Discussion Overview
The discussion revolves around the feasibility of achieving air breakdown using a 980nm laser with a 1 microsecond pulse duration and 250 milliwatts of power. Participants explore various factors influencing laser-induced ionization, including pulse duration, energy output, and wavelength considerations.
Discussion Character
- Exploratory
- Technical explanation
- Debate/contested
- Conceptual clarification
Main Points Raised
- Some participants note that a 5 nanosecond pulse with 50 millijoules achieved air breakdown, questioning whether a longer pulse with higher energy could yield similar results.
- One participant corrects an earlier claim about power output, clarifying that the output is actually 250,000 watts, not 250 milliwatts.
- A reference to a paper suggests that higher nanometer wavelengths and microsecond pulses might be effective for ionization.
- There is a suggestion that using two lasers focused into one beam could enhance the chances of achieving air breakdown.
- Some participants discuss the potential advantages of using lower wavelength (UV) lasers, as they provide more electron volts per photon, possibly improving ionization chances.
- A participant shares an anecdote about a high-power CO2 laser capable of breaking down air, emphasizing the complexity and cost of such setups.
- One participant expresses a desire to innovate and improve existing technologies, highlighting a belief in the potential for advancements in laser applications.
- Another participant encourages creativity and curiosity in STEM, affirming that there is value in exploration and learning.
Areas of Agreement / Disagreement
Participants express a range of views regarding the effectiveness of different laser parameters for achieving air breakdown, with no consensus reached on the optimal approach or the feasibility of the proposed methods.
Contextual Notes
Participants reference various assumptions about energy requirements, pulse duration, and the effectiveness of different wavelengths without resolving these uncertainties. The discussion includes anecdotal evidence and personal experiences that may not directly apply to the current project.