--- Terry Blanton (aka hohlraum) wrote: > That would be 'hoHlraum'. > <sniff>
Yes and a hearty: Ho-ho-hoh. A moniker you have adopted as your own,no? Unfortunately also a mutterspracker 'loaner' word, which is obviously not yet in my spell checker ;-) ...which BTW I am convinced has been 'infected' so that even on its best days will non-randomly chose the most embarrassing possible word to misspell BTW Wiki has updated it containerized coverage to include both a pic and mention of the "indirect" drive method (heavily censored most likely)- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hohlraum ...which BTW -- if this ICF irradiation methodology were found to be even remotely connected to the Cravens-Letts-Hagelstein hybrid concept - which it probably is NOT ... ... but if it were, then a double-sided arrangement with two gold layers might be worth the effort, even if irradiated only on one side .... I say "probably is not" - because even with visible light laser interference causing both superradiance (going to gammas) and subradiance (going to terahertz) those inherent loses are so high; and the initial power so low -- that it strains the credulity to imagine that this is a scaled down version of ICF hot fusion - even if it is on the smallest possible scale (one exciton) Jones BTW - how many Deuterium atoms are in one exciton? That is a really important question for this whole subject. Any good guesstimates? Mine is now revised: "about one thousand," but that has been based in the recent work which is not yet out in print - and assumes that the chosen interference frequency was derived from from that resultant dimension - which may not be true. It could well be a case of serendipity - and using what happened to be available.
