Dr Park speaking at University of Maryland on September 9th

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

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

crowberry
Posts: 672
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 6:34 am

Dr Park speaking at University of Maryland on September 9th

Post by crowberry »

Dr Park is speaking at the University of Maryland on September 9th 2014 with the title "Measurement of Enhanced Confinement at High Pressure Magnetic Cusp System".
Abstract: The issue of plasma confinement in a cusp geometry dates back to the late 1950s, when Harold Grad Harold Grad and his team at New Your University conjectured (and to some extent calculated) that the confinement properties of a magnetic cusp would be dramatically improved if the confined plasma had sufficiently high pressure to exclude the B-field from the interior. Achieving high beta in a cusp proved very difficult. An experiment carried by Park and his group is the first one in 56 years, to demonstrate the increase in. confinement experimentally. The implications of this result are profound in that It can lead to electrostatic confinement fusion and break-even using aneutronic reactions such as p-B11.

As a background I should note that the experiments were conducted by small company a company EMC2 in San Diego with approximately -15M Navy funding. The objective was the development of a small aneutronic fusion propulsion reactor for ship and submarine propulsion. Although the program was not classified the Navy did not allow public release of the information till last month. I followed the program because I was a member of a 5 people committee that provided biannual input to the Navy as to its progress. A breakthrough demonstration happened approximately 6 month ago and they finally got permission to publish and present the results. A preprint can be found in http://arxiv.org/abs/1406.0133
When: Tue, September 9, 2014 - 4:00pm
Where: Lobby of the Physical Sciences Complex
http://umdphysics.umd.edu/index.php/eve ... inars.html

I posted this in another thread, but it kind of got lost because of topic drift.

Tom Ligon
Posts: 1871
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 1:23 am
Location: Northern Virginia
Contact:

Re: Dr Park speaking at University of Maryland on September

Post by Tom Ligon »

Dang, and I'll be out of town! What are the odds?

zbarlici
Posts: 247
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 2:23 am
Location: winnipeg, canada

Re: Dr Park speaking at University of Maryland on September

Post by zbarlici »

"A breakthrough demonstration happened approximately 6 month ago and they finally got permission to publish and present the results."

So can we finally say that bussard's claims were verified? Are we finally down to just engineering isues?

mattman
Posts: 459
Joined: Tue May 27, 2008 11:14 pm

Re: Dr Park speaking at University of Maryland on September

Post by mattman »

Thanks for the news. I will spread this around....

Tom Ligon
Posts: 1871
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 1:23 am
Location: Northern Virginia
Contact:

Re: Dr Park speaking at University of Maryland on September

Post by Tom Ligon »

zbarlici wrote:"A breakthrough demonstration happened approximately 6 month ago and they finally got permission to publish and present the results."

So can we finally say that bussard's claims were verified? Are we finally down to just engineering isues?
There are a couple of threads here discussing the paper this talk seems to be about. In a nutshell, they built a small machine specifically to find out what it takes to actually form a "wiffleball" diamagnetic condition. They showed that the early simulations were off and you have to initially bang the plasma about 10x harder, but a wiffleball does indeed form.

Its a needed step to making a larger, fusion-capable machine create wiffleballs, without which they might have foundered around for years. But is not the ultimate proof the concept will work. It does makes me smile.

I wish we'd had Dr. Park running the lab in 1999.

zbarlici
Posts: 247
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 2:23 am
Location: winnipeg, canada

Re: Dr Park speaking at University of Maryland on September

Post by zbarlici »

This has been the longest friggin' 7 years ever.... and it seems to still be dragging on :( If this keeps up, not even poly viagra will work.

edit: maybe i should calrify.. nothing will work trying to raise enthusiasm

D Tibbets
Posts: 2775
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 6:52 am

Re: Dr Park speaking at University of Maryland on September

Post by D Tibbets »

That explains why the U. of Maryland is hosting a talk. One of the reviewers is based there.

http://www.umerc.umd.edu/projects/plasma-physics

Dan Tibbets
To error is human... and I'm very human.

Robthebob
Posts: 383
Joined: Mon Jun 23, 2008 11:12 pm
Location: Auburn, Alabama

Re: Dr Park speaking at University of Maryland on September

Post by Robthebob »

From what I've heard, Dr. Park is talking at all the schools with big plasma groups. I actually missed his talk at LANL.

There's a chance I may be able to do polywell research. A source said if you want to do important physics, you pretty much have to do 1m x 1m; this will be very difficult for me.
Throwing my life away for this whole Fusion mess.

crowberry
Posts: 672
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 6:34 am

Re: Dr Park speaking at University of Maryland on September

Post by crowberry »

It would be nice to hear a report of the seminar if someone from Talk-Polywell did attend.

crowberry
Posts: 672
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 6:34 am

Re: Dr Park speaking at University of Maryland on September

Post by crowberry »

The slides from Dr Parks seminar are available at http://www.physics.umd.edu/jaeyoung_park_slides.pdf.
They complement nicely the arXiv preprint with more details. Enjoy! :D

Skipjack
Posts: 6805
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:29 pm

Re: Dr Park speaking at University of Maryland on September

Post by Skipjack »

crowberry wrote:The slides from Dr Parks seminar are available at http://www.physics.umd.edu/jaeyoung_park_slides.pdf.
They complement nicely the arXiv preprint with more details. Enjoy! :D
Very cool! Thanks crowberry!

Tom Ligon
Posts: 1871
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 1:23 am
Location: Northern Virginia
Contact:

Re: Dr Park speaking at University of Maryland on September

Post by Tom Ligon »

So much for operating under a gag.

Let's see, what didn't they reveal? Did they use plate nuts or conventional hex nuts on their CF flanges?

ladajo
Posts: 6258
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: North East Coast

Re: Dr Park speaking at University of Maryland on September

Post by ladajo »

Well Tom, I am glad he is putting it out in the wild now. I have told him that visibility is his friend.
Must be that the patents are fully in, so he is willing to share now.

Ooops, I guess I let the cat out of the bag a bit.
Is this the part where I admit that I have touched WB7, WB8, and Mini-B?

:)
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)

D Tibbets
Posts: 2775
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 6:52 am

Re: Dr Park speaking at University of Maryland on September

Post by D Tibbets »

The revelation that Mini B achieved a calculated(?) Beta of 0.7 is enlightening. I wondered about the B field exclusion of ~ 15% and if it was because of the measuring loop being outside the wiffleball border, etc. This better defines the conditions. It also raises the question of the "sharp border" at high Beta. How close to Beta=1 is needed for the sharp border to dominate electron motions- turn around. The fusion output potential is further revealed also. Apparently, expected density scales linearly with Beta. A Beta= 1 would have a density 1/0.7 greater and fusion yield may be that squared or ~ twice as great. Compared to a Tokamak with a Beta of perhaps 0.03 gives a fusion rate ~ 0.0009 per unit of volume. This is consistant with the claimed density differential of ~ 10^19 to 10^20 particles per meter cubed for a Tokamak and ~ 10^22 for a Polywell. The resultant fusion yield is ~ 10,000 times greater per unit of volume. This is again consistent with the estimate of ~62,000 greater power density for a Polywell over a Tokamak.

This assumes similar internal plasma conditions other than density. Temperature, thermal spread, and non ion confluence areassumed to be the same. It serves as a comparison of the Beta to machine performance. Any improvement to Beta- even modest gains, in a Tokamak are significant. The problem is that the edge / macro instabilities become more difficult to control with increasing Beta in Tokamaks. This illustrates another attractive feature of Polywells , the stable magnetic field surfaces due to convexity towards the plasma. The sharp border at high Beta refines the distribution of the plasma to the B fields. In a magnatized plasma it is difficult to define where the plasma is in relation to the B field lines- it is on both sides with a gradual gradient. In the Wiffleball condition in a Polywell there is no such ambiguity. Note that electron ExB diffusion is not eliminated, but it becomes much less contributory to the description of the plasma distribution, for the electrons and indirectly for the ions also (due to the potential well ideally confining the ions to the interior of the Wiffleball).


Dan Tibbets
To error is human... and I'm very human.

Tom Ligon
Posts: 1871
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 1:23 am
Location: Northern Virginia
Contact:

Re: Dr Park speaking at University of Maryland on September

Post by Tom Ligon »

ladajo wrote: Is this the part where I admit that I have touched WB7, WB8, and Mini-B?

:)
I myself did NOT touch Mini-8 when I saw it. They were setting it up for a shot and I kept my distance.

Post Reply