Having the target simply vanish isn't a particularly interesting video game effect.

  19. Time to count... by EpsCylonB · · Score: 3, Funny

    Time to count the number of austin powers posts...

    1. Re:Time to count... by NineBall · · Score: 1

      Well, you have to admit, when universities start building giant "lasers", "Death stars" can't be far behind.

      --
      You may not agree with what I'm saying but I'll kill you for my right to say it
    2. Re:Time to count... by nate+nice · · Score: 1

      select count(posts) from slashdot where
      (post.topic = 'austin powers') or (post.topic = 'dr. evil');

      --
      "If you are a dreamer, a wisher, a liar, A hope-er, a pray-er, a magic bean buyer ..."
    3. Re:Time to count... by Unregistered · · Score: 2, Funny

      ERROR: OVERFLOW

  20. HOT by sixdotoh · · Score: 1
    Not that I pretend to know anything about nuclear fusion, but if they're planning to use this laser for research in nuclear fusion, wouldn't that have to be built almost solely for that purpose?
    Then again, what else are you going to use a laser that can heat things up as hot as a star for?

    Alright, this is the last time I'm telling you this! If I see one more reenactment of the blowing up the apple scene from Honey I Shrunk The Kids . . .

    --

    This post was brought to you by the number 584811 and the characters / and .

    1. Re:HOT by lavaforge · · Score: 1

      Then again, what else are you going to use a laser that can heat things up as hot as a star for?

      Cooking hotdogs?

    2. Re:HOT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's for blowing up Islam. Can't you see? It's all just one big conspiracy! Or have they gotten to you?!

    3. Re:HOT by rickwood · · Score: 1

      Then again, what else are you going to use a laser that can heat things up as hot as a star for

      Making enormous Swiss cheese?

  21. If only... by FroMan · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If only the world would spend its time and money on things that can't kill each other. Why does everything have to be about killing people?!?

    [/sarcasm]

    I hope all the sheep that always claim that the US only spends money on DoD stuff figure out that the government (DoE here) does spend money on things other than to kill folks. And its a frick'en laser, and it isn't meant to kill people. Amazing.

    Otherwise pretty cool.

    Granted the otherside of slashdot that complains about anything with nuclear in it are going to hate this cause its going to kill us all! Lunatics on the left, and even more lunatics on the other left.

    --
    Norris/Palin 2012
    Fact: We deserve leaders who can kick your ass and field dress your carcass.
    1. Re:If only... by thesupraman · · Score: 1


      Read the article,

      The primary source of funding for the facility there is nuclear weapons stewardship - ie: keeping the US nuclear weapons stockpile warmed up and ready top go.

      Hmmm, yep, that would be 'Dud Stuff' and aimed at 'killing people' I would have thought.

      Not that they don't do a lot of great research in to other areas, but lets not fool ourselves here.

    2. Re:If only... by Doppler00 · · Score: 1

      Who says the research going into creating this laser won't be used later for some secret military laser satelite? Just imagine if they could combine the capability of aiming within 10cm accuracy with a laser that could shoot through several meters of concrete. Something like that could make nuclear weapons obsolete.

    3. Re:If only... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Name one invention that can't be used to kill people.

    4. Re:If only... by revscat · · Score: 1

      My, my. Aren't we high and mighty.

      Listen, monkey spank, there are always nutbags in any given political movement. Always. Pointing out the jokers on either side of the political spectrum does nothing to bring us closer to the truth, and it does nothing to invalidate general principles.

      Examples from the right? How about Rep. Tom "DDT never hurt anybody" Delay? Or perhaps Ken "Clinton's penis is my life" Starr? Pat Robertson? Newt Gingrich? Donald Wildmon? That guy who wrote the "Left Behind" series? Damn near every Southern Baptist preacher?

      Pot, meet kettle. Next time try to say something that actually is intelligent and/or insightful. Setting up straw men is neither.

    5. Re:If only... by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      You do realize that in 2001 the federal government spent about twice as much on social programs than it did on defense, right?

    6. Re:If only... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Soviet America defence spending is a social program.

    7. Re:If only... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Fred.

      </silly>

  22. Re:Frickin Evil by Dismal12 · · Score: 1

    How about dolphins? can we mount it on their heads? or killer whales...

  23. Progressive Step by ThomasFlip · · Score: 1

    Its good to see that government is trying to do something about easing its reliance on fossil fuels, albeit not very much. To bad high yield nuclear fusion power plants are still years ahead of our time.

    --
    If the dollar is an "I owe you nothing", then the Euro is a "Who owes you nothing." - Doug Casey
    1. Re:Progressive Step by NineBall · · Score: 1

      Too bad the oil companies are probably going to shit can them just before they come online, more like.

      --
      You may not agree with what I'm saying but I'll kill you for my right to say it
    2. Re:Progressive Step by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Too bad high yield nuclear fission plants aren't being allowed to remove more of those nasty radioactive materials from the environment.

      "Uranium is terrible stuff, it causes mutations and nasty things everywhere near it!"
      "OK, we'll take the uranium out of these rocks and store it safely in steel and concrete." "No, you're damaging the environment with a nasty mine! And that nuclear reactor is creating radioactive waste!"
      "Well, most of that radioactive waste is cloth and steel that's less radioactive than the mountain before we removed the uranium. But we'll bury it more safely than where Mother Nature had it."
      "No, no, burying waste only puts it where we can't worry about it! You can't get rid of it!"
      "We have to keep it because we can't get rid of it because we shouldn't keep it?"
      "Yeah, don't get rid of that stuff! And quit using cheap nuclear power!"
      "Nuclear power is more efficient, but we do have a lot of coal if you prefer to have your uranium in the air."
      "Look at all the plutonium in the nuclear waste from that reactor! It's horribly powerful waste!"
      "Well, just put that used fuel in a breeder reactor and we'll consume the plutonium..."
      "No! It's waste, I tell you! Terrible waste we'll never get rid of!"

  24. RIT UoR by pimpybra · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I swear that RIT should build an even larger one, and blow UoR away. :D

  25. CHA by Malicious · · Score: 4, Funny

    Such a machine could only have one viable purpose.
    To carve your name in the MOON!

    --
    01101001001000000110000101101101001000000110001001 10000101110100011011010110000101101110
    1. Re:CHA by Pingular · · Score: 0

      Malicious - 01101001001000000110000101101101001000000110000101 10110001110011011011110010000001100010011000010111 0100011011010110000101101110

      --

      When anger rises, think of the consequences.
      Confucius (551 BC - 479 BC)
  26. Why this is needed... by f97tosc · · Score: 4, Interesting

    In order to start a fusion reaction, you must reach these incredible temperatures.

    For H-bombs, the idea is to use a fisson bomb to kick-start the whole thing.

    Now they are trying to build fusion reactors, and obviously using fission power is not that popular (the whole point is to get rid of the problems of fission).

    Using extremely powerful and focused lasers seems to be the best idea as yet. This is only needed to start the reaction, once it has started it is kept alive by its own power and a supply of hydrogen.

    Tor

    1. Re:Why this is needed... by Tim+C · · Score: 4, Informative

      using fission power is not that popular

      It would also be wholly impractical in this case.

      What is required, as you say, is to raise the hydrogen to a suitably high temperature and pressure. The laser is used not only to increase the temperature of your target material, but also the pressure (the sudden increase in temperature causes the surface to ablate, which causes an increase in pressure on the remainder of the target). To achieve the same effect using a fission reaction, you would essentially have to create an explosion, which would be *far* harder to do safely. You're likely to just destory the reactor, as only a small fraction of the total output energy of the explosion could actually be directed at the target.

      In an H-bomb, of course, the more destructive the reaction the better.

    2. Re:Why this is needed... by flend · · Score: 1

      And as and added bonus these laser fusion experiments produce conditions similar to that, as you say, in a hydrogen bomb. Hence the results are effectively a military nuclear test just wrapped up in civilian `clean power-source' clothing. Neat, eh?

    3. Re:Why this is needed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Hence the results are effectively a military nuclear test just wrapped up in civilian `clean power-source' clothing.

      It might be true that a bomb maker could learn a thing or two by studying these reactions, but it is an exageration to say that it is "effectively a military nuclear test". The military learns nothing about how to set off their bombs (the start mechanism is completely different), nor about explosive effect (the experiment is a controlled reaction).

      Also, the main reason that people don't like nuclear tests is all the radiation. But these fusion experiments produce almost no radiation (the surrounding structure gets some radioactive exposure due to the emitted neutrons, but this is not the same order of magnitude problem as the waste generated by a common fisson plant or a bomb). In that sense it is not just the wrapping or clothing that is changed - the essence of what is objectionable is gone.

    4. Re:Why this is needed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You have it backwards. The intense heat in a miniscule area is the goal. A laser is a controlled way of creating that heat. A hydrogen bomb is a brute force way, by wasting most of a fission bomb to create a little hot spot before the entire mechanism is destroyed. The advantage of a fusion bomb's approach is being able to have a larger hot spot and do a little more fusion at one time..outdoors. A military nuclear device is a crude way of making what civilians have been trying to make in a bottle.

      Comparing a fusion power plant to a fusion bomb is like comparing a coal plant's power to a lightning bolt. A lightning bolt can't deliver power for years to a wide area, and a power plant can't make a spark five miles long which is focused on a single tree.

      A fusion power plant will create a lightning bolt a foot long and convert it to a steady power supply, but you can't take an hour's worth of a single foot-long lightning bolt each second and produce a single bolt 3,600 feet long.

      The most likely military use of fusion plant technology would be a "fusion torch" -- allowing a fusion burst to escape through a rocket nozzle instead of gathering all the heat for power creation. A fusion torch would allow a tank full of tritium/deuterium (special water) to power a continuously-firing rocket and reach the Moon in a few hours instead of 3 days, or Mars in several days. It makes for a poor weapon, as a big flame in atmosphere gets broken up air so can't reach far, while in space you have to get within a few miles of a target -- a target that can see you and also can use the same type of rocket to move away, as well as the shielding on its own torch protects it from your torch by simply aiming at you too.

    5. Re:Why this is needed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Sayeth the parent: Using extremely powerful and focused lasers seems to be the best idea as yet. This is only needed to start the reaction, once it has started it is kept alive by its own power and a supply of hydrogen.

      Actually, this is wrong. The lasers are needed at every stage, the fusion occurs in a series of pulses. Each pulse is another shot from the laser. The notion is that the power generated (basically by letting the fusion reaction boil water and putting it through a turbine) is greater that that needed to fire the lasers. It's a technology that has been 30 years from market for the last 30 years, but has also generated a tremendous amount of knowledge about the fusion reactions. Not to mention some major engineering feats in building the giant toys!

      Also, to correct another misconception, the heat of the lasers is almost insignificant compared to the pressure wave that is generated. In the current best-approach, the lasers vaporize a small gold cannister (aka "hohlraum"), inside which is a plastic bubble with frozen hydrogen in it. The vapozired (actually plasma-ized) gold cloud gives off high-intensity X-Rays. The X-Rays hit the outside of the frozen hydrogen and vaporize that, and that shock-wave causes the pressure to go through the roof. The Temp goes up with the pressure, similar to PV=nRT, although the laws are different since the hydrogen are now raw nuclei rather than atom with the usual electrons. This is a plasma, rather than a gas. If the plasma is hot and dense enough, the hydrogen nuclei will hit and fuse into a helium nucleus, releasing energy that increases the temperature and pressure still further.

      The fusion reactions are time-limited by the fact that the plasma starts to fly apart immediately. The more intense the initial shockwave, the more completely the hydrogen will fuse. For this reason, laser-fusion is often referred to as "Inertial Confinement" fusion.

      The above is simplified but hopefully not incorrect. IANA Nuclear Physicist, but I spent two years helping get the hydrogen in the plastic bubbles to freeze with sub-micron surface roughness, so that the shockwave would be equally smooth.

  27. of course you can! by twitter · · Score: 1

    It'a a PETa watt laser. Those are designed for pet sharks. What else would you put on your pet shark's head, an amonia based MASER? It's the 1990's, get with the program.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  28. almost by LBArrettAnderson · · Score: 1

    Sounds a lot like Real Genius to me

    but in real genius it was only a 5-meg-watt laser. what's this? petawatts? is that like a billion times more powerful than meg?

    1. Re:almost by sharkey · · Score: 1

      You'll be able to fill 100 houses with popcorn.

      --

      --
      "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
    2. Re:almost by LBArrettAnderson · · Score: 1

      no... this would probably oblitorate the seeds before they are able to pop...

  29. All they have to do now is.. by questforme · · Score: 1, Redundant

    make them small enough to attach to Sharks heads.

  30. Petawatts? by B3ryllium · · Score: 1

    Now, are these petawilsonwatts? They're very cool.

    Please tell me they are not PETAwatts. PETA is soooo gorram annoying.

  31. fusion by ArchieBunker · · Score: 1

    So we can study things like fusion which may lead to a better enegry source.

    --
    Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
  32. Already the most powerful UV laser at UR by 3Suns · · Score: 1

    AFAIK (it still says it on the LLE webpage) The Laboratory for Laser Energetics here at UR already houses the world's most powerful ultraviolet laser, the Omega Laser. Apparently these new petawatt lasers will make it the most biggest laser of any kind. Anyone know what it will be edging out?

    --

    -3Suns

    ~~~~
    The Revolution will be Slashdotted
    1. Re:Already the most powerful UV laser at UR by deglr6328 · · Score: 5, Informative

      As a technician on the Omega Laser I guess have a bit of an inside track on what's going on around the LLE.

      First you must make a distinction between most powerful(energy/time) laser and most energetic(energy per pulse) laser, this is a distinction not made in the article. The Omega laser is currently the most energetic ultraviolet(frequency tripled Neodymium:Glass) laser in the world now at ~25 Kilojoules per pulse, very soon to be eclipsed by the preliminary first light of the National Ignition Facility. However each "shot" on the system, as they are called, is only a couple hundred picoseconds to a couple nanoseconds long (depending on the shot pulse shape) making it's peak power around a maximum of about 60 Terawatts. This is not the most powerful laser in the world. The Rutherford Appelton laboratory in England has a "Petawatt" system they just commissioned which is capable of at least hundreds of Terawatts of power albeit only with a couple hundred joules of energy per shot.

      It is interesting to note that the mechanism the Petawatt upgrade at the LLE will use to achieve it's million billion watts of power in a pulse time of a few picoseconds to hundreds of femtoseconds is called Optical Parametric Chirped Pulse Amplification(OPCPA) and was invented right at THE UofR in the late 1980's!! Chirped Pulse Amplification lasers are the only means to get to petawatt intensities and they are interesting because they are the first technology to allow nuclear reactions to be directly caused by intense light radiation(ie. no implosion/ heating stage as in ICF). This is really interesting because in addition to the spark plug type inertial confinement fusion catalyzing experiments that are planned, the intensity fluences allowed by petawatt lasers approaches (possibly >10^21 watts/sq. inch) what is necessary to do an experiment called "sparking the vacuum" whereby enough energy is placed in a small enough volume of space in a short enough period of time to cause a spontaneous transformation of energy directly into particles(via E=Mc^2). Neat eh?

      --
      - "Hear that?! The percolations are imminent! Cease your ingress!"
    2. Re:Already the most powerful UV laser at UR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's sad that the readers here know nothing about physics or they would have modded the statement full of incorrect facts into the cellar where it belongs.

    3. Re:Already the most powerful UV laser at UR by deglr6328 · · Score: 1

      such as......?

      --
      - "Hear that?! The percolations are imminent! Cease your ingress!"
    4. Re:Already the most powerful UV laser at UR by danila · · Score: 1

      I'm just wondering, if all these lasers are so low-power, how safe would if be to stand in front of the laser beam or put a hand there....

      --
      Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
    5. Re:Already the most powerful UV laser at UR by deglr6328 · · Score: 3, Funny

      They aren't low power. There are 60 beams on the laser with an average Omega beam being around 30cm in diameter and assuming 1TW pulse/beam you would be exposed to several Gigawatts per square cm. Im guessing now, but I would think if you were exposed to the infrared beam(before it gets converted to UV) you would be very severely burned but if you were hit with the UV side it might not be so bad since it is so readily absorbed by the upper layer of your skin it might just blow off a few top layers. I definitly would not want to try it though, there are scary looking burn marks all over the laser target chamber and walls of the containment room.

      --
      - "Hear that?! The percolations are imminent! Cease your ingress!"
    6. Re:Already the most powerful UV laser at UR by SEWilco · · Score: 1
      Should we ask what idiot is firing the laser at the walls of the containment room, instead of having a suitable backstop behind their target?

      Or is blasting the inner surface of the containment room merely the final test of the containment room?

    7. Re:Already the most powerful UV laser at UR by deglr6328 · · Score: 1

      The 60 beams are arranged around the target exactly opposite eachother to maximize irradiation uniformity on target. Sometimes the target breaks or something goes wrong with the expected amount of plasma opacity of the imploding target and the beam exits the opposite side of the chamber(at off angles). Other times they are simply mispointed, which can happen when more than 8 shots are done in a day and each one requires a slightly different setup.

      --
      - "Hear that?! The percolations are imminent! Cease your ingress!"
    8. Re:Already the most powerful UV laser at UR by SEWilco · · Score: 1
      Oh, OK.

      Just make sure you have your filter goggles on so you're safe in there.

  33. India covered by solar cells by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    According to my calculations, if you covered an
    area the size of India with the best solar cells avaliable (30% efficiency), they could supply 1 Petawatt!

  34. In case of Slashdotting by sam_handelman · · Score: 5, Funny

    UR plans to build world's most powerful laser

    By Matthew Daneman
    Democrat and Chronicle

    (May 9, 2003) -- One burst from the University of Rochester's Omega laser heats up its target to 100 million degrees Celsius in a quest to duplicate the power of the sun.

    But the world's most powerful fusion research laser is about to get a lot more powerful.

    Construction could start as soon as early July on a $70 million addition of a pair of petawatt lasers to UR's Laboratory for Laser Energetics Omega facility on East River Road.

    The incredibly powerful petawatt would be the most destructive device in existence, capable of vaporizing an entire planet.

    Researchers have a broad array of plans for the petawatt, including using bursts from it to disintegrate major landmarks.

    Nuclear fusion is what powers stars, including the sun, and is the principle behind hydrogen bombs. Scientists have been trying for decades to replicate and control fusion for use as a cheap, pollution-free power source.

    "They mocked my research!" said lab director Robert McCrory. "But I'll show them ... I'll show them all!"

    UR is planning for an 82,000-square-foot addition to the back of the laser lab. The town of Brighton Planning Board is having a special meeting at 5:15 p.m. May 19 at the laser lab. The meeting will include a tour for board members and neighboring residents and a demand for cash payments to stave off their imminent destruction.

    UR estimates the lab could be fully operational in about four years. When Rebel forces attempt to destroy the shield generators protecting the installation, UR will reveal that it is already fully operational.

    The U.S. Department of Energy has put up $13 million so far for the expansion plans, and UR expects to see $37 million more over the next few years. The university is putting $20 million of its own into the construction.

    A petawatt laser could generate a pulse of up to a million billion watts of power, several hundred times more powerful than the Omega, and would enable the lab to hold the entire world hostage, said Steven Loucks, engineering director for the laser lab.

    "This will be the most intense laser ever built," said Craig Sangster, a senior scientist at the laser lab.

    With the petawatt, UR would leap into the emerging and promising field of "fast ignition" fusion. Hypothetically, a burst from the petawatt would serve as the metaphorical spark plug, igniting a fuel source and setting off a fusion reaction, destroying an entire planet. Researchers also foresee using the petawatt bursts to "see" into the plasma generated when the Omega laser array is fired at unsuspecting tourists, "which we'd love to do now, but we can't," Sangster said.

    And the petawatt will help in one of the lab's primary jobs -- "stockpile stewardship" of the nation's nuclear weapon arsenal, Loucks said. The vast majority of the lab's $49 million annual operating budget comes from the Energy Department, which pays for study of death rays now that the nation no longer does nuclear testing.

    The laser lab upgrade will add no more than a handful of jobs to the facility, which employs close to 250 people in stupid black helmets with wheels on them. But the petawatt will help ensure that federal money continues to flow to Rochester, McCrory said.

    Added Lousch: "Do not be too proud of this technological terror you have constructed, for the ability to destroy a planet is insignificant next to the power of the force."

    The lab contributes about $20 million to the local economy, according to UR estimates.

    One of the petawatt laser's main jobs will likely be to supplement the $3.5 billion National Ignition Facility being built now at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California, Sangster said. Livermore's 1.8 megajoule laser -- with power capacity far beyond UR's -- is expected to go online in about five years. Researchers will undoubtedly use UR's laser lab to "destroy all those who mocked" their research before annihilating Livermore, he said.

    --
    The good and new comes from no quarter where it is looked for, and is always something different from what is expected.
    1. Re:In case of Slashdotting by donglekey · · Score: 1

      That's hilarious

    2. Re:In case of Slashdotting by mnemonic_ · · Score: 1

      I agree.

    3. Re:In case of Slashdotting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's good to know.

      After all, where would the world be if we didn't have this hugely important piece of information that mnemonic agrees with a post on Slashdot.

    4. Re:In case of Slashdotting by Gantoris · · Score: 1

      Thank you, you just made my day, funniest thing I've read in a long time! ;)

    5. Re:In case of Slashdotting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who moderated it as informative because they didn't read the article, come on, admit it!

      70% Funny
      20% Overrated
      10% Informative

  35. Re:Pffffffft by gantrep · · Score: 1

    I don't understand your comment. Do you understand that the watt is a unit of power and the joule is a unit of energy?

  36. World seires and world's most powerful laser... by kharchenko · · Score: 1

    From the article:
    The incredibly powerful petawatt would be the only one of its kind in the United States and one of only a small handful in existence.

    This is going to be the most powerful laser in the United States, not in the whole World as the posting's title claims. But that's just a detail - we know there's nothing beyond our faithful shores :)

    1. Re:World seires and world's most powerful laser... by shaitand · · Score: 1

      apparently you didn't really read it, you see they are adding TWO petawatt lasers (the ones there are only a few of in the world) to the many lasers they already have that simultaneously hit a small object causing it to get really hot. Essentially, all the other lasers are considered one big friggin laser.

      This one big friggin laser when completed will be duct taped to the head of a guppy who will then be augmented by the radiation it gives off when he destroys large cities, he will mate and spawn hordes of ultra guppies with natural lasers mounted to their heads... this will then lead to the dreaded guppy hordes of 2039 which eradicate all humanity.

  37. Re:Pffffffft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hooray for the American educational system.

  38. An offer you can't refuse... by lowe0 · · Score: 2, Funny

    You know, seeing as how they already have a gigantic frickin' laser, I'm not sure I'd want to be the one to say "No" to them....

    "So, you see, the citizens have some concerns about the facility, and..."

    (A switch is flipped, a quiet whirring is heard.)

    "Umm... approval granted."

  39. Re:Pffffffft by Colin+Walsh · · Score: 2, Informative

    A petawatt is one petajoule/second. So, are you impressed yet? Or do you want some frickin' sharks thrown in there too?

    Picky.

    -Colin

  40. Not really news.. by njan · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This isn't really news, being that the Vulcan laser in the UK reached petawatt capacity some months ago, after being awarded a grant for the purpose four years ago (see here) - the article doesn't mention the exact capacity, but I don't imagine that it's much more than a petawatt.

    Another important thing to mention - again, not having read up on this - is that most scientific lasers are single-shot; most lasers are femto or petasecond lasers. From the same site as above (different news item, "Over the course of the three year upgrade project, the output of Vulcan's ultra-short pulse beam will be increased to 500J in a pulse of 500fs duration giving a power on target of 1 Petawatt (1015 Watts)" - for many purposes, a laser such as Astra suits many peoples purposes; whilst the pulse energy for astra is

    As far as military applications are concerned, as mentioned in other threads, this laser would almost certainly be useless; it would be far too hard to aim, and in any case, lasers like this reach sufficient power that they require nitrogen-filled tubing in many laboratories in order not to ionise the air under certain circumstances (which creates irritating popping noises) - there are certain other technical details (such as the beam type) which render them inefficient for military purposes (although one scientist working with astra and vulcan did want to shoot a beam into space with an encyclopedia encoded in the beam pulse in order to transmit data to potential victims of human first contact).

    --
    I am a viral sig. Please copy me and help me spread. Thank you
    1. Re:Not really news.. by njan · · Score: 1

      (paragraph three should have finished:

      for astra is [up to] 250mj, it provides pulses of 50 femtoseconds, every few femtoseconds - to the naked eye, a continuous beam. For many purposes (for instance, exciting inert gases in order for x-ray experiments), a pulsed laser is far more useful than a laser such as Vulcan which has to be recharged after each shot - and is also a lot less staff intensive, since staff can be reduced to competant troubleshooters in a control room who communicate with scientists in and around the target area.

      silly me using diamond brackets to indicate lesser-than signs. ;)

      --
      I am a viral sig. Please copy me and help me spread. Thank you
    2. Re:Not really news.. by shaitand · · Score: 1

      although one scientist working with astra and vulcan did want to shoot a beam into space with an encyclopedia encoded in the beam pulse in order to transmit data to potential victims of human first contact

      With that kind of first contact I bet they will understand the nature of humanity quite well and respond appropriately.

    3. Re:Not really news.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1 Petawatt (1015 Watts)

      That should read 10^15, otherwise it really doesn't seem all that impressive :-)

    4. Re:Not really news.. by renoX · · Score: 1

      >With that kind of first contact I bet they will understand the nature of humanity quite well and respond appropriately.

      They'll send us back blinking light?
      What is a very strong laser here, would be nothing more than a harmless blinking light when it reaches a remote star.

    5. Re:Not really news.. by shaitand · · Score: 1

      sure sure, ruin all my fun. damn realists.

  41. Re:Pffffffft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sure, and he's talking about the total energy expressed in a pulse, instead of the peak power.

    A petajoule laser would be more impressive than a short pulse petawatt one by far ;P

  42. 1. invest in bulk popcorn seeds 2. ???? 3. profit Now just to get some land so I can open my store front right next to this school.

  43. Real Genius by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Speaking of RG, I found out a couple weeks ago that MIT was showing this at the frosh weekends. WTF? The movie is completely based on Caltech, their rival. Just about every inside joke comes from good ol' Pasadena. They don't call it "Pacific 'Tech" for nothing.

    Anyways, they show it (rightfully) at CIT prefrosh weekends, so maybe the kids'll be smart enough to figure it out for themselves.

  44. They should call it... by SoVi3t · · Score: 1

    the Alan Parsons project *stops with the Austin Powers jokes*

    --
    Defender of Microsoft and Communism!!!
    1. Re:They should call it... by Carnivorous+Carrot · · Score: 1

      > *stops with the Austin Powers jokes*

      www.shhhhh.com

      --
      "Has [being a kidnapped teenage girl, raped repeatedly for months] changed you?" - Katie Couric to Elizabeth Smart
    2. Re:They should call it... by SoVi3t · · Score: 1

      have you ever actually checked out www.shhhhh.com ???

      --
      Defender of Microsoft and Communism!!!
  45. MTG by gnarled · · Score: 1

    Hmmm, I must be playing to much Magic: The Gathering because I immediately thought, what does it matter if the shark can be blocked or not.

    --
    I'm a firm believer in the philosophy of a ruling class. Especially since I rule. -Randal, Clerks
  46. Re:Pffffffft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, I think what the parent poster's point was that a petawatt ain't a big deal if its only on for a tiny fraction of a second.

    This laser certainly will not be emitting a petajoule anytime soon (how the hell would you power it)?

    This laser will probably run on the order of nano to microseconds at a time.

  47. Re:Pffffffft by Jeffrey+Baker · · Score: 1

    His point is that the petawatt laser has extreme energy flux for a tiny instant of time. A 1 PW laser with a 1 MJ capacity would only be able to fire for 1 ns, which obviously isn't all that long. However it might be enough for these purposes. The laser at the National Ignition Facility is a 500 TW and 1.8MJ, which allows it to fire for a bit longer.

  48. what exactly do you want? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I want five megawatts by mid-may.

  49. Don't touch it! by spnbs · · Score: 1

    Chris: You didn't touch anything, did you?
    Mitch: No.
    Chris: Good. Because all of my filth is arranged in alphabetical order. This, for instance, is under 'H' for "toy.
    Mitch: What is it?
    Chris: It's a penis stretcher. Do you want to try it?
    Mitch: No.
    Chris: I'm just kidding. It's yet another in a long series of attempts to avoid responsibility.

  50. better yet... by Tuxinatorium · · Score: 2, Funny

    Can you mount it on the moon and call it a "DEATH STAR"?

  51. Re:Pffffffft by gantrep · · Score: 1

    Gotcha. I didn't know that people refer to lasers by the maximum amount of energy that they release in one pulse. To me, a petajoule laser didn't make much sense, because any laser could eventually deliver a petajoule of energy given enough time, and assuming that its components wouldn't break down before that point. Now I understand. But still, the definition leaves some ambiguity for me because a "pulse" could mean many things. A petajoule of energy delivered in a one nanosecond pulse is a lot more impressive than a petajoule delivered in a five second pulse.

  52. ''Omega Laser''?? by Tom7 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Damn dude, you know something called the "Omega Laser" is just doomed to end up malfunctioning and destroying the world. It sounds like something that Dr. Robotnik would build...

    1. Re:''Omega Laser''?? by stwrtpj · · Score: 2, Funny
      Damn dude, you know something called the "Omega Laser" is just doomed to end up malfunctioning and destroying the world. It sounds like something that Dr. Robotnik would build...

      That's ridiculous. The world will NOT be destroyed. A blue hedgehog in sneakers will show up at the right moment to stop it.

      --
      Karma: Frotzed (mostly due to the Frobozz Magic Karma Company)
  53. Re:Pffffffft by pseudonymouse · · Score: 1
    If you only get one pulse, and the pulse is brief (say a nanosecond), then 10^15 watts amounts to 10^6 joules. This comment might be expressing a wish for 10^15 joules in a single pulse.

    I'm jumping in here because I wish they'd said what pulse duration they want. I'm assuming they're not looking for a long string of pulses. Someone who knows more about laser-induced fusion than I do would likely be able to guess, but I need this sort of thing spelled out. I remember that there was a lot of excitement about picosecond pulse lasers, because it was such a brief pulse that the energy was all absorbed by the target before enough plasma was created to reflect the energy. I'm figuring that this laser is designed for a longer pulse than that, though, or they'd have mentioned it.

    --
    In a free society you are who you say you are. -- Mumford
  54. heh, but do *you* go to U of R? by snitty · · Score: 2, Funny

    I attend the University of Rochester, and I have to say, this kinda of bothers me. . . I mean, what if I am taking an optics course and I get the teacher really angry durring Laser Lab?

    What's to prevent me from being vaporized? huh?

    --
    Modular Redundancy--Because 4 out of 5 Nodes agree
    1. Re:heh, but do *you* go to U of R? by Blaine+Hilton · · Score: 1
      There would be witnesses, but then again if it was spun around that problem could be solved...

      --
      Need a calculator?

    2. Re:heh, but do *you* go to U of R? by Unregistered · · Score: 1

      Dont worry. This thing's big. as long as you don't walk in fornt of it you're ok. It's not like he can aim the damn thing quickly. (NOTE: if he starts setting up mirrors, RUN!!)

  55. neodymium-doped yttrium lithium fluoride? by TheRealRamone · · Score: 1

    a Nd:YLF pumped diode laser was used as the first stage for the current Omega laser due to its wavelength being readily absorbed by solid hydrogen (I would guess) and its relatively high output. it's wavelength lies in the infrared with green and ultraviolet harmonics. some beam splitting and amplification/acceleration is involved with the production of the final pulse.

    this laser also seems to be popular photon source in imaging devices for which has replaced expensive and bulky TiSaph equipment in many applications (or so think i read). so . . .

    question for slashdot: will the basic technology for the petwatt upgrade be the same?

    sorry no links - go hit up the search engines yourself (i refuse to say "google" as verb). . . oh, what the heck:

    This is pretty nifty.

    --TRR

    1. Re:neodymium-doped yttrium lithium fluoride? by deglr6328 · · Score: 1

      (I'll point you to my previous post first, which may clear some things up) Actually the Omega Laser dosen't use Nd:YLF it uses Nd:glass which is much MUCH cheaper to make. Other than than the only real difference is going to be that the new laser uses the "NIF style" beam amplification which makes use of a "PEPC" or plasma electrode pockles cell to reflect the beam back through the same Nd:glass slabs more than once, squeezing more energy out of them with each pass. Also the diffraction gratings for the re-compression of the chirped pulse will have to be HUGE and endure extremely high electric fields at the surface; this has never been done before on such a scale and will be a challenge to make for the laser.

      --
      - "Hear that?! The percolations are imminent! Cease your ingress!"
    2. Re:neodymium-doped yttrium lithium fluoride? by TheRealRamone · · Score: 1

      . . . {goes and reads your post} . . Fascinating.

      {rembering days gone by} I recall seeing slabs of a plasticene greenish glassy stuff used inside elementary particle detectors (cerenkov effect maybe) years ago, I wonder if it's the same material.

      Thanks!

      --TRR

      (btw, an animated web demo of your system like the one I linked to would be insanely neato)

  56. Re:Pffffffft by Carnivorous+Carrot · · Score: 1

    By doing it in a miniscule fraction of a second, the overall power skyrockets.

    And since my son's slumber party is watching Austin Powers II, and quotes are all the rage at the moment here, I'll leave off with...

    Scott: A trillion is more than a billion, numb-nuts.

    "Christ, he's tiny. I've got bigger chunks of corn in my crap."

    --
    "Has [being a kidnapped teenage girl, raped repeatedly for months] changed you?" - Katie Couric to Elizabeth Smart
  57. Re:Pffffffft by Carnivorous+Carrot · · Score: 1

    Dr. Evil Brown: My evil time machine requires 19.21 billion watts, what we scientists refer to as a (double quotes fingers in air) "giga" watt.

    Other Scientists: Hahahahahahahahhaa

    Dr. Evil Brown: What?

    Other Scientist: Ha ha ha, sorry. It's just that, for comedy movies with wacky scientists, 19.21 billion watts just isn't that much anymore.

    Dr. Evil Brown: Uhh, I shall build a new time machine. One that will require...one bil

    Scientist waves hand up, more! more!

    Dr. Evil Brown: One...one trillion watts!

    Evil music swells.

    --
    "Has [being a kidnapped teenage girl, raped repeatedly for months] changed you?" - Katie Couric to Elizabeth Smart
  58. mode parent down-flamebait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    please mod the parent down as it has no connection whatsoever to the topic and is a time waste.

    Mods-thanks.

    1. Re:mode parent down-flamebait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you retarded?

  59. Err... by Eudial · · Score: 1

    Exactly what did they -really- intend on fiering it on? You don't build the worlds largest laser w/o planning on blasting something to smithereens.

    --
    GAAH! MY PRINTER IS ON FIRE!!! PUT IT OUT! PUT IT OUT!
    1. Re:Err... by Have+Blue · · Score: 1

      Very small pellets of potential fuels for fusion reactors.

    2. Re:Err... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My buddy actually makes the targets for the current shots at UofR. Generally, they shoot at a very small, perfectly spherical ball of heavy water-ice.

    3. Re:Err... by SEWilco · · Score: 1

      Every fuel has potential. At the very least, as long as it is on a shelf it has potential energy from gravity. Any shelf with possible fuels has potential fuels.

    4. Re:Err... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does your buddy have very small hands, then?

  60. Re:Frickin Evil by shaitand · · Score: 1

    why not guppies? I can see it now, we all quiver in fear as we think of the dreaded Guppy laser enforcement squads!

  61. Off the coast of Japan... by psyconaut · · Score: 1

    Godzilla was seen wrestling a giant squid with the world's largest laser attached to its head... ;-)

    -psy

  62. Can you Imagine by memmel2 · · Score: 0

    A beowulf cluster of these babies : )

  63. On a related note.. by CausticWindow · · Score: 1

    How do you (where you live) pronounce laser?

    Last time I visited NY, the guys in the physics lab called it l-a-ser with an a as in father. Is that normal on the east coast?

    I've always pronounced it with a very broad a, like in "layser".

    --
    How small a thought it takes to fill a whole life
    1. Re:On a related note.. by Vegeta99 · · Score: 1

      I've always heard it pronounced the latter way, and I'm an east coaster.

    2. Re:On a related note.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Make sure to install each laser inside a vase with a tomato-and-potato design.

  64. A clue by stwrtpj · · Score: 1
    please mod the parent down as it has no connection whatsoever to the topic and is a time waste.

    humor n. 1) A comical quality 2) the ability to express what is funny, amusing, etc 3) the expression of this 4) what you are seriously lacking.

    --
    Karma: Frotzed (mostly due to the Frobozz Magic Karma Company)
  65. [Re:Close to me] I thought they already had it... by LiberalApplication · · Score: 1

    Not so long ago, I went to go to the U. of R, and I was under the impression that they already had the world's largest, most powerful laser. Is that not true?

  66. Re:Pffffffft by uberdave · · Score: 1

    I thought lasers were measured in "Gilettes": ie how many razor blades it can burn through.

  67. Fuel cells? by pipegeek · · Score: 1

    So, what I want to know is why anyone is still talking about fusion as a source of power. It's dangerous, has the potential to produce radioactive waste (as mentioned in earlier comments on this article), and produces an end-product which really does qualify as exhaust (helium). Why is it that anyone is working on this, given the recent progress in the domain of fuel cells? Given that there exists in fuel cells what seems a much more practical, safe and clean means of producing power from hydrogen, this strikes me as a bit odd.

    (for those who don't know, these are devices by means of which electricity is generated from hydrogen at reasonable temperatures with the only exhaust being water and heat).

    1. Re:Fuel cells? by Cecil · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Because the only plentiful source of hydrogen that we have access to is electrolysis of water, which by definition takes at least as much -- and in practice, much more -- energy as the conversion from hydrogen and oxygen back to water. It's a chemical process. You can't get more energy out than was originally put in. What's the point of a hydrogen fuel cell plant when we'll need a conventional power plant sitting beside the electrolysis facility?

      Nevermind the fact that even if we did somehow find a plentiful source of hydrogen, we'd get at least an order of magnitude (if not many orders of magnitude) more energy by using it in a fusion reactor than we would in a fuel cell. Again, fuel cells are an entirely chemical process, you can only get a tiny fraction of the energy out of chemical reactions than you get from annihilation-of-mass reactions, such as fission and fusion.

      A fusion reactor is many times cleaner and less dangerous than a fission reactor. And we have fission reactors all across North America. And even if you were to entirely discount the use of fusion as a common power source on earth, which I think would be idiotic, you cannot dispute the usefulness of fusion in space. Fuel is ridiculously expensive to get into orbit. The more juice we can get out of a given amount of fuel, the better. Fusion is the most viable power source for interstellar travel, when we come to that point.

    2. Re:Fuel cells? by Suidae · · Score: 1

      What's the point of a hydrogen fuel cell plant when we'll need a conventional power plant sitting beside the electrolysis facility?

      Many people just don't get hydrogen power. Hydrogen is not a power source, its an energy storage medium.

      If we were to run out of oil and had to use coal to power everything, it would be much easier to have a coal-fired power plant producing hydrogen to use as fuel for cars than it would be to design cars that run on coal.

      Just think of hydrogen as an abstraction layer, a simple interface between two independent processes.

  68. You can keep your popcorn and your sharks by Conspir8or · · Score: 1

    and your Death Stars and whatnot. I and my lesbian flying circus are mounting this atop a van, carving my way into Fort Knox, irradiating the gold therein, and kicking back on a pile of profit. Or should I say, "Profit!"

    Do I expect you to mod this down? No, I expect you to DIE!

  69. Oink! Oink! Pork alert by Animats · · Score: 2, Insightful
    And the petawatt will help in one of the lab's primary jobs -- "stockpile stewardship" of the nation's nuclear weapon arsenal, Loucks said. The vast majority of the lab's $49 million annual operating budget comes from the Energy Department, which pays for study of the energy phenomena that occur in nuclear explosions now that the nation no longer does nuclear testing.

    The laser lab upgrade will add no more than a handful of jobs to the facility, which employs close to 250 full-time workers. But the petawatt will help ensure that federal money continues to flow to Rochester, McCrory said. "We could be a target ripe for closing if we don't stay technologically current," he said.

    "Stockpile stewardship" is a code word for "keep people employed working on bomb-related stuff, even if we're not making any". Over at the Lawerence Livermore Senior Activity Center for Aging Physicists, it's their main mission. All the old guys who know how to design H-bombs will die off soon, and nobody will remember how to make them. It's been half a century since young smart people went into bomb design, after all.

  70. I finally finish and ... by RageEX · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ... then they decide to dump money into the physics program instead of the Rochester Strong Medical Center.

  71. Don't you mean.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Real Genius? Sure the nerds had a robot maid but they never came close to Val Kilmers weapon that's like "Lasing a stick of dynamite".

  72. awww by maloneoni · · Score: 1

    you see i live in livermore california.for those of you who do not know, we have the lawernce livermore national labs. the one interesting place in this lame town is llnl. well, we used to have the largest laser, but not any more i guess. aww man this town is really boring agian.

  73. Re:[Re:Close to me] I thought they already had it. by LUDO54 · · Score: 1

    I believe U of Illinois at Chicago had that distinction. It was an Xray laser. Used for taking photos of protein folding. I'm too lazy too look up any specifics right now.

  74. For those in the dark... by Psiolent · · Score: 1
  75. Duh McFly! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unfortunately if the units aren't jiggawatts, I don't care.

  76. Imagine a beowulf cluster of world's most by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    powerful lasers.

  77. don't forget.. by danalien · · Score: 1

    ... that these highpower lasers only output that much energy under a fraction of a second (somewhere down around micro/pico seconds), no more. Because there isn't a powersource on earth that can power it for even a tenth of a second!

    --
    I don't claim I know more than I know, and if you know you know more than I know, then by all means, let me know.
  78. Matt's Mom is the shiznat! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    PROPS TO MAUS AND GABE.

  79. It's basically military weapons work. by billstewart · · Score: 1
    And the petawatt will help in one of the lab's primary jobs -- "stockpile stewardship" of the nation's nuclear weapon arsenal, Loucks said. The vast majority of the lab's $49 million annual operating budget comes from the Energy Department, which pays for study of the energy phenomena that occur in nuclear explosions now that the nation no longer does nuclear testing. (That's LLNL, not UR labs talking.)

    It's fun to think about fusion reactors being practical sources of electric power, and it's fun to spend millions of dollars on Really Cool Toys and do fundamental physics research that nobody could do before and build really big computers for mathematical simulations of the physics. But it's really about testing new nuclear weapons designs, and modelling the aging of existing nuclear weapons to know when they need replacing. More detailed discussion on Stockpile Stewardship. After all, that's one of the things that you can do with very precise knowldge of hydrogen fusion behavior.

    Furthermore, the Bush Administration recently got the Senate Armed Services Committee to approve $25M for resuming nuclear weapons testing and about $20M for designing new small nuclear bombs (less than 5KT) and big bunker-buster bombs (up to 1MT.) The small ones are presumably fission-based, while the bigger ones are probably fusion. SJMerc article. TheAge Article. (So just in case you thought the recent unpleasantness in the Middle East was designed to stop Weapons of Mass Destruction, well, no...)

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
    1. Re:It's basically military weapons work. by Suidae · · Score: 1

      Sure seems like bunker-buster bombs should focus more on penetration power than raw explosive power. I mean, what good is a megaton bunker buster if the bunker to be busted is in downtown Bagdad?

      I don't have a big problem with nuclear weapons research, mostly because I don't think that we've seen the last of small countries developing them. I would like to see our military tools developed in such a way that we would never need to deploy nuclear weapons, but the psycological effect of there existence should not be discounted. 'The Bomb' has been the ultimate weapon for so long that I can imagine some country thinking that since the US(*NB) does not have 'The Bomb' that if they did, they would be invincible on the battlefield. They would not of course, because the US would have superiour strategy, equipment and soldiers. But if the goal is to prevent deployment of nuclear weapons (and prevent the associated risks), its best if the US plays the game in such a way as to prevent anyone from developing new nuclear weapons.

      It might seem silly to try to prevent the development of nuclear weapons by developing nuclear weapons, but when theres only one super-power, its probably an effective stratagy.
      The game changes if another super-power emerges and it is no longer clear to either side who would win in an all-out battle. In this case cooperation would be a much better solution.

      But then I don't know much about game theory, and I don't thing Bush Jr. does either. Maybe the US govenment needs a Department of Game Theory or something to advise them on given situations. Because they sure make some dumb-assed foriegn policy decisions sometimes.

      *NB: I'm just using 'the US' to mean the dominant military power, it could be anyone.

  80. Douglas Adams might say by spineboy · · Score: 1

    The only use for a peta-watt laser was found to be a really effective garbage disposal unit....

    --
    ..........FULL STOP.
  81. A small step for the Brotherhood by Firefly1 · · Score: 1

    Does this mean that Obelisks of Light aren't that far off? I already have preliminary sketches of the Hand of Nod (pretty unique shape for a house, eh?)...

    --
    - White Knight of the Order of Mihoshi Enthusiasts
  82. Re:Pffffffft by JoeRobe · · Score: 1

    Generally, if you have a pulsed laser (i.e. a Nd:YAG or Ti:Sapph) you measure in energy per pulse, say in mJ/pulse. However, if you have a continuous wave laser, like an Ar+, you measure it in power, like mJ/sec = mW.

    For publicity reasons, lot of labs put their pulsed lasers in terms of power. For example, in the lab that I work in, we have a Nd:YAG laser that outputs about 2 mJ/pulse green light. However, all of that happens in about 9 nanoseconds. So if we wanted to impress a visitor, we would say that the power of the laser is 2mJ/9ns ~ 200 kW. Hundreds of kilowatts sound a lot more impressive than millijoules

    --
    The best way to predict the future is to invent it.
  83. I really have to ask by lingqi · · Score: 1

    but how would you have became "bored and quit" working on (or, having the *opportunity* to work on) z-pinches and very dangerous stuff that would probably change human society as we know it?

    I mean, besides large quantities of sex, I can't quite imagine something I'd more inclined to do compared to playing with things that has the possibility of making a sizable crater in the earth's surface.

    As for "out of date information" in a previous post, I would like to add that it is possible to electrostatically confine fusionable plasma by using a circular electrode. I think it was invented by farnsworth (inventor of TV, coincedentally), though sadly like much of Tesla's more enigmatic works, that particular fusion reactor has faded into the dark.

    --

    My life in the land of the rising sun.