Polywell pat application 20110170647 - prosecution documents

[Joseph Chikva]

there are other forces at work also, obviously. but that is the dominant one. but i think you know this already. it is basic. so i do not understand why you still have a question.

Bolded by me
I do not see any except electrostatic attraction between virtual cathode and ions. And also interaction with magnetic mirrors (MaGrids).
But their action on particles is regardless to that have particle an angular velocity or no. And so, they can not prevent thermalization.

ok, i think i understand you. you mean like a micro collisional model, translating x to y to z. there are various 'packing' scenarios i can think of mediated by Coulomb force. there is also Lorentze force. (also indirect (out of system) control functions).

Not x-y-z frame of coordinate (orthogonal or Decart) but if we talk about radial and angular momentums (velocities) so, we use spherical frame.
Where Lorenz forces are? MaGrids?
In magnetic trap confining thermal plasma are the similar mirrors. Or a little different (in-Yan trap) but with the same purpose.

Regarding to why I did not know anything about earlier, simply I was not interested.

I have friends or familiar with many people in Russia, Ukraine, Kasakhstan, etc.
But from Russians only one of them is physicist and he for a long time is a citizen of USA and works in one very big project as senior theoretic.

[rcain]

there are other forces at work also, obviously. but that is the dominant one. but i think you know this already. it is basic. so i do not understand why you still have a question.

Bolded by me
I do not see any except electrostatic attraction between virtual cathode and ions. And also interaction with magnetic mirrors (MaGrids).
But their action on particles is regardless to that have particle an angular velocity or no. And so, they can not prevent thermalization.

you are right. it will not 'prevent' thermalisation. but my virtue of the fact that the machine 'constrains' particle density, velocity and mass distributions in space and time, it a) means that the (balance, Q) conditions in one part of the regime is very different from that in another (except by designed symmetry), b) there is a reflection of this dynamic structure as a a set of temperature gradients throughout the system.

in other words, there is a logical argument that if you could just do this fusion thing quick enough, (eg. by virtue of pulsed regime, or recirculating regime - which Polywell claims), then the system simply wouldn't have time to Maxwellianise out of envelope (ie. losing its core, blowing out its wiffleball or melting down its containment).

its is a pretty fine balance, and from my understanding Bussard had concluded it was not possible, UNLESS the 'wiffleball' theory was found to be true by experiment.

So far as I know, Nebel is the only person who might know that conclusively at this time. But he is under government wraps. I believe the consensus is that the Navy contract would have been canned had they not found such evidence: They continue, thus it is (only) likely there is.

ok, i think i understand you. you mean like a micro collisional model, translating x to y to z. there are various 'packing' scenarios i can think of mediated by Coulomb force. there is also Lorentze force. (also indirect (out of system) control functions).

Not x-y-z frame of coordinate (orthogonal or Decart) but if we talk about radial and angular momentums (velocities) so, we use spherical frame.

sure, spherical if you want - still orthogonal transformations - that was my point.

Where Lorenz forces are? MaGrids?

yes. also, by virtue of velocity, charge, (population) (/self-) magnetic fields, etc. quite a complex soup in parts of Polywell regime.

quite difficult to model either computationally or theoretically.

personally i found the PC 'visualisation/sim' programs developed by HappyJack, (the mighty) Indreck, and others quite useful for thought. but they are very far from being complete or accurate representations. the best simulation is the device itself; ,its easier to build than to code (it is claimed).

Nebel himself cites several Polywell 'code packs' they have used in their modeling, elsewhere on this forum. I'm sure a search will bring it up.

In magnetic trap confining thermal plasma are the similar mirrors. Or a little different (in-Yan trap) but with the same purpose.

Purpose of mirrors is not actually to confine thermal plasma. That is the job of the electrostatic well. The mirrors (magrids) are there in order to form and sustain the virtual cathode (that in turn defines the well). They also perform a job of shielding (the anode - i think i have that right, several possible configurations have been discussed historically.).

[edit] the magrid also enables magnetic mirroring phenomenon, known as the 'wiffleball' which further (and critically aids confinement of the anode, ion containment and core density).that is the Polyell theory, insofar as I understand it, though there are many further details to consider.[/edit]

My understanding is that the configuration is 'most similar' to a multiple Penning trap, but we are using it to implement a different eventual mechanism, than might be 'supposed' for such devices.

Regarding to why I did not know anything about earlier, simply I was not interested.

well, i hope you are now. it is the reason many of us are still here after so many years of hearing very little, because we hear 'just' enough peripheral stuff to retain a little enthusiasm for the subject.

I have friends or familiar with many people in Russia, Ukraine, Kasakhstan, etc.
But from Russians only one of them is physicist and he for a long time is a citizen of USA and works in one very big project as senior theoretic.

i hope you will not say he works for ITER That is interesting. Do you keep in contact?

[Joseph Chikva]

b) there is a reflection of this dynamic structure as a a set of temperature gradients throughout the system.

I would like to use more habitual for me terminology.
According which Polywell has not gradient of temperatures but only gradient of coherent (arrange) velocities.
Temperature as measure of chaotic (thermal) motion due to mass transfer is uniform in all points occupied by plasma.

Yes, by idea mag fields of MaGrids in Polywell should confine only electrons and positive potential relative to virtual cathode should accelerate ions and then to keep their radial velocities.
But I doubt in this ideal scheme. As I have already explain earlier.
If average declination of particle is only 0.02 rad (a little more than 1 deg) and 5000 collisions before fusion we will have very significant randomization (or thermalization how you like).
Also I think that average ratio between scattering and fusion cross sections is higher than 5000.
That is not uniform: at the edge it is close to infiniteness (but low number density) with minimum in the core.

I am not sure that not miss something.

Conclusion: randomization should be significant. There is not any preventing mechanism.
And I am sure that the definition of Polywell’s plasma as “thermal” would be correct.

Yes, I keep the contact with that person.
BWT, he consults me when I have any question about instabilities.
As I am mechanical engineer and he is a very skilled plasma physicist.

[Giorgio]

Is this the same Joseph Chikva that posted till now?
You look like a very different person now that you actually are trying to understand. I would say two completely different persons.

Anyhow, if you are really getting interested into randomization and mechanism of preventing it, read this:
http://www.askmar.com/Fusion_files/Some ... ations.pdf
Especially from page 16 onward.

[KitemanSA]

As personally for me, I do not see any forces allowing moving in radial direction.

The forces for moving in the radial direction are the deep potential well developed by the trapped electrons.

Ions fall down into the center of the potential well and occasionally "collide".
* They either fuse or scatter. Those that scatter gain some amount of non-radial velocity.
* From the center, all directions are "up" so the ions climb up the well, losing their radial component of velocity, retaining their non-radial components. At the top, the random non-radial components cause collisions which randomly scatter the non-radial velocity into both radial and lower non-radial components.
* The UPscattered ions sometimes escape, those cause some losses.
* ALL THE OTHER ions are pulled back down the well by the electrical potential.

It is that electrical potential that provide the "forces allowing moving in radial direction".

[rcain]

b) there is a reflection of this dynamic structure as a a set of temperature gradients throughout the system.

I would like to use more habitual for me terminology.
According which Polywell has not gradient of temperatures but only gradient of coherent (arrange) velocities.
Temperature as measure of chaotic (thermal) motion due to mass transfer is uniform in all points occupied by plasma.

for that 'claim' in particular i must admit that i know of no supporting evidence for it. indeed i had only just considered it myself, i cant recall whether it has been discussed much. agreed the gradients would be pretty fast, but then so is particle recycling in the machine (new colder ones), by design.

it not only has gradients of coherent velocity distributions, but also all important 'discontinuities'/zeros, in this geometry.

Yes, by idea mag fields of MaGrids in Polywell should confine only electrons and positive potential relative to virtual cathode should accelerate ions and then to keep their radial velocities.

glad we agree this far.

But I doubt in this ideal scheme. As I have already explain earlier.
If average declination of particle is only 0.02 rad (a little more than 1 deg) and 5000 collisions before fusion we will have very significant randomization (or thermalization how you like).

i think it is healthy to doubt it until we see some data.

however is also true that the rate and nature of collisions will will not be uniform throughout the physical space. for example i recall experimental accounts of neutron generation in (2) 'shells' around the central core. there is also square/cube law to factor in with scaling.

the key point is that a viable window of energy effeciency/Q has been calculated.

if you want to you can take dispute with those numbers/conclusions, but none of the (healthy) skepticism you express is new to me. (or this board). I think Tod Rider (along with Art Carlson) and a few others, had a jolly good go at demolishing the theory. (google them). but for every objection, there has been a rebuttal, and neither side in the debate has given way completely yet. all await more 'real' data.

Also I think that average ratio between scattering and fusion cross sections is higher than 5000.
That is not uniform: at the edge it is close to infiniteness (but low number density) with minimum in the core.

i do not know the exact figure - it obviously depends on the exact machine and the experiment. certainly no one believes the required balance is 'unobtainable', otherwise they would have dropped the project. no doubt it remains a primary project goal. (i'm sure there are some substantial threads on here discussing it at length).

actual status/progress - your guess is as good as mine, since no news has come out of the labs.

I am not sure that not miss something.

Conclusion: randomization should be significant. There is not any preventing mechanism.
And I am sure that the definition of Polywell’s plasma as “thermal” would be correct.

Yes, I keep the contact with that person.
BWT, he consults me when I have any question about instabilities.
As I am mechanical engineer and he is a very skilled plasma physicist.

well, in truth we are still missing quite a lot, since you are only recently joining the Polywell discussion (and there is such a shortage of real data). but perhaps you will be more persuaded the more you learn, perhaps not. only the data will tell. or Rossi buys himself a new coffee machine

[Joseph Chikva]

As personally for me, I do not see any forces allowing moving in radial direction.

The forces for moving in the radial direction are the deep potential well developed by the trapped electrons.

It is that electrical potential that provide the "forces allowing moving in radial direction".

Really?
And what with velocities called in Polywell as "angular"?
Are there any forces?
I only would like to say that ideal model can dramatically differ from real.

[Joseph Chikva]

but for every objection, there has been a rebuttal, and neither side in the debate has given way completely yet. all await more 'real' data.

Let's wait.
Best regards,

[Giorgio]

I only would like to say that ideal model can dramatically differ from real.

No one here has EVER sustained the opposite.

[Joseph Chikva]

I only would like to say that ideal model can dramatically differ from real.

No one here has EVER sustained the opposite.

"I excited with Polywell" said someone.
"Polywell is not financed because of concpiracy of oil companies or mainstream scientists"
I have never heard about possible conceptual problems.
But heard a lot about 10T beta=1

[KitemanSA]

I only would like to say that ideal model can dramatically differ from real.

No one here has EVER sustained the opposite.

But "can be" ain't "is". The ideal model "can be" very close to real too.

I do recall reading that the data are consistent with EMC2's model. But IIRC, that statement was made by Dr. Nebel, so it may be a scam.

[Ivy Matt]

"I excited with Polywell" said someone.
"Polywell is not financed because of concpiracy of oil companies or mainstream scientists"

Where did you hear that? Polywell is financed because of a conspiracy of government bureaucrats and the military-industrial complex.

[vankirkc]

"Polywell is not financed because of concpiracy of oil companies or mainstream scientists"

Who said that? Polywell IS financed...by me and a couple hundred million other Americans. TBH, I'd rather there really was such an organized resistance, at least in regards to using tax money for this type of thing.

[TallDave]

How is it that a Polywell patent can be denied on the grounds of lack of practical application, and yet a patent like this one (US 5999908) can be approved?

Yep, the field is dominated by people who think in LTE. Remember how much trouble that gave Art? And he was a bright guy.

Kuhn was on to something.

I wonder if WB-7 or WB-8 results will change anyone's mind? Heh, they may someday have a working 100MW net power reactor and still be unable to patent the damned thing.

As to experimental evidence that this (annealing) happens in a Polywell - I don't believe there is any - yet. But I could be wrong.

I've been wondering about this lately. Does anyone have an impression of how fast the physics are on that? I know it's generally believed some important physics are so fast that the quarter-millisecond WB-6/7 pulses at beta = 1 are essentially steady-state, but I don't know if this is one of them. I lean toward thinking ion-collisional processes would be but I don't really know.

Either way, if WB-8 is the steady-state device that it was alluded to be, someone knows or will soon know whether annealing or a comparable process happens. The loss of ion focus should be fairly obvious from the neutron counts even in the absence of density interferometry.

But remember...

We don't really need ion focus, if the WB works as hoped, though it's very nice to have. Keep in mind Rick's ITER comparison.

[Joseph Chikva]

"I excited with Polywell" said someone.
"Polywell is not financed because of concpiracy of oil companies or mainstream scientists"

Where did you hear that? Polywell is financed because of a conspiracy of government bureaucrats and the military-industrial complex.

If Polywell would be a really promising idea, its financing would be on orders higher.
If you talk about military-industrial complex (US NAVY), the total "financing" of Polywell does not exceed the cost of 2, 3 or max 5 Harpoon missiles.
You call this "financing"?

I like american tax payer's dither: "I am financing with couple millions of others".
Actually, who asks them?