http://www.springerlink.com/content/146646h240747113/
New Polywell Reactor Article in Journal of Fusion Energy
New Polywell Reactor Article in Journal of Fusion Energy
http://www.springerlink.com/content/105 ... s=Accepted
http://www.springerlink.com/content/146646h240747113/
http://www.springerlink.com/content/146646h240747113/
Engineering Is the Art of Making What You Want from What You Can Get at a Profit. ( MSimon )
Only the abstract is available without money. It is confusing, mentioning both increasing and decreasing the magnetic field strength to optimize the potential well. I'm guessing it may have something to do with the shape of the potential well and effect on confluence, or not. It also may suggest that there are a lot of subtleties that need to be worked for optimal performance. I will assume that they did achieve optimistic deep potential wells, another source reinforcing this debated issue. I note that the authors names may imply (weak confidence) the study was done in India, of course it also could have been done in California.
It will be interesting if someone reads the entire article and relates it here. It does appear to be theoretical computer modeling, not hard experimentation.
Dan Tibbets
It will be interesting if someone reads the entire article and relates it here. It does appear to be theoretical computer modeling, not hard experimentation.
Dan Tibbets
To error is human... and I'm very human.
"the potential well depth increases with decreasing the magnetic intensity" (sic)
That sounds counter-intuitive.
What if we take it to the limit, where B=0? Is then the electric well the deepest? ... ?????
What a pity science publications are still [mostly] pay per view. When are they going to discover [the] Internet?
That sounds counter-intuitive.
What if we take it to the limit, where B=0? Is then the electric well the deepest? ... ?????
What a pity science publications are still [mostly] pay per view. When are they going to discover [the] Internet?
"The problem is not what we don't know, but what we do know [that] isn't so" (Mark Twain)
If he is running a Polywell. The abstract seems to indicate that they were running a computer simulation.
If he/ they have produced fusion at ~ 10^7 neutrons/ second, it could be from a 'simple' fusor. The best amateur fusioneers are reaching near this level. So, this does not imply an operating Polywell. Even > 10^9 neutrons /s might be obtainable if they have reproduced Hirsch's ion fed fusor from the early 1970's. The U. Wisconson at Madison has tried to do this, their results as of last year were ambiguous. Perhaps if they are presenting at this years conference in Early Dec. they will have expanded results.
Dan Tibbets
If he/ they have produced fusion at ~ 10^7 neutrons/ second, it could be from a 'simple' fusor. The best amateur fusioneers are reaching near this level. So, this does not imply an operating Polywell. Even > 10^9 neutrons /s might be obtainable if they have reproduced Hirsch's ion fed fusor from the early 1970's. The U. Wisconson at Madison has tried to do this, their results as of last year were ambiguous. Perhaps if they are presenting at this years conference in Early Dec. they will have expanded results.
Dan Tibbets
To error is human... and I'm very human.
More from Damideh.
http://www.network54.com/Forum/242875/t ... enerations
Good to see the Iranians doing something constructive. I wonder if Rick has seen their paper?
It would certainly be an amusing twist if Iran built a net power Polywell reactor before the US Navy. It would be embarassing in a sort of reverse Pons debacle sense.
http://www.network54.com/Forum/242875/t ... enerations
Good to see the Iranians doing something constructive. I wonder if Rick has seen their paper?
It would certainly be an amusing twist if Iran built a net power Polywell reactor before the US Navy. It would be embarassing in a sort of reverse Pons debacle sense.
n*kBolt*Te = B**2/(2*mu0) and B^.25 loss scaling? Or not so much? Hopefully we'll know soon...
D Tibbets wrote:If he is running a Polywell. The abstract seems to indicate that they were running a computer simulation.
If he/ they have produced fusion at ~ 10^7 neutrons/ second, it could be from a 'simple' fusor. The best amateur fusioneers are reaching near this level. So, this does not imply an operating Polywell. Even > 10^9 neutrons /s might be obtainable if they have reproduced Hirsch's ion fed fusor from the early 1970's. The U. Wisconson at Madison has tried to do this, their results as of last year were ambiguous. Perhaps if they are presenting at this years conference in Early Dec. they will have expanded results.
Dan Tibbets
You are absolutely right about that.
In this study, we didn't do experimental study in connection with Polywell device. Of course we hope to do it in the future.
In this work, we just showed that in Polywell methode; unlike MCF (Tokamaks, et. al.); we don't need to produce very high magnetic field. There is an optimum magnetic field value to produce appropriate potential well depth in a Polywell reactor. If the reactor's magnetic field is more or less than the optimum value, the potential well depth is reduced.
This phenomena can reduce the cost of Polywell reactor.[/quote]
Engineering Is the Art of Making What You Want from What You Can Get at a Profit. ( MSimon )