FP Generation

[ladajo]

Famulus has an interesting new post up...

"One of the major obstacles that limits the fusion output in IEC devices is the result of repulsive electrostatic forces arising from the ions themselves. This limits the amount of current that can be injected/contained, and is related to the well-known Child-Langmuir current limit for unneutralized particle beams. In 2010 FPGeneration invented an approach that circumvents such limitations, by overlapping multiple ion beams at different energies on the same axis. This is a significant breakthrough which has the potential to impact a number of technologies (wherever space charge limitations arise)."

http://prometheusfusionperfection.com/

http://www.fpgeneration.com/

Sounds familiar regarding some of what Joseph Chivka has been going on about.

[hanelyp]

overlapping multiple ion beams at different energies on the same axis.

Something like what the polywell would have naturally if annealing is imperfect?

Granted, if annealing is too poor ion losses soar.

[chrismb]

I do not think Child-Langmuir applies in terms of volumes of magnetised particles. I think it would say more to investigate Brillouin limits, in the presence of magnetic fields, both analytically and experimentally (some devices appear to do better than Brillouin). Applicable to fusors, looks like that is right. Applicable to magnetic devices, doesn't look right.

Reducing electrostatic forces by differential velocities is a beaten and bloodied horse in the 'Chikva threads'. To get anywhere near reducing effective electrostatic repulsion you have to get ions relativistic, and that is waay to much energy for fusion. As I said to him, and failed to gain his comprehension, too much energy and you don't get fusion. Optimum ion energy for fuson is a Goldilocks energy; too high and you have built an atom-smasher.

In regards 'unneutralised' deviced, now we get on to Rider's oft forgotten 'secondary' points. He also pointed out that if we accept net fusion gain can be done with pure(r) charges then that might be OK but for the fact that the energy density sucks real bad.

As he said in one of his presentations " Electrons; can't live with 'em [thermalisation], can't live without 'em [no useful energy density]."

[Joseph Chikva]

Reducing electrostatic forces by differential velocities is a beaten and bloodied horse in the 'Chikva threads'.

From my side I did not beat horse at all. I only said that pinch of non-neutral plasma is possible. As I remember you and Georgio did not believe.

As I said to him[Chikva - added by Chikva], and failed to gain his comprehension, too much energy and you don't get fusion. Optimum ion energy for fuson is a Goldilocks energy; too high and you have built an atom-smasher.

As I understand you waited comprehension
May you please note me and others what is that "Goldilocks energy"?
And at which frame of reference that energy should be?
For example, it is very interesting to me what do you think if deuterium nucleus catches up moving at the same direction tritium nucleus with center-of-mass collision energy of e.g. 100keV but both in sum have in our frame of reference e.g. 1MeV. What do you think - what will happen?
Atom (nuclei) smashing? At what cross section?

Thanks.

[Giorgio]

Reducing electrostatic forces by differential velocities is a beaten and bloodied horse in the 'Chikva threads'.

From my side I did not beat horse at all. I only said that pinch of non-neutral plasma is possible. As I remember you and Georgio did not believe.

Actually my understanding of your statement was that a pinch could be experienced "without" a current flow in the plasma.
You clarified that this was not your position a couple of posts later, but then the discussion level really fell and it was not anymore worth insisting on the many communication and comprehension issues that was going on from all the sides.

[Joseph Chikva]

Reducing electrostatic forces by differential velocities is a beaten and bloodied horse in the 'Chikva threads'.

From my side I did not beat horse at all. I only said that pinch of non-neutral plasma is possible. As I remember you and Georgio did not believe.

Actually my understanding of your statement was that a pinch could be experienced "without" a current flow in the plasma.
You clarified that this was not your position a couple of posts later, but then the discussion level really fell and it was not anymore worth insisting on the many communication and comprehension issues that was going on from all the sides.

Sorry, if did not understand correctly.
Without current pinch impossible. Z-pinch - axial current, theta-pinch - I am afraid that we can call the same things differently, but in Russian literature direction of current called "azimuthal".
If considering the relativistic nature of magnetism as respectful Chris proposed, axial current in Z-pinch may be considered in two frames of reference: ions and electrons correspondently.
And for the frame of reference connected with ions plasma will be charged negatively and for electron’s frame of reference – positively as particles' number density is not invariant in different frames of reference. So, ions in their frame of reference will be in negative potential well and electrons in their frame – in positive potential well.
When at least one of those (ions or electrons, but electrons in my proposal) are high-relativistic in our frame of reference we need not total neutralization of space charge. That's all.

And Chris wrong declaring that coherently moving particles do not feel magnetic forces. Simply that magnetic attraction reduces electrostatic repulsive forces. But total reduction occurs when v=c.
But for high-relativistic beams only very small amount oppositely charge particles are needed for pinch.

[chrismb]

And Chris wrong declaring that coherently moving particles do not feel magnetic forces.

Stop with your 'such and such is wrong' claims, and demonstrate statements are wrong, with argument and numbers, if you want to show it.

It is self-evident that coherent charges have no pinching magnetic effect on each other. Charge distributes itself evenly across an isolated metal plate!

[Joseph Chikva]

It is self-evident that coherent charges have no pinching magnetic effect on each other. Charge distributes itself evenly across an isolated metal plate!

So, space charge's repulsive forces are the same regardless move particles or no?
Do not beat horse but if equal, I am wrong, if no -you.

PS: How interact each other two unidirectional currents? And can we consider coherent motion of charged particle as current?

PS#2: And where is the metal plate in Z-pinch if first Z-pinch experiments was simple discharge in glass tube at low pressure?

[chrismb]

It is self-evident that coherent charges have no pinching magnetic effect on each other. Charge distributes itself evenly across an isolated metal plate!

So, space charge's repulsive forces are the same regardless move particles or no?

'Move' relative to what?! Charges on a plate are like charges in a beam - they are not moving relative to each other therefore make no magnetic field for each other.

[Joseph Chikva]

It is self-evident that coherent charges have no pinching magnetic effect on each other. Charge distributes itself evenly across an isolated metal plate!

So, space charge's repulsive forces are the same regardless move particles or no?

'Move' relative to what?! Charges on a plate are like charges in a beam - they are not moving relative to each other therefore make no magnetic field for each other.

Move relative us.
I see one big problem with you.
Like people eating a lot of food and having then digestion problems, you also read but have then problem similar to indigestion.
I think so because that you know about O-P stripping, relativistic nature of magnetism, etc. But your knowledge is useful only for filling crossword puzzles.

[chrismb]

Move relative us.

So are you agreeing that same charges in a group that are not moving to us push each other apart. But if they are moving to/away us then they pinch?

[Joseph Chikva]

Move relative us.

So are you agreeing that same charges in a group that are not moving to us push each other apart. But if they are moving to/away us then they pinch?

I have already explained that to Georgio:

And Chris wrong declaring that coherently moving particles do not feel magnetic forces. Simply that magnetic attraction reduces electrostatic repulsive forces. But total reduction occurs when v=c.
But for high-relativistic beams only very small amount oppositely charge particles are needed for pinch.

[chrismb]

So, if charged particles not moving relative to each other nor moving to us feel repulsive forces, but particles not moving relative to each other that ARE moving relative to us pinch together, THEN WHO THE FRICK TELLS THEM WHICH WAY THEY ARE GOING!!!!

[Joseph Chikva]

So, if charged particles not moving relative to each other nor moving to us feel repulsive forces, but particles not moving relative to each other that ARE moving relative to us pinch together, THEN WHO THE FRICK TELLS THEM WHICH WAY THEY ARE GOING!!!!

They will not pinch without oppositely charged particles.
Maximum that can do the magnetic force between group of coherent moving particles is that to reduce repulsive electrostatic force in our frame of reference. If you once agree that electrostatic repulsive force reduces by square of gamma I assume that you knew this.
But I said you earlier: I can not help you. If you wish to know you should not only to read something, but also to analyze what you read and then to come to understanding from yourself independently.

[chrismb]

They will not pinch without oppositely charged particles.

Without oppositely charged particles doing what, or being where, exactly?

You talk in riddles. Never answer a direct question. There is no 'help' I want from you, why do you keep saying this?

YOU came here with something so grand. Did you do it to show how clever you were, for people to make comments, what!? You're the one who came here for help. If you did not, then you can now exit the way you came knowing that you said all that you could possibly say about it, and then moved on to things that were not even possible to say!

Why did you post your funny 'invention' on this forum? Answer the question directly.