So, Michael did a really lovely job of introducing basic concepts and fusion.
Some of the problems we're facing with fusion.
And I really want to think about where is he going next? How can we take it further?
What are the devices that we're going to consider? So I hope by the end of this talk, I will at least somehow convince some of you that Stellarator,
which I will introduce in a moment, could potentially be the future of fusion.
Okay. So before I get started, there are obviously other different types of fusion devices.
One being an actual component fusion, which actually we'll talk about in the last topic of the day.
But we also have other areas of research.
I'm putting them on the slides here just to be transparent that, you know, tokamak accelerators, etc. are not the only form of fusion.
Other things do exist, but I'm not really gonna spend any time on these.
I just want to point out there are other areas of active research.
So arguably the most popularised fusion device is the Tokamak.
Most of you probably would have heard of it. It's the one that makes it into the news.
It's one that has a lot of fancy science results, maybe overhyped, as we've heard.
But, you know, this is arguably the most famous fusion device.
So a really quick recap of what a tokamak is. It's basically a doughnut.
We say it has this as a little symmetry. I'm sure you all know what it means, but it means it's symmetric with two pi.
So how do they work? Well, we for most modern day tokamaks, we have these capacitors in which the Tokamak is sandwiched in between.
And we discharge a current. This current induces a toroidal electric field.
So that's one that goes around the doughnut. So it'd be like the jam of the doughnut.
This electric field increases the current. The current very nicely produces these colloidal magnetic fields.
So that's like the basically the shape of those red poke at the pointer, those red circles up here.
So this would be the colloidal clay that is generated by the current that goes through or part of it is and this is themselves confining, right?
It keeps it in this doughnut shape. Those magnetic fields contain on our tokamak.
So that's what I took my first very quick refresh to those we can think back to Michael talk you know and that
has been talked about tokamaks have their own problems and they are numerous and I'm not going to get over that.
But some real main ones that we have to consider, all one we actually need to charge them up is means they are discontinuous and use.
This is extremely problematic when we think about you know from a commercial standpoint we don't want to be connecting discontinuous problem.
Any second now, it will hopefully come back up. We don't want a discontinuous power supply to our national grid.
The irony is not lost on me. You know, this is why we need stuttering.
So, like I mentioned, they have this steroid occurrence that is actually extremely problematic.
It wasn't mentioned too much by my uncle, but this is extremely problematic because they drive their own instabilities.
There is a whole host of instabilities associated with this toroidal current.
They lead to these violent outbursts that you saw on that on that video that Michael played when we had those flashes of white light,
that was the violent disruptions, again, partly due to these.
So that that's one problem. And the assignment problem I really want to mention is that Tokamaks have this empirically observed density limit.
That means we hit a wall of the density that we're allowed. And for some reason that we're not entirely sure about yet, we can't go beyond this.
And as you can imagine, that is really bad for fusion. We want high densities because then fusion is more likely to happen and the likelihood of
a reaction actually occurring is going to be greater if we have these high densities.
So these are some problems of tokamaks. So I'm going to propose to you an alternative that is rising,
arguably in popularity amongst some and all people in the in the field is that that's the stellarator.
So how can we think what is the stellarator? So the way I'm going to explain this to you is the following.
I take my tokamak, I twist it, I stretch it, and maybe compress it in some way.
Just kind of really moulder around and I'm going to get a stellarator.
So what am I actually doing? What? What do I mean when I say I'm twisting, stretching, etcetera?
Well, these purple surfaces that you see here are the flux surfaces that Michael spoke about earlier.
We hope and pray that all particles are going to be confined, these purple surfaces.
And the idea is they're allowed to steam along these surfaces, but we don't want them drifting off of them.
And a tokamak, generally speaking, has these like nested surfaces.
So the way you can think about this is if you think about one of the Russian dolls.
But we have one is the other side. The other is like the other. We hope that we have these kind of purple surfaces.
One is like the other is like the other. And I'm going to take each of my purple surfaces.
I'm going to twist it in some funky way, and I'm going to get some crazy geometry that has no is no longer acce symmetric.
So one thing I really want to draw your attention to here, because it's going to come up later in the talk.
You know, it is, you know, tokamak nice and symmetric. It has this by symmetry.
And look how simple the shape is. It looks nice, right?
The stellarator. Now the hand has this very nontrivial geometry.
And as such, the coils that can go around the outside have to match.
This complicated geometry has to recreate these magnetic surfaces.
So they are just going to be more complicated and it's not as trivial a problem to create the shape in a stellarator as it is in a tokamak.
So that's my vague introduction to what a stellarator is. I hope it gives you some kind of a feel for what they look like.
But you know, as you can imagine,
I can't just twist my device in whatever way I want and expect to get a fusion reaction that's going to work perfectly.
You can just imagine that not everything is going to work.
So we have to ask ourselves, what devices are we actually allowed?
So Michael spoke about in his talk very kindly leading up to mine that we have these regions of good and bad curvature.
So on the bad curvature region, this is where those instabilities all unstable.
They grow in amplitude. This is really problematic.
But on the good curvature region, we have, you know, stability, the amplitudes of turbulence, the suppressed, etc. we like that side.
So the tokamaks, the way that they deal with the fact that we have turbulence, etc., as Michael very kindly explained earlier,
was they take stuff from the outside where it's unstable and these are all the way to the inside where it's stable.
And the jargon within the fusion community to describe this is something called the safety factor, which I put up here.
It's called Q for some unknown reason, and it's just basically telling us the number of toroidal turns.
So the number of times we go down way along the doughnut bars, over the number of colloidal terms,
which is the number of times we go the short way around the doughnut. And for tokamaks, generally speaking, we want this to be greater than one.
And the reason we want this is because then the particles will on average see good curvature.
You know, overall they will those perturbations will be stable.
So that's what we do for Tokamaks. You know, I care about Stellar.
So what do I do to celebrate as well? You know, the not actually symmetric.
And so it's not as trivial as it is in the Tokamak.
We don't necessarily have an intuitive feel of what the good and bad curvatures are in the stellarator.
So we have to be more intelligent. We have to think a bit more.
And I was very proud of this shape. But we have to think outside the non actually symmetric.
And I will tell you, I laughed at this when I came up with it.
Say, well, let me say before I even decide what I'm not allowed to like, before I tell you what I am and what I want for my salary.
We have to think what are excluded? What are we not allowed to do?
So in order to think, well, I can't have, I need to know what I'm worried about.
Right. So there are two main problems that I want to talk about today that we have to be very worried about.
So they are magnetic drift and this thing could be a classical transport, which hasn't been introduced yet.
But I will introduce you to it in a minute. So the first one.
Is magnetic dressed again, Michael, very kindly, almost leading up to this presentation like it was planned.
Introduce the magnetic dress earlier. So the first one just to highlight here, something Michael sticks out is the equals B dressed.
And this is purely a dress that acts radially and it's a result of the fact we have electric and magnetic fields in all systems.
We have that rugby dress that Michael spoke about earlier where we have these
dress that are occurring purely as a result of a magnetic field gradient.
And again, just to remind you back to Michael's talk,
this is occurring because where there is a weaker magnetic field, it's a lot bigger and stronger magnetic field.
The normal weight is a smaller. And again, this means that these dress out of our device.
But there's one additional thing that we need to consider,
and this is very inventively called the curvature dress, and it arises because of curvature.
And so the way you can think about this is the particles are streaming along and they
experience some kind of fictitious centrifugal force outwards purely as a result of curvature.
So these are something that we need to contend with, something we need to be aware of these these little losses in our devices.
The other thing I want to introduce here is an external transport.
So let's take a moment to think about what this actually is.
So on the board here, I have a schematic of the magnetic field, all the talk of that.
So it's quite a crude schematic. So please forgive me slightly, but the general just isn't here.
So we have the magnetic field as a function of along the field line.
So we have regions where the magnetic field is stronger and this is going to correspond
to that good curvature region which is on the inside of our torque network.
Magnetic field is stronger.
We have this region of bad curvature which is corresponding to the outside of our device, whether magnetic field is weaker.
So I'm now going to invite you to consider some different particles.
So let's start off with a particle that has enough energy to sample the entire magnetic field.
I'm kind of representing this as a red line on the field line.
However, I know energy and field are not quite like this as a square.
But generally speaking, imagine my particle has enough energy to sample anything on the field line.
Well, as you can imagine, it's just going to stream all the way around my device.
It's going to go along the field line almost as if it was never impeded.
It'll just keep going. Okay. But obviously not enough.
Nothing's ever that simple. So we might have a different type of particle, right?
Let's now consider a particle that only has enough energy to sample some of the magnetic field.
Well, in this case, it doesn't have enough energy to go to the good character regions or beyond sitting in a steaming round.
Instead, it gets trapped inside, basically a potential well, and it's just going to bounce back and forth, back and forth.
And it's going to be confined to, mostly speaking, the Bad Cabbage region.
So this introduces two different types of particle trajectories.
So the first to do with the particle that can sample the entire magnetic field is called passing particles.
So this flat surface here is a flat surface, as I spoke about earlier, and I've only just taken a cut in my in my tokamak to look at it.
But they would just go all the way around. They have no problem. They can just do the entire thing.
The other ones, the trap particles, which don't have enough energy to sample the whole thing, are going to bounce within this magnetic.
Well, right. I'm going to go back and forth and back and forth.
And if this is kind of when the classical starts coming in as we talk about these orbits and how they relate to collisions.
So collisions tend to enhance these types of stress of these orbits.
And that is, generally speaking, what we call neo classical transport.
It's not entirely important for this talk to really fully understand every detail of the classical transport.
But I really want to give you an overview of what it's talking about.
So these drifts outwards will cause electric fields, these clothes again in the perturbations, etcetera, etcetera.
And we end up finding that there is more transport because of these types of orbits.
And just so you can see what these really look like on the on the left here,
I have the passing particles and you can see the black lines are giving us particle trajectories and they just go all the way round.
They have no problem. They're very happy. On the right here, I have my trap particles and again, the black lines that are showing us the trajectories.
And you see, they kind of bounce back and forth and they never make it to this blue side at the top of that.
So this is just how they would look in our device. So this is passing trap particles.
Okay. So now let's have a look at a schematic for Stellarator magnetic field.
So you can see it looks very similar to a tokamak shape.
It's got this same kind of like oval arching structure, but on top of it,
it has these like little undulations on it, and that's arising because of the geometry of our device.
So now when we think about all types of particles.
Well, the first is all passing particles again. They have no problem making sample the entire magnetic field.
This is fine. But the particles, because of these more complicated geometries, they have the potential to get trapped in these small wells as well.
And so I just kind of want to show you a video quickly of what this kind of looks like.
So this is a device that is not optimal. So the red lines are showing the particle factories.
And currently we're looking at the passing particles.
As you see, they don't really have much of a problem. They stick to our device quite nicely.
They're not really the big concern here, but these trap particles as we're about to see.
They start off on our socks off so that they start off being quite happy.
You'll see they very quickly drift radially out of out of the flux office.
This is problematic. This is leading to losses in our device.
It's poor confinement in general. This is not good. This isn't what we want.
So this is a non optimised thing. You can see this type of problem is now arising and it's obviously going to be more
complicated in a device like a stellarator because the geometry is more complicated.
Okay. So you just quickly summarise neo classical transport is this interaction between collisions and geometry.
And honestly, we have very little control over this part of our equation.
I mean, it's a very crude equation, but we have very little control over I can't tell my particles how to collide.
Alex, you might not disagree with me, but I can't tell my pocket, Clyde.
I can't tell them how to interact. Well, what I do have a lot of control over, especially for stellar eaters, is the geometry.
So that's what I'm really going to say to something. So, you know, I've told you, these are my problems.
What do I demand in order for these things not to actually be a problem within my salary?
So you can maybe just think hard for 5 minutes and you might come up with the idea.
As Michael kind of alluded to earlier, we want these average drifts to go to zero.
That means that as my particle goes around the device, in theory,
it would be following its field line and at some point it might draw out away
from my device and other points on sort of mind in the good character region.
It might drift back onto the field line overall during its entire order.
I want that radio address to go to zero. So basically, I want those things to not leave the magnetic surface on average.
That is the general gist of what I want. You might think that's nice and obvious, which if you think hard, it might happen.
Sadly, I didn't come up with it. And I'm sure you all remember from your physics undergrad that we absolutely love symmetries in physics.
Whenever there's a symmetry,
we normally have some kind of concept of quantity associated with it and the symmetry associated with these types of things.
I'm going to focus on in this talk anyway something called quasi symmetry.
It is a subset of a wider part, a wider group of symmetries, but it's one that I'm really just going to focus on today.
And so for these symmetries, I'm saying that, B, have a continuous symmetry in the sun quarter system.
And if my device is quasi symmetric, it means that these radio dressing are going to average to zero, which is exactly what I want from my device.
So this is going to be something I'm going to focus on. So what do I mean when I say the causes metric?
I told you this complicated thing that, you know, in the sun coordinate system, etc., etc., but what am I actually telling me?
It means that if I take my I stellarator here, which arguably has very complicated geometry compared to our nice simple tokamak,
I take a little cut down one of the sentence. I'm going to cut it about here.
I'm going to unfold it. Unwrap it. I'm going to apply my coordinate transformation.
I'm going to get something that looks like this. So would you believe that these two are the same regardless?
They are. But the idea is, if I have a particle streaming along here, if my device is quasi symmetric, I can make one of these transformations.
And my particle wouldn't know. It's not in an axis symmetric system, so it doesn't know that it's not a tokamak under this coordinate transformation.
And so this is how we get these types of symmetries. You know, there's been a lot of work into it.
And I feel like it's slightly more understood these days that this is what we require for confinement.
And just to show you that this isn't kind of something that people have, scratch their heads over and actually had applications.
These are some quasi symmetric devices that exist, like some of them have actually been built.
So w seven max have been built in Germany is one that I would focus on today.
You know, some of these devices exist in the real world and have gone on.
So this is a real advancement for theory, right?
We made these predictions, made these gluons on our symmetries, and we came up with shapes that are allowed for our stellarator.
Okay. So I've told you the demands. I told you the symmetries that I require for my stellarator.
But I guess why do we want stellarator anyway?
Tokamaks are more favourable, you might ask. Surely them will save for a reason.
And to. To explain to you why I think we won't celebrate.
I think it's important to understand this kind of rat race between tokamaks and celebrate is so a little bit of a history of stellarator.
They actually were conceptualised by Spitzer in 1951, before the Tokamak was.
So people thought accelerators were going to work us.
And there was kind of a funny anecdote that Spitzer was on.
It was skiing. He was on a ski lift. And between the time of the bottom and the top of the ski lift, he had completely outgrew Tokamaks.
He had decided they weren't going to work and it was due to this toroidal current that they have.
He said that too unstable. They're not going to work. And so the initial influx of interest was actually accelerated.
So this is Spitzer himself with the first stellarator, and I really want to highlight the size of this thing.
It would probably fit happily on this table, but following this, there was actually an influx of interest in Stellarator.
And, you know, they didn't want to don that. That's just another story.
But following that introduction, the Soviet Union in 1968 unveiled to the world the Tokamak, and it was just superior.
It had better confinement, had better fusion properties in general.
It was just far better than one of these tabletop devices.
And that's because this was extremely lossy. It didn't have good confinement.
So the Tokamak took over. And you might ask, okay, great.
So they both existed. Why? Why did Tokamaks fly off the shelf?
Why did everyone pick up Tokamak Research and not continue with both?
And I think it's nicely encapsulated by the statement.
I try to avoid hard work when things that complicated, that is often a sign that there is a better way to do it.
And I think if you ask anyone who was with me, I live my life by this philosophy.
So I mean, if we're being completely honest, it stellarator is initially they were neoclassical dominated.
So those programs that I told you about mean classical transport that was a real problem to solve is so that was problematic.
The Soviet Union tokamaks that were unveiled to the world which are superior.
Like I said, they had better confinement, better fusion properties in general.
They looked like they were going to work better. But I think one thing is just that they were objectively simpler.
You know, they looked more attractive to both engineers, to physicists.
We feel like we can approach the more they are just objectively simpler, and I think that makes them more attractive.
But you know, with numerical developments with other people at Oxford, we have been able to really make advancements in stellarator physics.
So we're now actually able to optimise for that new classical transport that I spoke about earlier.
So this isn't just something I'm saying we can do, it's something that has been done.
So there exist accelerator, like I mentioned, in Rice out in Germany, could find signs of an X or w7x for sure.
And this was the conceptual shape that you can see. It's very complicated.
The yellow is the magnetic field or the magnetic flux axis, and these blue,
horrible squiggly things are the coils that are required to produce that surface.
Please note just how horrible they are. It is non-trivial and it is much more complicated than the lovely tokamak which has this beautiful symmetry.
But, you know, these things do exist. This was the concept of it.
This was the construction of it.
Notice not only how big these things are, as I'm sure Michael kind of hammered home earlier, but notice how complicated the shape is.
It's not nice. It's not. And this at each point in our stellarator as we go around, this will change.
Shape is not going to be the same here as it is here or here now.
It changes shape as we go around the device. It looks messy.
But, you know, physicists like continued, they had, you know, was the iron.
Well, they continued forward and we actually have built their designs overnight.
So I say we as if I had anything to do with it, but we built out Windows seven X, it exists, it's now in operation and it is producing results.
We experiment on it. You know, it is a device that now exists.
And this is a real triumph of theory because we have been able to optimise in the classical transport.
Okay. So this is just the mall side by side. Although from inception to completion and now it exists.
Okay, so what I would want to evaluate, you might say, right, how are they any better than Tokamaks?
Well, one thing is that they are driven by these external coils.
That's great, because we can now have continuous operation. You remember that?
I told you that tokamaks are discontinuous and these we don't have that problem
to celebrate because we can completely drive them by these external current.
The external coils which are driven by currents with more improvements in materials, we can use superconducting coils.
This is great for power output. It reduces the power we need to drive these devices.
They don't have this toroidal current or at least we can design them to not have these two little currents.
You know, I told you that this was a real problem for Tokamaks because it draws a whole load of instabilities and some major disruptions.
But Stellarator is we can avoid that completely. That's very. They have an empirically observed high density limit than Tokamaks I told you before,
the Tokamaks have this wall of density that we don't really understand, but we can't go beyond it.
We don't seem to have such a rule in Saturday celebrations that there will be problems that we
don't seem to have such work and currently tokamaks are not producing good enough confinement.
We had arguments earlier that they're not doing great and there is the potential the STELLARATOR could fill that gap.
Well, you know, I'm telling you, kind of a beautiful picture of salary.
Is that going to fix all of our problems? But as you expect to get anything for every single advantage that we have, we are at a disadvantage.
So you know, stellarator, they do have more complicated geometries.
I cannot hide that this is not a super attractive feature in terms of engineering, etc.
They are they are just complicated. That is something we just kind of have to deal with.
They, you know, they don't have these self-generated currents.
And although I've been telling you how problematic these currents are,
there are people within the community who actually think these these currents could be helpful.
They they generate this colloidal carrot of this field that goes round the short way around tokamak, which is self confining.
At the moment, it's only 10 to 20%. That actually helps.
But some people really want to take advantage of this. They want to see if they can push it further.
Now, that could potentially be a problem or at least a disadvantage compared to Tokamaks.
They have these big radios. We don't know if that's going to be a problem.
The accelerators are comparatively feeling kind of new in terms of how much we understand them.
That's still to be worked on that.
And then the final disadvantage accelerators, which up until now are really shoved under the rug.
And I didn't want to mention it because it is a very embarrassing point for those of us who like elevators,
is that we're not actually guaranteed to have these massive accesses.
So, Topamax, I told you we had these kind of like Russian dolls of magnetic surfaces.
We can't guarantee this the stuttering, because we can say that we can we can demand that we have at least one,
maybe a couple, but there's no 100% guarantee that we can have these nice nested fluxes.
You know, we do need to be cautious of that. Okay.
So there seems to be as many disadvantages as I have for advantages over salary.
It isn't. All right. I'm telling you that every thing I say that's good about a salary in the same breath.
I'm telling you the bad things about them. And you may be very well inclined to think that this is the slowest race in humanity.
You know, we first conceptualised harnessing the power of the sun 100 days ago.
That was when it was first thought that maybe we could produce seasonal math to try and produce energy in the same way the Sun does.
The first Stellarator was thought of and built about 70 years ago and 70 years on,
we are probably no farther than the Tokamak is in terms of our advancements when facing similar problems.
And you'd be very right to think this is a very silly race that who is winning is tortoise versus tortoise.
But, you know, whenever we have problems, physicists have said save the day.
And so we like to think of ourselves as superheroes from time to time.
So, you know, I've told you that there are many problems,
that these are ongoing active areas of research in which people are making some serious leaps in different areas.
So I repeat, if you mess with me, not to mention that we are making new strides and understand the physics of these problems and also that
a lot of people dedicate a lot of time to understanding fundamentals to understand the instabilities.
Now we are slowly trying to get to grips with the physics going on here.
We are making major strides in optimising some field configurations.
So what I mean by this, I showed you those magnetic flux surfaces, you know, the purple ones and how they're all twisted.
Well, I can change them in a certain way and move them about and use machine learning
and other clever techniques to try and optimise these for my confinement.
The other thing which I kind of want to maybe emphasise a little bit is those horrible looking coils that we had.
Everyone in this room would be very entitled to say, they look like an engineering nightmare.
How are we ever going to have that being a commercially viable saying?
How are we ever going to have this working?
Well, I'm here to tell you, physicists are saving the day because some people are working very hard to optimise these clothes for error.
What do I mean by that? If you give me your pragmatic successes that I want and you're saying this is the surface,
I want these give me the coils in which I have as much tolerance as possible,
and I'll still get the same magnetic flux of this, all the same confinement properties.
And the reason we really want this is despite us all wanting to think we can do our best job ever,
we can never arrange these coils down to atomic precision.
So we need to allow some kind of error because we can never get them perfect.
And that has been some real strides in this area, meaning that these horrible looking coils are becoming more and more accessible to us.
And again, it'd be a mistake not to mention the fact that there is research into turbulence.
And yes, I, too, if I ever meet, God, will say why turbulence?
As Michael put in that lovely quote,
you might be noticing that the overarching theme here of why we are making so much progress with salary does the maybe we
haven't made in the past is due to numerics really and it's actually something I personally spend a lot of time focusing on.
So a large portion of my Ph.D. has been to develop code.
So you may, if you recall, cast your mind back to Michael's talk where we had those that picture of the Tokamak.
It was beautiful. It was green and blue and speckled.
That was actually done by simulating a single field line and stitching them all together.
We can recreate the whole surface. And the reason we're allowed to do this is because the that the Tokamak has this nice symmetry about it.
Stellarator doesn't have these symmetries.
So the codes that we currently have that have been working for Tokamaks don't necessarily apply to Stellarator as well.
If you think just kind of vaguely each field line on my own, my surface is going to expose a different geometry, right?
So I can't stitch them together. I can't just reproduce the same field line and hope for the best.
So I need to be a bit more clever. And part of my research especially has been producing a code that simulates the entire flux at phase.
So now we can look at fusion simulations of the entire thing and we can see how geometry is going to influence this.
So like I said, we are making big strides in these in these areas.
But largely this is due to massive advancements, which is why it's taken so long for accelerators to catch up.
Okay. So why do I think that Celera is all going to be the future of fusion?
You know, why do I have such strong faith in them? I'm going to draw your attention back to the schematics on the board, which I had up before.
And these, again, just remind you of the magnetic field strength of a tokamak and the stellarator.
And I spoke before about these problematic trapped particles.
I said they are they could be worse in a stellarator because we have these more complicated geometries.
Now, it's just hard to understand that really this actually these complicated geometries could be accelerated to make a string.
And to demonstrate why this could be the case, I'm going to use one example of these trap particles.
So I told you that we could get trapped here, but we could also get trapped here.
Problematic that some people in the audience may have already asked themselves,
why couldn't we trap up here instead where we have like in the schematic good kind of where turbulence and instabilities all stabilise.
And this is exactly why I think Stellarator could be the future or at least could
give us a beacon of light forward in fusion research is because some people who
are extremely clever and probably cleverer than I am could design a shape in such
a way to take advantage of the fact that we could cause all of our trapping.
For example, in a good capital region, we could design autocrats as right.
We could design accelerators in order to be favourable for fusion and favourable for life.
So what I want out of my device. So with all these opportunities, it gives scientists, physicists,
people who are researching this space to be more intelligent with that design and to really try and determine what they want.
And so this is exactly why I think celebrate is all they all could at least be the teacher of magnetic confinement region.
It's because this big a parameter space that they offer,
despite it being horribly complicated and somewhat scary, it offers more opportunities to control.
And it means that with more numerical advancements, we could potentially adjust it in a way that we want.
And this isn't just me thinking, Oh, this could be great. This actually has been great.
So to demonstrate that this is not just entirely me having wishful thinking, I want to show you another video.
So before I showed you that video of a non optimised device, this is not one that has been optimised for that main classical transport.
So achievement of size of next the device in Germany.
So again, the red lines are showing the the particle directories and you can see the parts and particles.
Again, no problems. We don't have any issues with these guys that they're quite happy on a flat surface.
And now we're going to look at the trap particles, which before, if you remember, caused us problems.
They radially drifted away from our device and that's extremely bad behaviour.
So again, these are the the Trump articles, they start on the successes and you'll see as they come back around they have drifted away.
But by the time they closed back into the same location, the radial drift has averaged to zero.
And so this is an example of optimisation for these types of problems.
And this actually, like I said, has been built and it has gone to operation.
And so this shows that theory can sometimes prevail and we can make these types of strides forward.
Okay. So, you know, just to then whet your appetite for the future accelerators and what this could mean.
These are some wacky designs that people have come up with that potentially have very good confinement properties.
So I wouldn't claim to to tell you anything about these confinement properties,
but you can see they're getting a bit more crazy like this one here is wild.
So this just shows that with more intelligence, with more numerical advances, we are actually making some strides.
These could be the future devices that power our national grid.
So we know. But the idea here is, I think the fact that we have more geometry, we have more control, we have more opportunities.
You might think initially this is terrifying, but this actually could be one of the best things about Cellarity.
And so to almost as I told you before, that we had this really slow race of tortoise races, quarters of stellarator and tokamak.
What I'd actually like you to think it's more of a quote from Paris, where, you know, the Tokamak flew forward.
It started off great, had a lot of advances at the beginning, but it hit this wall.
It now is now limited, partly because of its geometry.
You know, the Stellarator has been chugging along in the background.
We've made some advancements. It's coming further forward. It's managed to reach up to the have.
You never know. In the future it may completely take over.
So with that, I want to thank you for your time,
and I hope I've at least tried to convince you that Stellarator could be the twisted tokamak of the future.