Polywell FOIA

Point out news stories, on the net or in mainstream media, related to polywell fusion.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

chrismb
Posts: 3161
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 6:00 pm

Post by chrismb »

TallDave wrote:Are you even being serious anymore? You think all the energy is going into background neutrals??
It usually does - especially in an IEC device.

Where did you think it went, all that input energy?

TallDave
Posts: 3140
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 7:12 pm
Contact:

Post by TallDave »

chrismb wrote:
TallDave wrote:Are you even being serious anymore? You think all the energy is going into background neutrals??
It usually does - especially in an IEC device.

Where did you think it went, all that input energy?
Because other IEC devices have grids. They aren't full of electrons, and they operate in backgrounds. Polywells are, and don't.
n*kBolt*Te = B**2/(2*mu0) and B^.25 loss scaling? Or not so much? Hopefully we'll know soon...

chrismb
Posts: 3161
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 6:00 pm

Post by chrismb »

TallDave wrote:
chrismb wrote:
TallDave wrote:Are you even being serious anymore? You think all the energy is going into background neutrals??
It usually does - especially in an IEC device.

Where did you think it went, all that input energy?
Because other IEC devices have grids. They aren't full of electrons, and they operate in backgrounds. Polywells are, and don't.
There are as many electrons in a fusor, at any one time, as there are [deuteron] ions - just like a Polywell, actually!

If it were otherwise, Gauss would have something to say about it.

TallDave
Posts: 3140
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 7:12 pm
Contact:

Post by TallDave »

There are as many electrons in a fusor, at any one time, as there are [deuteron] ions - just like a Polywell, actually!
In the system, yes. Zipping around inside a magnetic bottle ionizing neutrals, no.

Polywells do work in stricter vacuums than fusors. I don't think they quite need to be 10^-22 torr.
Bussard wrote:Typically, for no = 1E13 /cm3 (i.e.
ptorr = 3E-4 torr), veo = 1E9 cm/sec (Ee = 100 eV), and
sigmaizn = 1E-16 cm2, the cascade e- folds with a time
constant of about 1E-6 sec (one usec). Thus all of the
neutral gas is ionized and the system is filled with low
energy electrons in only a few usec.
n*kBolt*Te = B**2/(2*mu0) and B^.25 loss scaling? Or not so much? Hopefully we'll know soon...

MSimon
Posts: 14334
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Post by MSimon »

chrismb wrote:
TallDave wrote:There isn't any background matter to heat in a Polywell.
You're living in a fantasy world thinking this kind of stuff.

So you mean it's gonna operate at 10^-22 torr?

These are the sorts of ideas that idealistic inventors dream up, then wonder why their invention didn't work.

Problem is, you won't need many loose neutrals to spoil the party, cos once just one gets shunted by a fast ion, then that fast ion is no longer very fast, then you've got two not-full-speed ions, and then 4, and then xxx.. This is thermalisation, and Polywell will not resist it. Polywell's only hope is that this, supposed, annealing process will somehow pull up those slowed ions back to full energy, a process that I am not holding my breath to see.

The only way you can avoid thermalisation is to ensure there really are no neutrals floating around at all, and I presume you do understand that this is just a fantasy.
10^-100 chris. Except at the center where it is 10^100. Lots of power. Wooo hoooo.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

DeltaV
Posts: 2245
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 5:05 am

Post by DeltaV »

I love this kick-ass stuff.

I don't understand it, but I'm just a country boy.

[Edit] That was just the beer talkin'. I'm sober now. 11 days to FOIA. Tick. Tick. Tick. Tick....

MSimon
Posts: 14334
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Post by MSimon »

Chris,

I was thinking about my sarcastic post (!0^100) and came to the conclusion that there may be a regime where all the conflicting rqmts. will produce net power. The question then is - can such a regime be realized.

Tom Ligon often refers to the balance of rqmts to make Polywell work.

So your argument is not with theory. It is with realization.

Maybe we will know more in a few (11 and counting) days.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

KitemanSA
Posts: 6179
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Post by KitemanSA »

TEN

chrismb
Posts: 3161
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 6:00 pm

Post by chrismb »

MSimon wrote: I was thinking about my sarcastic post (!0^100) and came to the conclusion that there may be a regime where all the conflicting rqmts. will produce net power. The question then is - can such a regime be realized.

So your argument is not with theory. It is with realization.
I think that is a fair observation.

I cannot think of a single plasma discharge experiment that has ever worked as the theory expected it to. In a manner of speaking, I theorise that the theory won't work (!) but will be something else.

Will it be better or worse? As you say, we wait....

It has held me in good stead in life to presume the worst scenario/outcome and plan to deal with that. It is for this reason, perhaps, that I am seen as being 'down' on Polywell, even though I would still like to see it succeed. I guess the 'conflict' comes because, as you say, people hope for the theory and I worry on the realisation.

MSimon
Posts: 14334
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Post by MSimon »

People long to see such a simple device as a fusor working. As the grid is the only thing people can physically see in a fusor, so they blame that for it "not working".
Grid losses are the accepted reason fusors can not do net power. There may be additional reasons. Why look into them if the grid kills you before you start?
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

KitemanSA
Posts: 6179
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Post by KitemanSA »

NINE

DeltaV
Posts: 2245
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 5:05 am

Post by DeltaV »

Don't forget the NIST, ISO, EPA, NAFTA, UL and UNESCO write-ups. Those take time too.

chrismb
Posts: 3161
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 6:00 pm

Post by chrismb »

MSimon wrote:
People long to see such a simple device as a fusor working. As the grid is the only thing people can physically see in a fusor, so they blame that for it "not working".
Grid losses are the accepted reason fusors can not do net power. There may be additional reasons. Why look into them if the grid kills you before you start?
God is the accepted reason for why the Universe exists. That doesn't mean its true.

A right to vote is the accepted reason why democracy is considered "free and fair". That doesn't make it true, does it!?

I cannot do this faith-based debate. Present your case, don't present the opinions of others because I cannot debate the reasons that other people have this opinion if neither you nor I know what those reasons are.

KitemanSA
Posts: 6179
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Post by KitemanSA »

EIGHT

Post Reply