chrismb wrote:Come up with some numbers, or stop posting.
I said you that ready to discuss method and not real design using the method.
Joseph Chikva wrote:
93143 wrote:..
When you would find time I will share you with some numbers that I am ready to disclosure.
Bullshit you got numbers to discuss.
You can go pander your stuff on other forums, but your bluff has been called here, and you have been found wanting.
When you do these 'numbers' for 9', then just remember that the magnetic field an ion produces is not one in its inertial frame - a bunch of ions all moving together generate no magentic field that the others experience. With as many electrons coming one way as ions the other, for space charge neutrality - where's the magnetic field gonna come from?
I do not advise you to go and learn how electromagnetic field is created.
People who can read Maxwell equations understand what I talk about very well.
All other including you can use the formula for calculating B of infinite, straight current filament.
I do not know how to insert here that formula but you easily can find that in the web. For example here: http://www.vaxasoftware.com/doc_eduen/fis/magnet.pdf
Good luck.
Last edited by Joseph Chikva on Wed May 18, 2011 8:14 am, edited 1 time in total.
You do not seem to understand that magnetic field is relative to observer. In ion frame it only sees electrostatic repulsion.
Magnetic field is relativistic frame transform of electric field. It is not the same for all observers, especially coherent beam ions to each other.
Did you not know this?
I know this. And what?
All magnetic field including field created e.g. by MaGrids are relativistic frame transform of electric field.
If you do not understand so simple things how you can discus fusion's other issues?
For example how pinch occurs: theta and Z?
Unfortunately I cannot help you. You should understand it from yourself. Do some readings.
You say 'I know ths' then say more which shows you do not?!
Beams do not pinch. They undergo emittance growth for reasons I explained. Zeta pinch is pinch of thermal plasma where net current of fast ions and fast electrons is zero, plus *extra electron current by external induction*.
chrismb wrote:You say 'I know ths' then say more which shows you do not?!
Beams do not pinch. They undergo emittance growth for reasons I explained. Zeta pinch is pinch of thermal plasma where net current of fast ions and fast electrons is zero, plus *extra electron current by external induction*.
Wrong
From what is *extra electron current by external induction*? It is nonsense.
Z-pinch and pinch in TOKAMAks occurs very similarly to what I propose: inducted axial electric field forces ions to move at one direction and electrons to opposite.
Or in the other words inducts electric current. Both currents - ions and electrons directed at the same direction - where positive charge ions directed. So, currents summarize each other. No *net current of fast ions and fast electrons is zero* From where external electrons appear?
Thermal or not thermal - that is another issue.
chrismb wrote:You say 'I know ths' then say more which shows you do not?!
Beams do not pinch. They undergo emittance growth for reasons I explained. Zeta pinch is pinch of thermal plasma where net current of fast ions and fast electrons is zero, plus *extra electron current by external induction*.
Wrong
From what is *extra electron current by external induction*? It is nonsense.
Z-pinch and pinch in TOKAMAks occurs very similarly to what I propose: inducted axial electric field forces ions to move at one direction and electrons to opposite.
Or in the other words inducts electric current. Both currents - ions and electrons directed at the same direction - where positive charge ions directed. So, currents summarize each other. No *net current of fast ions and fast electrons is zero* From where external electrons appear?
Thermal or not thermal - that is another issue.
Oh dear. You could have got away with that if you had said your idea is to tune the differential velocities for charge neutrality AND a net current but it doesnt look like you understand hw pinches work.
You need BOTH charge neutrality AND a directed unbalanced net current for a pinch.
chrismb wrote:You need BOTH charge neutrality AND a directed unbalanced net current for a pinch.
No, I need not.
Do some readings.
Joseph, unless you have a different definition for "pinch" chrismb is perfectly right.
You need to have both, current and charge neutrality if you want to obtain pinch.
Care to link us to some paper stating the opposite?
chrismb wrote:You need BOTH charge neutrality AND a directed unbalanced net current for a pinch.
No, I need not.
Do some readings.
Joseph, unless you have a different definition for "pinch" chrismb is perfectly right.
You need to have both, current and charge neutrality if you want to obtain pinch.
Care to link us to some paper stating the opposite?
No another definition of pinch. You are wrong similar to Chris.
How bout starting a new thread? I keep come to this one hoping to find discussion about why folks are optimistic about Polywell and all I get is this stuff about Chikva's daydream.
KitemanSA wrote:How bout starting a new thread? I keep come to this one hoping to find discussion about why folks are optimistic about Polywell and all I get is this stuff about Chikva's daydream.
Kite, this thread was never about polywell. It was JC trying to initiate a conversation to show his idea is better than a polywell experiment, and that we should all give up waiting for polywell to come good (or bad - whatever) and all swoon at the genius of his idea.