Focus Fusion news story

[Joseph Chikva]

"Polywell is not a beam machine"

Joseph, You said that POPs is not a beam machine, but Polywell is. Please explain why do you see them differently?

POPS is machine or principle how should ions oscillate around the center? Where I said that POPS is machine?

[ladajo]

Do you consider POPS a beam approach? I do not. I consider it a convergence approach, as I do Polywell, in the macro. In the micro, I do think there can be applied a simplification of beam principles (as I have said before), to analyse detailed interaction, but the larger construct, is not viable for beam machine analysis. It is more complex, and does not function in a beam mode.

I do not consider POPS as beams. But electron beams are injected into plasma sphere and they interact each other. "Beam injected into background plasma" is a standard condition when 2-stream is an issue. And electron beams are more vulnerable than ions'.

It would seem here that you said that.

[Joseph Chikva]

Do you consider POPS a beam approach? I do not. I consider it a convergence approach, as I do Polywell, in the macro. In the micro, I do think there can be applied a simplification of beam principles (as I have said before), to analyse detailed interaction, but the larger construct, is not viable for beam machine analysis. It is more complex, and does not function in a beam mode.

I do not consider POPS as beams. But electron beams are injected into plasma sphere and they interact each other. "Beam injected into background plasma" is a standard condition when 2-stream is an issue. And electron beams are more vulnerable than ions'.

It would seem here that you said that.

And did I call POPS "machine"? I call that "the name of principle". The desired principle how Polywell should work by its inventor and developers.

[ladajo]

Yes, POPs is a principle tested in a mirror machine (modified Penning Trap).
Just as Polywell is another principle being tested in a gridless electrostatic confinement machine.

My original point in bring up POPs was that Nebel and Parks were the senior team members for POPs. There was no accident that Bussard picked them for Polywell. Many parallels.

The second point I was seeking clarification on was whether or not you think the POPs machine is a beam machine?

I see them both as volumetric convergence machines with a degree of angular motion. One "surges", one does not.

Another point to consider in your persistant discussion of electron beams, is that Bussard (and Nebel) both thought that Polywell may be able to run without electron sources once scaled up. This was also part of Bussard's critiques of continuing testing on smaller machines.

[hanelyp]

If Debye length of system is less than its geometric dimension you can not separate spices (species?) with the help of external electrostatic field.

And what would be the Debye length in a region where the mean free path is larger than the size of the chamber?

The Polywell is a vacuum tube, employing electric potentials comparable to particle energy. This one detail sets it apart from most other fusion devices, and invalidates many assumptions standard for other devices. Until you have a good grasp on vacuum tube principles you have no hope of understanding the polywell.

One effect of the potential difference maintained between the magrid and the surrounding recirculation grid is that any charged particles finding their way into the region are pushed towards one side or the other, leaving little for particles to run into.

Far smarter people than you have attempted to prove the polywell can't work, and been persuaded the device has a chance.

[Joseph Chikva]

And what would be the Debye length in a region where the mean free path is larger than the size of the chamber?

Do alphas escape the chamber separately or together with lost ions and lost electrons? I think that together.
And Debye length has nothing to do with free path.

Debye length (also called Debye radius), named after the Dutch physicist and physical chemist Peter Debye, is the scale over which mobile charge carriers (e.g. electrons) screen out electric fields in plasmas and other conductors. In other words, the Debye length is the distance over which significant charge separation can occur.

For TOKAMAKs and gas discharges Debye length has an order of 0.1mm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debye_length

Far smarter people than you have attempted to prove the polywell can't work, and been persuaded the device has a chance.

Thanks. To me all the same will Polywell work or not. I practice in English, I have a little a good time here. For example, your and e.g. Kiteman’s rage amuses me when you are convicted of ignorance of very basic things.
Yes, when I am seeing wrong or doubtful statement - I am correcting. For example your very “smart” statements on uniform current distribution in TOKAMAKs or you today’s confusion of Debye length and free path.

[KitemanSA]

Thanks. To me all the same will Polywell work or not. I practice in English, I have a little a good time here. For example, your and e.g. Kiteman’s rage amuses me when you are convicted of ignorance of very basic things.

Hanelyp,
So, are you feeling "rage"?
For me it is more humor with a tad of disgust at the willful ignorance of some. But rage? No. I reserve that for things that matter.

[ogiw]

Ad homenim's aside, I asked joseph some time back about his bona fixes. Specifically, I asked what actual fusion reactor projects he himself has "bent metal" on. I based my inquiry on his incessant, repetitious criticisms of many reactor designs.

I never received a coherent reply.

I do not claim expertise in fusion reactor design or construction.

He does.

Without proof that he is anything but a very knowledgeable theoretician, subject to corroboration, criticism or proof himself.

Or, he's just a fanboy troll ...

Not up to me to decide.

I am not theoretician as I am engineer. I do not remember what did you ask. May be I missed somwhere. And do you think that real estimation of direct energy converter's length is a trolling?
Do you think that everybody in harmonous order should repeat "Polywell is not a beam machine"? While that is a beam-plasma machine.
Knowing such a simple things I became "knowledgeable theoretician"? Thanks I did not knew.

Then, I shall ask again.

What actual fusion reactor or fusion-inducing device have you yourself actually constructed?

Note, I am not asking for colleagues, family or friends names here.

I am also not asking for proposed designs.

EMC has built numerous devices.

Some of the people here have done so.

What devices have you actually built?

[Joseph Chikva]

EMC has built numerous devices.

Some of the people here have done so.

What devices have you actually built?

EMC2 built devices that do not work as desired. I did not build reactor on base of my fusion idea because simply I have not required for that several hundred millions dollars. Some people here built? May be. But only if they used e.g. TV-set's electron gun and vacuum chamber taken and retrofitted from clothes washing machine.

[vernes]

EMC has built numerous devices.

Some of the people here have done so.

What devices have you actually built?

EMC2 built devices that do not work as desired. I did not build reactor on base of my fusion idea because simply I have not required for that several hundred millions dollars. Some people here built? May be. But only if they used e.g. TV-set's electron gun and vacuum chamber taken and retrofitted from clothes washing machine.

Even 'I' can understand this part. It translates to "no".

[Joseph Chikva]

Even 'I' can understand this part. It translates to "no".

Of course, no.

[KitemanSA]

EMC2 built devices that do not work as desired.

And the basis for your libelous statement is?

[Joseph Chikva]

EMC2 built devices that do not work as desired.

And the basis for your libelous statement is?

EMC2 has modified the electron injectors to increase the plasma heating

These sentence as I understand is taken from official document. Where is POPS - periodically oscillation of ions?

[ogiw]

EMC has built numerous devices.

Some of the people here have done so.

What devices have you actually built?

EMC2 built devices that do not work as desired. I did not build reactor on base of my fusion idea because simply I have not required for that several hundred millions dollars. Some people here built? May be. But only if they used e.g. TV-set's electron gun and vacuum chamber taken and retrofitted from clothes washing machine.

There are people here who are working or who have worked on university projects, government projects and venture capital startups. You have engaged in projecting your limited options in conducting experiments to every one here.

I suggest that you find a job in the field corresponding to your skills and interest; at that point, your opinions will be more credible.

Please consider this a friendly suggestion.

[Joseph Chikva]

There are people here who are working or who have worked on university projects, government projects and venture capital startups.

In fusion? I do not see such people here. If to exclude one young man (I forgot his nick) making copy of Polywell.