Talk-Polywell.org

So... how much power does T-P think WB-8 will produce? We'lll assume .002 watts from WB-6/7, and Bx8, Rx2 for WB-8.

>>>***CHOOSE CLOSEST OPTION***<<<

Are you meaning "[up to] 0.002W" and [up to] &c." else presumably you have already concluded that it will definitely put out "something"?

And are you presuming *all* fusion reactions, inclusive of beam-wall interactions, or just fast-fast reactions?

Your question appears to presume that it can achieve steady state (watts) - or will "power" be inferred by some calculation of pulsed behaviour if it has some pulsed behaviour?

Somewhere between answers 2 and 3. More to the point, I reckon they'll still be too busy figuring out unexpected problems to worry about or be saved by power scaling.

Betruger wrote: More to the point, I reckon they'll still be too busy figuring out unexpected problems to worry about or be saved by power scaling.

I fully agree. If there was a "something unexpected" category, I'd tick that. Might be positive, might be negative... but it won't be what they expected. My reason for saying that'; no plasma experiment has EVER resulted in what was expected!

Well darn Chris. We finally agree on something. Call the scribe..

I am confident there is very little I have stated as a disagreement with anyone.

I do my best not to disagree with anything, I merely discuss vehemently.

I voted 0.2. Why? Because with everything that has been going wrong in my life in the last 9 months, I expect the worst. BUT, since I have to at least pretend to be keeping my optimism I went with the only half bad option.

I'd also vote somewhere between 2 and 3. I optimistically expect positive results, but not so spectacular that critics can't deride them as marginal.

I hope that WB-8 and WB-8.1 can lead on to WB-9. If no show-stoppers emerge, I think that answer 3 would be feasible for WB-9. I know a lot of people would like to jump from WB-8.1 to a 100MW plant, but I don't think it will happen that fast.

chrismb,

The option closest to what you believe the output will be. I updated the post for clarity on this point.

TallDave wrote:chrismb,

The option closest to what you believe the output will be. I updated the post for clarity on this point.

....CLOSEST ON A LINEAR OR EXPONENTIAL SCALE???!!!

chrismb wrote:

TallDave wrote:chrismb,

The option closest to what you believe the output will be. I updated the post for clarity on this point.

....CLOSEST ON A LINEAR OR EXPONENTIAL SCALE???!!!

Yes

I'll go with 64 Watts, except they might be more interested in testing confinement that scaling, in which case gain might be minimum.

I wanted to vote for carrots.

Hmmm. Two folks thing New Mexico is about to disappear. We seem to have a bit of the old "doomsday crowd" here, what?

I voted for the second option (from the top). I don't want to get my hopes up.