That makes sense to even a layperson like me, thanks .Art Carlson wrote:I'm trying to extract myself gracefully from this forum, but I feel honor bound to answer direct and sincere questions, as long as I can make any sense out of them. This one in borderline, I'm afraid. I'm not sure what you're getting at, but the simple answer is, the only connection I have made to the core plasma is to derive a minimum density and assume that the cusp plasma will have a similar density (say within a factor of 2). If the cusp contains primarily electrons at this density, then the electric potential of the cusps will be tens ov MV. That wouldn't change, even if you also manage to produce tens of MV in the core plasma. The point is, you don't have any way to produce tens of MV either place, so the system will find a way to neutralize most of the charge of the electrons by putting ions there as well.bcglorf wrote:Sorry, I seem to keep asking stupid lay person questions.
And Coulomb says, if electrons are in the cusp exhaust, then ions are there, too.
Is that still true if the electrons in the core outnumber the ions by a sufficient amount? From my really limited understanding I don't see why the negative charge in the cusps MUST be greater than that from the center. Doesn't the core just need enough excess electrons to hold more charge than the cusps to prevent ions getting pulled out with the electrons?
If I'm not entirely lost, your saying the volume and density of the cusps is such that the potential there is impossibly high? If I'm allowed a followup question, are there theoretically possible(even if improbable) values for the cusp volume and density relative to the core that aren't impossibly high? One of Bussard's main claims was the 'shrinking' of the cusps as voltage was applied, which as I understand would reduce the volume(an maybe relative density) of the cusp region. Or is Bussard's claim and your statement a chicken and egg kind of argument?