a discussion forum for Polywell fusion
https://talk-polywell.org/bb/
Could be an attempt to pry out what you're up to? If it isn't, I'd like to use it as suchladajo wrote:I also have to wonder about patent overlap with Polywell. Afterall, it seems to me that there is significant prior art in the concept of pinched cusps, be they line or point.
More B Field is better, to a point. And that point is probably closer than most realize.paperburn1 wrote:So, in layman's terms, larger would be better
ladajo wrote:This is a very complex system where everything is seeking its own balance. It is, IMHO, the epitome of a chaotic system.paperburn1 wrote:So, in layman's terms, larger would be better
Examining plasma trapping from the context of energy equilibrium yields new perspective on MHD independent of plasma microdynamics, a suggestion as to the form of equilibrium energy distributions and guidance as to how to construct plasma traps with better performance than the cusp- and mirror-derived devices commonly in use. We also see that the MHD equilibrium holds for systems with a magnetic null such as magnetic cusps. Gauge invariance, an intrinsic feature of the electromagnetic system, leads to the observation that the θ component of the vector potential in cylindrically symmetric neutral plasmas acts against confinement. A future paper will examine the design of an optimal trap for a force-free plasma.
Except that half the scale gives us 1/4 the cross section for coils, and corresponding amp-turns. Maybe even worse once shielding is accounted for.MSimon wrote:I have done some rather simple calculations that show that for a given number of amp-turns making the device smaller increases the power inversely. i.e. half the size doubles the power.
Smaller is better.
Where this gets good is in Polywell rockets. And for rockets smaller is intrinsically better.