Readit News logoReadit News
bombela · 5 months ago
7mths? What unit is that. Did they mean 7μs resolution? How is that special? I see youtubers doing nanoseconds.

edit: here is the important information in this article.

> Scorpius is a new accelerator project planned for the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) that will use an electron beam that can be broken into customized pulses to deliver x-rays and capture multiple images only hundreds of nanoseconds apart.

So 0.1μs or 100ns temporal resolution 3D X-ray.

abainbridge · 5 months ago
While we're nit-picking the title, what does the "real-time" part mean? How would it be different if it wasn't real-time?

Dictionary.com defines "real-time" like as, "the actual time during which a process or event occurs", eg "along with much of the country, he watched events unfolding in real time on TV". Or in the domain of Computing, "relating to a system in which input data is processed within milliseconds so that it is available virtually immediately as feedback to the process from which it is coming, e.g. a missile guidance system might have "real-time signal processing".

Neither definition work here. It seems like they took a sequence of pictures very quickly, and then, some time later, played them back at an enormously slowed-down rate.

gjhan · 5 months ago
The opposite of "real-time" in this context would be "sampling". It means that the capture represents the high-resolution time history of one particular event (one explosion) instead of fast and successively offset captures from as many events.

Deleted Comment

tngranados · 5 months ago
The first line of the articles says "seven-millionths of a second", which would be 1/7μs or 0,14μs. They also mention that the camera shot 16 frames in that period, so that would be once every 0,00875μs or once every 8,75ns

Youtubers are a couple of magnitudes away from that, AFAIK

SECProto · 5 months ago
I would say you described "one seven millionth" of a second (1/7,000,000 s)

"Seven millionths" would be 7/1,000,000 s (7μs). They take 20 to 40 images in that period using 7 cameras, so any given camera might be as low as 1.4μs per frame.

rhdunn · 5 months ago
The slow mo guys did a video [1] at 10 trillion FPS. They also recently did another video [2] at 5,000,000 FPS. Their other videos vary between 50,000 FPS and 850,000 FPS.

Edit: They mention in [2] that the Phantom camera they have can go to a 95ns exposure up to 1,750,000 FPS.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Ys_yKGNFRQ&pp=ygUMc2xvdyBtb...

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BTkZ36g4GOs

montag · 5 months ago
I understood the article just fine, despite the spurious hyphen. The HN title could be improved immensely if it just said 7 microseconds.
dbeardsl · 5 months ago
I think this is incorrect reading of the numbers

I've never heard of `{number} {plural magnitude}` meaning `mag / number`. I've only ever seen it mean `number * mag`. As in 3-thousandths == 3 * 0.001 not 0.001 / 3.

7 * 0.001ms = 0.007ms or 7us or 7000ns.

isatty · 5 months ago
I read it as months. Super confusing.
1970-01-01 · 5 months ago
7 months/seconds - Its both a dimensionless quantity and a variable. Very impressive. Los Alamos is taking the USA's 'anything but metric units for measuring' to new levels.
LAsteNERD · 5 months ago
Fascinating look into the dynamic imaging capabilities at Los Alamos National Lab—essentially, how the U.S. is able to analyze nuclear-level explosive events without actually conducting nuclear tests.

The Lab uses multiple systems to image these high-speed events:

• pRad uses proton radiography to get 20–40 frames of a detonation, with material-level resolution based on density.

• DARHT uses dual-axis x-ray imaging to create 3D snapshots from two angles, ideal for testing whether the computational models built from pRad hold up.

• Scorpius (in development) will take this a step further by using subcritical plutonium in a new accelerator at NNSS, capturing multiple high-resolution frames just nanoseconds apart.

The fact that they can tailor experiments based on frame-by-frame behavior of individual materials under explosive stress feels like the real-world version of “bullet time” physics modeling. The margins of error come down to billionths of a second.

josh2600 · 5 months ago
Thank you for contextualizing this. We are truly living in a wild part of the space time continuum.
meager_wikis · 5 months ago
Every time I read about one of the national labs doing this research, I wonder how much longer we will head about these. I feel fairly positive that DOGE's layoffs and budget cuts mean this output will fade away in time.
LAsteNERD · 5 months ago
I worry about this, but these capabilities are hard to replace. This kind of research hasn’t historically been something you can outsource to private companies. Or—at least—it hasn’t been until now. Even if this administration wants to open that door, the infrastructure investment required for the accelerators alone is staggering: easily in the multiple billions.
sfilmeyer · 5 months ago
Maybe I'm misreading your comment, but you seem like you're talking about privatizing this research whereas the other commenter seems to be talking about public cuts leading to a reduction of research. Just because something gets cut doesn't mean it gets outsourced elsewhere.
kjkjadksj · 5 months ago
It’s for bombs, it’s untouchable.
elygre · 5 months ago
It might end up financing a gold-plated airplane for a library.
mythrwy · 5 months ago
I don't think defense budget is facing cuts. They are getting even more money.
dralley · 5 months ago
The national labs are absolutely getting budget cuts.
dttze · 5 months ago
That’s going to the MIC grift though.
mhh__ · 5 months ago
Labs like this also have huge black budget spending that we don't get to see.

I'm guessing we'll see more hidden spending in future as the nukes and the engineers that made them get older. its worth asking if they even work (in some countries arsenals at least)

Deleted Comment

Dead Comment

tandr · 5 months ago
Pardon for the old meme here, but... "Pics, or did not happened!"?
cosmicgadget · 5 months ago
Yeah I kind of expected explosionpron not camera rig diagrams.
LAsteNERD · 5 months ago
Discussion continues, with more on dynamic imaging and the labs, here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44876919
getpost · 5 months ago
It's an apples-to-oranges comparison, but I'm reminded of the ~10^12 fps (1.7 ps exposures) demonstrated in work at MIT[0], which was for a completely different application.

[0] https://web.media.mit.edu/~raskar/trillionfps/

EDIT: Video with explanation. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EtsXgODHMWk

cco · 5 months ago
Why are science communicators so consistently missing the mark?

Is it not obvious that if you're writing an article proclaiming to capture _explosions_ at 7mths of a second, people want to see some pictures of said explosions?

Clearly they're understanding that explosions are a hook to grab the reader's attention, but then they just don't include any of the resulting pictures?

C'mon y'all! We need to do better here!

LAsteNERD · 5 months ago
junon · 5 months ago
404 for me in Germany.
ooterness · 5 months ago
Page not found :(
paradox460 · 5 months ago
For more on this, look at the DAHRT project. It occurred up the hill a bit from LANSCE, in DX instead, but did similar things