Polywell pat application 20110170647 - prosecution documents
Polywell pat application 20110170647 - prosecution documents
http://filestore.crossedfields.com/2011 ... -final.pdf
http://filestore.crossedfields.com/2011 ... nfinal.pdf
http://filestore.crossedfields.com/2011 ... ection.pdf
http://filestore.crossedfields.com/2011 ... rief_1.pdf
http://filestore.crossedfields.com/2011 ... rief_2.pdf
http://filestore.crossedfields.com/2011 ... rief_3.pdf
http://filestore.crossedfields.com/2011 ... rief_4.pdf
http://filestore.crossedfields.com/2011 ... _brief.pdf
http://filestore.crossedfields.com/2011 ... nfinal.pdf
http://filestore.crossedfields.com/2011 ... ection.pdf
http://filestore.crossedfields.com/2011 ... rief_1.pdf
http://filestore.crossedfields.com/2011 ... rief_2.pdf
http://filestore.crossedfields.com/2011 ... rief_3.pdf
http://filestore.crossedfields.com/2011 ... rief_4.pdf
http://filestore.crossedfields.com/2011 ... _brief.pdf
-
- Posts: 2039
- Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 4:30 am
Re: Polywell pat application 20110170647 - prosecution docum
Here a lttle about Morozov (in Russian but everybody who has Google translator can readit):Motivation for said inclusion derives from Morozov: “By introducing the mantle into plasma configuration, we stopped the gaps and general knowledge: “Since it was always known that conformal magnet coil cans/casings were the only way to avoid B field intersect with their surfaces”
http://w3.mirea.ru/science/priority/plazm.html
Thanks Chris - these appear to cover 2007-2009 - did you not suggest there was something more recent than this? (or just the availability is new?)
i see a lot of objections on grounds of lack of demonstrated 'means', utility' etc. can someone remind me of the final state of play - does the application remain 'withdrawn'?
i see a lot of objections on grounds of lack of demonstrated 'means', utility' etc. can someone remind me of the final state of play - does the application remain 'withdrawn'?
Re: Polywell pat application 20110170647 - prosecution docum
according to the responses from Nebel in http://filestore.crossedfields.com/2011 ... nfinal.pdfJoseph Chikva wrote:Here a lttle about Morozov (in Russian but everybody who has Google translator can readit):Motivation for said inclusion derives from Morozov: “By introducing the mantle into plasma configuration, we stopped the gaps and general knowledge: “Since it was always known that conformal magnet coil cans/casings were the only way to avoid B field intersect with their surfaces”
http://w3.mirea.ru/science/priority/plazm.html
the references to Morozov's paper were largely inappropriate/based on wrong assumptions (eg: non local thermal equilibrium).
[edit]http://w3.mirea.ru/science/priority/plazm.html looks quite interesting though, thanks[/edit]
Last edited by rcain on Thu Jul 21, 2011 5:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 2039
- Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 4:30 am
Re: Polywell pat application 20110170647 - prosecution docum
As I have read in that Russian site, there is talk about confinement of thermal plasma.rcain wrote:according to the responses from Nebel in http://filestore.crossedfields.com/2011 ... nfinal.pdf
the references to Morozov's paper were largely inappropriate/based on wrong assumptions (eg: non local thermal equilibrium).
It is interesting for me how Nebel explains the difference.
In which page he says about "non local thermal equilibrium"?
-
- Posts: 869
- Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2010 2:04 pm
- Location: Summerville SC, USA
My reading of the exchange is that the examiner believes the plasma is thermal, and the magnets won't be able to contain it, and the connectors will melt from lack of magnetic shielding, the device will explode if it contains the energy described, and the WB6 results were from "cross talk", arching, cosmic rays, etc. In the end they say it won't work because practical fusion is 50 years away, they sound like the DOE guys Bussard was trying to avoid.
CHoff
-
- Posts: 2039
- Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 4:30 am
-
- Posts: 2039
- Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 4:30 am
Of course, collision and instabilities tend to make the plasma thermal. Bussard worked on this issue and designed the Polywell with the idea of solving exactly this issue.Joseph Chikva wrote:Are sure that plasma in Polywell is not "thermal"?choff wrote:My reading of the exchange is that the examiner believes the plasma is thermal,...
If each scattering event will decline particle into random direction and there are no any forces for returning them back.
In the Polywell core the ions have their maximum speed (and lowest cross section), so the possibility of thermalizing collision is at its lowest.
On the edges the ions are at their lowest speed and even if some thermalizing collision occurs it has no impact on the core of the reactor (where the high speed of ions tends to favour fusion collisions).