I assume you are referring to the Polywell. I have little doubt that the Wiffleball effect is real. It has been accepted , at least by EMC2 and their reviewers (?), for at least ~20 years. The questions of piratically inducing and maintaining this state may be more uncertain., especially as the machine size is scaled up. The road block has been the electron current necessary to maintain this state, not the reality of the process.Robthebob wrote:So I had a talk with my advising professor, Dr. Gilmore. He said the ball of plasma at the center has been observed. Streams of electrons leaving the center is still there.
This pinching effect (WB effect) he hasnt seen it, but then again his involvement with the project is limited.
Also, I flinch when I hear the Willball described as a pinch- a magnetic pinch. My understanding is that this is misleading. The cusps are not pinched down. The mirroring effect which is dependent on the angle of incidence of the charged particle is a property that does not change. What does change is the magnetic surface that is involved with this effect. The Wiffle Ball model is useful, but not accurate. The loss cone angles do not change (the holes do not get smaller, at constant B). Instead the holes remain the same size, but the ball inflates, so that the total surface area / cusp loss surface area ratio goes up, perhaps by a factor of ~ 100 or more. This is multiplied by the cusp confinement to get the "thousands of passes" confinement of charged particles (electrons)- ie: the Wiffleball trapping factor. This is analogous to using a funnel imagery. The throat of the funnel is unchanged (no pinch), but the collecting cone is cut off/ flattened out (the particle is mirrored back into the central plasma volume instead of bouncing further into the cusp) so that much less flow is collected relative to the size of the plasma ball/ Wiffleball surface. Any electron aimed almost at the center of the cusp still escapes as any bounce/ mirror effect only feeds it seeper into the cusp. It is the relative change in the total surface area to the effective cusp surface area that changes, not the absolute cusp surface area.
This is subject on how you define the cusp. You could also represent the total surface are as unchanging as the cusp surface areas decreases. This is the Wiffle Ball description and is not counter to using a pinch concept. But this ignores the funtional inflation of the plasma volume that is a basic tenet.