Focus Fusion news story

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

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

KitemanSA
Posts: 6114
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Re: Ummmm ...

Post by KitemanSA »

Joseph Chikva wrote:
KitemanSA wrote:
Joseph Chikva wrote: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?
Not part of this design. Why should it be here? Are you TOTALLY clueless about Polywell? I mean, really! What a silly thing to say.

Joseph Chikva
Posts: 2039
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 4:30 am

Re: Ummmm ...

Post by Joseph Chikva »

KitemanSA wrote:
Joseph Chikva wrote:
KitemanSA wrote: 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?
Not part of this design. Why should it be here?
He-he-he.
Gee you dance nice!

vernes
Posts: 135
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 10:22 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Ummmm ...

Post by vernes »

Joseph Chikva wrote:
KitemanSA wrote:
Joseph Chikva wrote:These sentence as I understand is taken from official document. Where is POPS - periodically oscillation of ions?
Not part of this design. Why should it be here?
He-he-he.
Gee you dance nice!
KitemanSA has a point, I am near clueless about fusion physics, but I understand that the polywell design, like the fusor, is designed to work as such. electrode charged and a constant stream of positive charged gas keep being pulled towards the electrode center, in this case a cloud of trapped (or semi trapped) electrons.

So, I am assuming you know more about fusion physics then me. So I am making a bigger assumption by stating this is a deliberate act?

Are you in fact a well educated troll? And how fat are you with everybody feeding you here?

Joseph Chikva
Posts: 2039
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 4:30 am

Re: Ummmm ...

Post by Joseph Chikva »

vernes wrote:KitemanSA has a point...
I see. Now he states that company with two full time physicists works simultaneously on two different projects.

polywellfan
Posts: 33
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2012 3:05 pm

Re: Ummmm ...

Post by polywellfan »

Joseph Chikva wrote:
vernes wrote:KitemanSA has a point...
I see. Now he states that company with two full time physicists works simultaneously on two different projects.
I don't think he said this.

ladajo
Posts: 6204
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: North East Coast

Re: Ummmm ...

Post by ladajo »

Joseph Chikva wrote:
vernes wrote:KitemanSA has a point...
I see. Now he states that company with two full time physicists works simultaneously on two different projects.
Come on Joseph. You know full well he did not say that.

They both worked on POPs. POPs has/had some similarities with Polywell. They are surely bringing that experience in to the mix.

One of the main things I like about the Polywell project is that it is not a given. The project's history is rich with insights and learning. That is what science is all about. Tokamak however, is no longer so rich. It has more or less stalled on some fundamental points for a while. The other sad part, is that is is now merely a giant physics lab, with no real future potential for viable commercial application. The treasure to return ratio is completely untenable.
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)

KitemanSA
Posts: 6114
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Re: Ummmm ...

Post by KitemanSA »

Joseph Chikva wrote:
KitemanSA wrote: Not part of this design. Why should it be here?
He-he-he.
Gee you dance nice!
Joe,
Can't you think of ANYTHING by yourself? Parroting someone else's wit in a stupid way does NOT make you clever. But it DOES make you look like an idiot.

Joseph Chikva
Posts: 2039
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 4:30 am

Re: Ummmm ...

Post by Joseph Chikva »

ladajo wrote:Come on Joseph. You know full well he did not say that.

They both worked on POPs. POPs has/had some similarities with Polywell. They are surely bringing that experience in to the mix.
Well, please explain what does this mean:
KitemanSA wrote:
Joseph Chikva wrote:
KitemanSA wrote: 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?
Not part of this design. Why should it be here?
ladajo wrote:One of the main things I like about the Polywell project is that it is not a given. The project's history is rich with insights and learning. That is what science is all about. Tokamak however, is no longer so rich.
Funny statement.
You said about one single Dr. Nebel "well stated, multiply published, etc., etc., etc." Recall that in TOKAMAK project thousand PhD worked and still work. And all they are "well stated, multiply published, etc., etc., etc." I would admit that Dr. Bussard and Dr. Nebel are geniuses. But TOKAMAK is a team work of thousands of people the level of the most of which is not lower. And some of them are world class physicists.
Read for example this story: http://www.iter.org/newsline/86/659

ladajo
Posts: 6204
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: North East Coast

Post by ladajo »

POPs is not part of the Polywell design. However, some principles and lessons are probably being applied.
But TOKAMAK is a team work of thousands of people the level of the most of which is not lower.
This is exactly why Tokamak will not die (yet). It is not a science project anymore. It (singular) is an industry unto itself. So many folks have piled on to the Goose. It is no longer about the Golden Egg. And soon, the Goose will be dead, as it is currently in its death throws. Tok is a money pit. So many are vested in it now, to pull put would completely wreck them. So, they must finish. And once they finish, it will be the complete ending. We will not build another. There is no reason imaginable at this point to do so.
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)

Mike_P
Posts: 30
Joined: Fri May 21, 2010 4:16 pm
Location: Thousand Oaks, CA

Post by Mike_P »

From my point of view the main reason that there are so many folks involved in the Tokamak design is because it's one of the projects that perpetually runs into more complexity as it goes along. Having decades of experience in writing code for real-time control systems I can tell you with some authority that an ill conceived project can seem simple to begin with. But as you go along in the project more and more error conditions pop up and more and more unforeseen issues arise until the you have an incredibly complex system that has over run its budgets for both time and money and worse yet its very prone to failure. A good project manager will see this coming and put the brakes on the project before things get out of control.

It would seem that the Tokamak project is just such an out of control project. As Dr. Bussard pointed out during his Google talk, billions have been spent just to find out that a Tokamak design is no good. A lot of well educated, well meaning folks have made good faith efforts at resolving the issues that have arisen. They have done good work in that regard. What has been lost is the grand over-arching original purpose of the thing, to generate clean power at a reasonable price in the near future. Now if in fact the mission statement of the Tokamak project has changed from that to plasma support systems research, then I believe it is a good and honorable thing.

I for one just don't want to spend billions of dollars on the Tokamak when other projects that have the potential (pun intended) to fulfill the original goal of fusion research.
Last edited by Mike_P on Thu May 03, 2012 5:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

ladajo
Posts: 6204
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: North East Coast

Post by ladajo »

Yup.
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)

krenshala
Posts: 914
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2008 4:20 pm
Location: Austin, TX, NorAm, Sol III

Re: Ummmm ...

Post by krenshala »

Joseph Chikva wrote:Funny statement.
You said about one single Dr. Nebel "well stated, multiply published, etc., etc., etc." Recall that in TOKAMAK project thousand PhD worked and still work. And all they are "well stated, multiply published, etc., etc., etc." I would admit that Dr. Bussard and Dr. Nebel are geniuses. But TOKAMAK is a team work of thousands of people the level of the most of which is not lower. And some of them are world class physicists.
Read for example this story: http://www.iter.org/newsline/86/659
So, are you stating that the tokomak is better because there are thousands of physicists expending man-decades (or is it man-centuries by now?) of work that hasn't produced its intended result after 30+ years is somehow better than a project that has had 3 physicists (that I know of; Drs Bussard, Park and Nebel) work on it over its 25 years, at a fraction of the cost (0.1%? 0.01%?), and actually has something closer to a production design in use?

Joseph Chikva
Posts: 2039
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 4:30 am

Post by Joseph Chikva »

Mike_P wrote:It would seem that the Tokamak project is just such an out of control project. As Dr. Bussard pointed out during his Google talk, billions have been spent just to find out that a Tokamak design is no good.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riggatron
Riggatron
A Riggatron is a magnetic confinement fusion reactor design created by Robert W. Bussard in the late 1970s. It is tokamak on the basis of its magnetic geometry, but some unconventional engineering choices were made, in particular the use of copper magnets positioned inside the blanket, which was hoped to lead to much lower construction costs.
Fusion research establishment consideration
Studies carried out at the time suggest the Riggatron was not considered as much of a "sure thing" by other members of the fusion research establishment.[1][2] Existing experimental tokamaks generally do not include a lithium blanket, and are thus fairly similar to the Riggatron in layout, yet none of these reactors is close to generating a fusion gain of one, let alone the three that was being claimed for the Riggatron. In retrospect it appears the Riggatron concept likely would not have worked, due to the various plasma instabilities that were only being discovered coincident with its design process. Interest in the Riggatron has essentially disappeared.
So, Bussard had not such opinion at least in late 70s.
At least that time he asked 150 millions dollars for building TOKAMAK with lifetime of magnets 30 days. Recall that that time 150 millions would be more than today's billion. The cost of 1 barrel of crude oil that time was not higher than 10 USD vs. today's 120.

Betruger
Posts: 2310
Joined: Tue May 06, 2008 11:54 am

Post by Betruger »

Bussard did not go Polywell while thinking Tokamak was "good" and not out of control, as you yourself can see Bussard say in the Google video.

Joseph what is your response to Krenshala's above reply?
Last edited by Betruger on Thu May 03, 2012 6:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
You can do anything you want with laws except make Americans obey them. | What I want to do is to look up S. . . . I call him the Schadenfreudean Man.

Mike_P
Posts: 30
Joined: Fri May 21, 2010 4:16 pm
Location: Thousand Oaks, CA

Post by Mike_P »

If you will review the Google-talk video you can watch Dr. Bussard amend his earlier stance. He explicitly states that having expended efforts on such early designs he no longer believes in them. Just as early belief in Newtonian physics proved to be misplaced, IMHO so is belief in a Tokamak fusion reactor.

Another recent example was the implementation of the GPS satellites. The first ones were configured for both Newtonian and Einsteinium calculations. After launch and testing the Eisenstein calculations were proven to be the more accurate. Once a new and better model comes to light then it makes no sense to hang onto a discredited one.

Post Reply