Recovery.Gov Project Tracker

[ladajo]

Both.

Did not FEL have a power input leap around February? As I recall they hit 500KV input.

[KitemanSA]

Both.

Did not FEL have a power input leap around February? As I recall they hit 500KV input.

Maybe, but all the recent reports on functional laser weapons have focused on ganging solid state lasers. AFAIK, the FEL is not in contention for ships anymore. ICBW.

[icarus]

So you guys just got all giddy over a second hand report of some electron confinement experiments?

Is that a fair summary?

[bennmann]

icarus, first hand ? The recovery.gov reports are first hand? Second hand would be "my friend saw it" right?

[krenshala]

hearsay: "they" say it works this way!
third hand: my room-mate said his brother saw it!
second hand: my uncle told me he saw it!
first hand: i saw the thing light up the room!

[Ivy Matt]

1) EMC2 submitted the quarterly report, so someone at EMC2 chose the wording.
2) The wording said "plasma confinement".
3) Does anyone have serious alternative explanations as to why EMC2 just hired a microwave engineer?

The experiment is being conducted and EMC2 is obtaining results. I don't consider the Polywell concept proven, but in my opinion there is sufficient reason for optimism, at least.

Of course, I suppose EMC2 could be deceitful in the reports. Is there a good reason to suppose that?

[Betruger]

hearsay: "they" say it works this way!
third hand: my room-mate said his brother saw it!
second hand: my uncle told me he saw it!
first hand: i saw the thing light up the room!

Me reading you/EMC2 say you saw the thing light up the room is second-hand info, as far as I, the reader, am concerned.

Of course, I suppose EMC2 could be deceitful in the reports. Is there a good reason to suppose that?

Cynicism

[Joseph Chikva]

Of course, I suppose EMC2 could be deceitful in the reports. Is there a good reason to suppose that?

Cynicism

As I understand there are 8 generations of Polywell reactors: WB1...WB8 if not considering their variations: e.g. WB7.1
Have you any hard data such as achieved number density and confinement time from first hands?

I permanently hear at this site about scaling. But scaling of what?
For example everybody knows about scaling in TOKAMAKs, by which confinement time increases by increasing of dimensions. And that is well proved fact. And if for example on Japanese TOKAMAK was achieved confinement of 1 s, ITER should have 300 s.

Please provide numbers.
And not common phrases such as "well promising data".

[mvanwink5]

4. Who leaves government recovery money on the table just so they don't have to fill out quarterly reports with twenty words on it?
5. Counting neutrons is quick and relatively easy, so power scaling results have been known for some time, why would excellent plasma confinement be worth twenty words if power is not scaling?

The reason for building and testing small machines is its easier, quicker, cheaper, and safer to build and get your mistakes behind you before making the big machine. It looks like EMC2 now knows how to build and test the machines on a schedule, safely, within a budget. The machine is not breaking new engineering ground in magnet design, vacuum technology, high voltage devices, variable measurement and control, etc. The cost for the final product is within reason.

What would you do if you were Navy? I am surprised we know as much as we do at this point, but that is just me. Get ready to hold your breath for 4 more years.

[mvanwink5]

As I understand there are 8 generations of Polywell reactors: WB1...WB8 if not considering their variations: e.g. WB7.1
Have you any hard data such as achieved number density and confinement time from first hands?

I permanently hear at this site about scaling. But scaling of what?
For example everybody knows about scaling in TOKAMAKs, by which confinement time increases by increasing of dimensions. And that is well proved fact. And if for example on Japanese TOKAMAK was achieved confinement of 1 s, ITER should have 300 s.

Please provide numbers.
And not common phrases such as "well promising data".

If you really want numbers, it is simple, go get the financing, design, build and test the device. Then we can say to you where are your numbers.

[Joseph Chikva]

If you really want numbers, it is simple, go get the financing, design, build and test the device. Then we can say to you where are your numbers.

So, you too donot know two required numbers of e.g. WB7?
Number density and confinement time.
And is beta equal to 1 or much less than 1?

[tomclarke]

If you really want numbers, it is simple, go get the financing, design, build and test the device. Then we can say to you where are your numbers.

So, you too donot know two required numbers of e.g. WB7?
Number density and confinement time.
And is beta equal to 1 or much less than 1?

of course wb7 & wb8 beta << 1. It is all about how scaling changes beta.

[Joseph Chikva]

of course wb7 & wb8 beta << 1. It is all about how scaling changes beta.

If scaling changes beta should you have infinitely large reactor for achievement beta=1?
When the talk is about 3 m reactor what value beta should have?
As I heard from Dan Tibets and others: beta=1, B=10T, n=10^22 m^-3 for 3m reactor.

Are there possible anything destroying scaling law?
Like TOKAMAK for which nobody really knows its behavior when instead of induced current non-induced current will flow (so called "Advanced TOKAMAK").

[ladajo]

Both.

Did not FEL have a power input leap around February? As I recall they hit 500KV input.

Maybe, but all the recent reports on functional laser weapons have focused on ganging solid state lasers. AFAIK, the FEL is not in contention for ships anymore. ICBW.

I think that the short term solution is the ganged lasers and I know that the contractors are really pushing that, IMHO to make sure they get a peice of the pie. For FEL, it is well beyond weapons application for utility, and it is also potentially way more efficient for delivering energy down range. I think that is what will save it as a program. A tunable laser is a VERY useful tool for many tasks. I may get slowed down, but I do not think it will be killed.

Railgun is another issue. Killing that kills the only realistic Naval Gunfire Program on the table. It also drives up future force costs by causing the navy to maintain for longer its large and very expensive expolsive ordnance handling infrastructure, both ashore and afloat. (As you know), it costs a butt-ton of money and effort to design, build and maintain, as well as adds operating costs to ships and shore due to special facilities, schedules, fuel burns, blah blah blah. I really think that it was a STUPID AND SHORT SIGHTED decision to table Railgun for a Program Kill. Idiots. FEL, I think can be slowed down a bit, without the same long term drama potential as Railgun.

[Betruger]

Sounds like it all really makes Polywell a valuable prospect. For the Navy.