Charged-particle probing of X-ray-driven inertial-fusion implosions

Science

Volumn 327, Issue 5970, 2010, Pages 1231-1235

  Li, C K ^a   Seguin F H ^a   Frenje, J A ^a   Rosenberg, M ^a   Petrasso, R D ^a   Amendt, P A ^b   Koch, J A ^b   Landen, O L ^b   Park, H S ^b   Robey, H F ^b   Town, R P J ^b   Casner, A ^c   Philippe, F ^c   Betti, R ^d   Knauer, J P ^d   Meyerhofer, D D ^d   Back, C A ^e   Kilkenny, J D ^e   Nikroo, A ^e  

^a MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^b LAWRENCE LIVERMORE NATIONAL LABORATORY   (United States)

^c DIF   (France)

^d UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER   (United States)

^e GENERAL ATOMICS   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

PROTON;

ELECTRIC FIELD; FUNDAMENTAL PARTICLE; IMAGING METHOD; LASER METHOD; RADIOGRAPHY; X-RAY;

ARTICLE; BOHR EFFECT; ELECTRIC FIELD; ELEMENTARY PARTICLE; IMAGE ANALYSIS; NUCLEAR ENERGY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RADIOGRAPHY; X RAY;

EID: 77749264561     PISSN: 00368075     EISSN: 10959203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1126/science.1185747     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. J. Nuckolls, L. Wood, A. Thiessen, G. Zimmerman, Nature 239, 139 (1972).
2. J. Lindl, Inertial Confinement Fusion (Springer, New York, 1999).
3. S. Atzeni, J. Meyer-Ter-Vehn, The Physics of Inertial Fusion (Claredon, Oxford, 2004).
4. B. A. Remington, D. Annett, R. P. Drake, H. Takabe, Science 284, 1488 (1999).
5. R. P. Drake, High-Energy-Density Physics (Springer, New York, 2006).
6. J. R. Rygg et al., Science 319, 1223 (2008).
7. C. K. Li et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 225001 (2008).
8. R. D. Petrasso et al., Phys. Rev. Lett 103, 085001 (2009).
9. C. K. Li et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 205001 (2009).
10. C. K. Li et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 135003 (2006).
11. F. H. Séguin et al., Rev. Sci. Instrum. 74, 975 (2003).
12. S. I. Braginskii, Review of Plasma Physics 1 (Consultants Bureau, New York, 1965).
13. M. G. Haines, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 254 (1997).
14. J. M. Soures et al., Phys. Plasmas 3, 2108 (1996).
15. D. D. Meyerhofer et al., Phys. Plasmas 8, 2251 (2001).
16. A slight upshift from its birth energy is caused by positive charging of the backlighter target.
17. J. D. Jackson, Classical Electrodynamics (Wiley, New York, 1975).
18. -2 for Au (25). If the five-spoke structure in the images is caused primarily by proton collisional scattering in the spokes, this amount of pi would lead to -1 MeV energy loss for 15-MeV protons, which is substantially more than observed in Fig. IC [energy loss consistent with collisional scattering if we assume that CH in the spoke would be even greater (15 MeV)J.
19. P. A. Amendt et al., Plasma Phys. Contr. Fusion 51, 124048 (2009).
20. J. R. Rygg et al., Phys. Plasmas 13, 052702 (2006).
21. C. K. Li, R. D. Petrasso, Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 3059 (1993).
22. The backlighting proton fluence is reduced or even blocked along the hohlraum axis due to the deflection and/or collisional scattering in the compressed capsule core (Figs. 1 to 3).
23. R. D. Petrasso et al., Phys. Rev. Lett 90, 095002 (2003).
24. C. K. Li et al., Phys. Rev. E 80, 016407 (2009).
25. T. A. Lasinski et al., Rev. Mod. Phys. 45, S1 (1973).
26. J. J. MacFarlane, J. Quant. Spectrosc. Radiat. Transf. 81, 287 (2003).
27. This work was supported in part by the U.S. Department of Energy and the Laboratory for Laser Energetics (LLE) National Laser User's Facility (DE-FG52-07NA28059 and DE-FG03-03SF22691), Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (B543881 and LDRD-ER-898988), CEA/DIF (France, Cooperative agreement DE-FC52-08NA28302), LLE (414090-G), Fusion Science Center at University of Rochester (412761-G), and General Atomics (DE-AC52-06NA27279).