Talk-Polywell.org Forum Index Talk-Polywell.org
a discussion forum for Polywell fusion
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

"The verdict is positive"
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Talk-Polywell.org Forum Index -> News
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
JoeStrout
Site Admin


Joined: 26 Jun 2007
Posts: 219
Location: Fort Collins, CO, USA

PostPosted: Tue Dec 16, 2008 11:52 pm    Post subject: "The verdict is positive" Reply with quote

Please see Alan Boyle's latest report on EMC2's progress, "Fusion We Can Believe In?"

Quote:
The team has turned in its final report, and it's been double-checked by a peer-review panel, Nebel told me today. Although he couldn't go into the details, he said the verdict was positive.


Finally, some news!

Cheers,
- Joe
_________________
Joe Strout
Talk-Polywell.org site administrator
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Aero



Joined: 30 Jun 2008
Posts: 868
Location: Eastern Iowa

PostPosted: Wed Dec 17, 2008 12:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

That's good news! Hey everyone, the review is over! Very Happy
Do you think we can get some information to help our theory forum?
_________________
Aero


Last edited by Aero on Wed Dec 17, 2008 12:15 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nanos



Joined: 05 Jul 2007
Posts: 337
Location: London UK

PostPosted: Wed Dec 17, 2008 12:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I wonder when we might get more details.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
spaccemonkey



Joined: 08 Dec 2008
Posts: 10

PostPosted: Wed Dec 17, 2008 12:16 am    Post subject: review Reply with quote

I don't suppose that anyone has any information on when the results of the wb7 will be published? Did they attempt fusion, or was this just a test of the confinement? So many questions, so little data. I'd like to just know if this is reasonable or not, do we have a new fusser with no possibility of break even or can we finally get enough clean power? ( I realize that even in a best case model, the latter statement is pie-in-the-sky.)

I've dreamed of a fission powered future my whole life, and it's broken my heart at every turn... still it's a lot cooler than a jet pack.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Shubedobedubopbopbedo



Joined: 27 Jun 2007
Posts: 60

PostPosted: Wed Dec 17, 2008 12:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

So Nebel's results were not unambiguous. For the next step in his research I would focus on eliminating the ambiguity. After all, there were many versions and iterations of tokamaks built to understand what was going on inside them. There are countless phenomena unique to tokamaks, and I expect there may be similar phenomena unique to the polywell design as well.

I would give the go-ahead for more experiments. Particularly for measuring devices that yield more data about the plasma while it is running.

There should be a way to verify Bussard's scaling rule by running the same wiffleball device at different power levels and field strengths. But like I said, better devices need to be used to determine what is going on with certainty and high precision.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
just_an_observer



Joined: 03 Apr 2008
Posts: 18

PostPosted: Wed Dec 17, 2008 12:27 am    Post subject: NOw that's a nice Christmas present Reply with quote

NOw that's a nice Christmas present
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
icarus



Joined: 07 Jul 2008
Posts: 376

PostPosted: Wed Dec 17, 2008 12:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I must object to the Polywell following being described as "cult-like".

Bussard was a top class scientist and there are good legitimate reasons why this might work.

Now Tokomak fusions pushers have blundered on with little but blind faith that they can stabilise their plasma trubulence for over 4 decades, all evidence to the contrary, how is that not cult-like.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JoeStrout
Site Admin


Joined: 26 Jun 2007
Posts: 219
Location: Fort Collins, CO, USA

PostPosted: Wed Dec 17, 2008 1:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

icarus wrote:
I must object to the Polywell following being described as "cult-like".


It doesn't seem to me that it was. The "cult following" was a reference to the fusor community — but the polywell is not a fusor (and the failure of Seife to understand the distinction just indicates to me that he hasn't looked into it very deeply).

My $0.02,
— Joe
_________________
Joe Strout
Talk-Polywell.org site administrator
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
icarus



Joined: 07 Jul 2008
Posts: 376

PostPosted: Wed Dec 17, 2008 2:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Joe: it was this paragraph that got me going.

Quote:
The idea is still way out of the mainstream, however. In his new book about the frustrating fusion quest, "Sun in a Bottle," Charles Seife says that WB-7 and similar contraptions, known generically as fusors, aren't good candidates for power-generating fusion - even though they've attracted "something of a cult following."


Seems like words like "contraptions" and "cult" are easy to throw around but people who are willing to explain, using quantitative physics why Bussard was wrong are thin on the ground. Run the numbers, do the tests and let the chips fall where they may.

Good news all in all I suppose. Even better if we get some data to feed into our Open Source Theory effort though.

I wonder what size will the proposed new test bed be?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jeff Peachman



Joined: 13 Jun 2008
Posts: 69

PostPosted: Wed Dec 17, 2008 2:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

woo-hoo!
_________________
- Jeff Peachman
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rj40



Joined: 09 Feb 2008
Posts: 181
Location: Southern USA

PostPosted: Wed Dec 17, 2008 3:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This sounds like good news. However, I thought the next step was to just go for it and build the net power machine. The report seems to say that Nebel has backed off of that. Still good news.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
djolds1



Joined: 13 Jul 2007
Posts: 770
Location: Lancaster, PA

PostPosted: Wed Dec 17, 2008 5:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

icarus wrote:
I must object to the Polywell following being described as "cult-like".

Perfect phrasing if you're trying to discredit a start up challenger.

Which programs provide Seife's paychecks? Whose ox is being gored is always the question to ask.

JoeStrout wrote:
The "cult following" was a reference to the fusor community — but the polywell is not a fusor (and the failure of Seife to understand the distinction just indicates to me that he hasn't looked into it very deeply).

Rider's flawed IEC analysis has made the rounds.

Duane
_________________
Duane J. Oldsen
Vae Victis
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
choff



Joined: 08 Nov 2007
Posts: 337
Location: Vancouver, Canada

PostPosted: Wed Dec 17, 2008 6:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Happiness, they probably want to build a test machine that can be run steady state to definitely prove it will work, since WB7 only runs in bursts.
I will have to forego the sacrifice of my firstborn, just to satisfy the critics of Polywell. Anybody hear of a company called General Fusion, in this months Popular Science mag. They're building a fusion reactor that will run like a diesel.
_________________
CHoff
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
djolds1



Joined: 13 Jul 2007
Posts: 770
Location: Lancaster, PA

PostPosted: Wed Dec 17, 2008 8:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

choff wrote:
I will have to forego the sacrifice of my firstborn, just to satisfy the critics of Polywell.

Let's hold off on that. Blood sacrifice can be powerful, and may still prove necessary.

choff wrote:
Anybody hear of a company called General Fusion, in this months Popular Science mag. They're building a fusion reactor that will run like a diesel.

http://www.generalfusion.com/t5_general_fusion.php

Interesting MTF variation. Elegant, simple and possibly scalable.
_________________
Duane J. Oldsen
Vae Victis
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MSimon



Joined: 16 Jul 2007
Posts: 8780
Location: Rockford, Illinois

PostPosted: Wed Dec 17, 2008 11:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't mind being part of a cult. After all the evidence of the potential was rather thin on the ground when the "promoting" started.

And so far the evidence is still rather thin.

All we know now is that WB-6 has been confirmed. What we don't know is - can it be scaled to a power producer. And for that we need WB-8 (what I used to call WB-7x) a continuous operation machine maybe several of them about the size of WB-7.

Thanks to Doc B, Tom Ligon, Rick Nebel, Joe Strout, Roger Fox, Indrek, Mark of Ask Mark, Art Carlson (who keeps us honest), Alan Boyle, Instapundit, and all the others who have joined in to make the next step possible.

The cult has gained a following.

Yeeeeeeee Haaaaaaaaaaaa!
_________________
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Talk-Polywell.org Forum Index -> News All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Page 1 of 7

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group