Stopping of directed energetic electrons in high-temperature hydrogenic plasmas

Physical Review E - Statistical, Nonlinear, and Soft Matter Physics

Volumn 70, Issue 6 2, 2004, Pages

  Li, C K ^a   Petrasso, R D ^a  

^a MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

APPROXIMATION THEORY; CHARGED PARTICLES; DEUTERIUM; ELECTRON ENERGY LEVELS; ENERGY TRANSFER; PLASMAS; POLYNOMIALS; QUANTUM THEORY; TRITIUM;

ENERGETIC ELECTRONS; HYDROGENIC PLASMAS; MULTIPLE SCATTERING; PLASMA PHYSICS;

ELECTRON SCATTERING;

EID: 41349096399     PISSN: 15393755     EISSN: 15502376     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevE.70.067401     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. L. Spitzer, Physics of Fully Ionized Gases (Interscience, New York, 1962).
2. B. Trubnikov, Review of Plasma Physics 1 (Consultants Bureau, New York, 1965).
3. S. Skupsky, Phys. Rev. A 16, 727 (1977).
4. C. K. Li and R. D. Petrasso, Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 3059 (1993).
5. J. D. Lindl, Inertial Confinement Fusion (Springer, New York, 1998), and references therein.
6. J. D. Lindl, R. L. McCrory, and E. M. Campbell, Phys. Today 45(9), 32 (1992).
7. R. D. Petrasso, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 095002 (2003).
8. M. Tabak et al., Phys. Plasmas 1, 1626 (1994).
9. C. Deutsch et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 2483 (1996); 85, 11400(E) (2000).
10. C. Deutsch et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 2483 (1996); 85, 1140(E) (2000).
11. S. Atzeni, Phys. Plasmas 6, 3316 (1999).
12. M. H. Key et al., Phys. Plasmas 5, 1966 (1998).
13. b≫ 1, the interaction can be envisioned as the linear superposition of individual, isolated electrons interacting with plasma, which is the focus of this paper.
14. M. Honda et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 2128 (2000).
15. M. J. Berger and S. M. Seltzer, NAS-NRC Publication No. 1133, 1965 (unpublished); these results are very close to that of the range calculation of this paper.
16. E. S. Weibel, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2, 83 (1959).
17. H. H. Hubbel et al., Phys. Rev. A 26, 2460 (1982).
18. Deutsch et al. have a factor of 2 error in the electron continuous-slowing-down stopping power [Eq. (3) of Ref. [9]]; in both their erratum and the original paper, this leads to about a factor of 2 overestimate in the electron range (Figs. 1(a) and 2(a) of Ref. [9] and erratum).
19. M. D. Rosen et al., Phys. Rev. A 36, 247 (1987).
20. B. Yaakobi et al., Phys. Plasmas 7, 3714 (2000).
21. N. F. Mott, Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 135, 429 (1932).
22. R. D. Evans, The Atomic Nucleus (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1955).
23. Only the first term has been kept in this differential cross section. This approach is equivalent to the first-order Born approximation (the second term has an order of αZ, α=1/137, the fine structure constant). For heavy elements, the e-i cross section will need to be corrected.
24. C. Møller, Ann. Phys. (Leipzig) 14, 531 (1932).
25. Since small-angle scattering dominates, we have neglected terms that are not associated with this process. Furthermore, this expression is approximately accurate only for γ≤ 10.
26. Beam and Jets in Astrophysics, edited by P. A. Hughs (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 1991).
27. A. Pukhov et al., Phys. Plasmas 6, 2847 (1999).
28. H. W. Lewis, Phys. Rev. 78, 526 (1950).
29. S. A. Goudsmit et al., Phys. Rev. 57, 24 (1940).
30. 1 and dE/ds have nearly the same dependence on In A, a consequence that it is sufficiently large (i.e., ∼5), any sensitive dependence on the Coulomb logarithm nearly cancels out.
31. J. D. Jackson, Classical Electrodynamics (Wiley, New York, 1975).
32. E. Rohrlich et al., Phys. Rev. 93, 38 (1954).
33. In Deutsch et al., their penetration is about four times smaller than their range for 1 MeV electrons [Figs. 1(a) and 2(a) of Ref. [9] and erratum]. Even including electron scattering effects, the results of the present paper indicate a penetration that is only a factor of 1.32 smaller than the range of 1 MeV electrons. As best we can tell, the approach of Deutsch et al. is unjustified since they invoke an approximation by P. C. Hemmer and I. E. Farquhar [Phys. Rev. 168, 294 (1968); see Eq. (67) and discussion], which is valid only for small angle deflections and for small energy loss. This approximation is invalid in the present context of large deflections and total energy loss.
34. K. H. Weber, Nucl. Instrum. Methods 25, 261 (1964).
35. Whether considering fast ignition or electron preheat, the distribution of electron energies about their mean will smear out the energy deposition, making it more uniform.