Alexander Franklin Mayer's Quantum Gravity

[dashxdr]

This looks interesting:

http://www.jaypritzker.org/pages/StrongForce.html

The foregoing discussion is not simply academic. It suggests the possibility of a new approach to the technological problem of producing usable energy by the process of nuclear fusion. It would appear that a very particular impact velocity (i.e., p-wavelength) of nuclear interactions might be calculated that would increase the probability of a fusion event by many orders of magnitude. If this is correct, a machine might be constructed which somehow controls the impact velocity between nucleon projectiles and their designated targets within a very narrow tolerance of the calculated optimum interaction wavelength. A reasonable analogy is the calculation of a small critical reentry window in celestial mechanics. Without the knowledge of such a reentry window, the only chance of success is statistical (i.e., sending a huge number of spacecraft towards the target on random trajectories so that a few might pass through the window). Conventional “hot” fusion takes the latter approach. The envisioned machine would be a nuclear fusion energy generator, which could be expected to operate at normal temperatures and pressures.

Obviously, such a technology would revolutionize the energy industry and solve the apparent problem of global warming due to excessive use of fossil fuels. Oil would be reserved primarily for aviation and the petrochemical industry, ensuring an economical long-term supply for both, which is essential for a healthy global economy. Desalinization of seawater, providing potable water and irrigation for arid regions in the Middle East, Africa and Asia would be economically viable. The development of practical economical commercial fusion energy technology would immediately make fission reactors obsolete. Consequently, there would be no reason for any developing country to build such reactors with the potential for misuse as as a source of military-grade fissile material.

-Dave

[dashxdr]

As a followup, the assertion is that only a certain narrow window of velocity will allow for fusion. The polywell device is a means to allow random collisions to go on long enough to allow particles to just magically undergo fusion. AF Mayer's theory might give us the exact energy particles must have in order to fuse.

Now AF Mayer discusses a device to increase the chance of fusion. Suppose you heat up hyrdogen until it's an ionized plasma, and you allow it to escape through some orifice in a very tight beam. It will consist of particles of a variety of velocities. If they pass through an electric field, they'll get deflected by varying amounts -- slower ones will get deflected more. This would act like a prism, spreading out the particles based on their energy level.

If you place a target at the right place in the spread, you might get a very high rate of fusion.

I don't know, it seems to me this could be a very fruitful line of research. Also experiments seem to be easy to set up.

-Dave

[dashxdr]

One other note, what if you just accelerated hydrogen ions (with a fusor?) using electric charge, but you accelerate them at a target cooled to very low temperatures.

That way the target's thermal energy is eliminated. By changing the fusor's voltage, you can control the energy level of the hydrogen ions. Maybe at just the right energy you get fusion products in huge quantities.

-Dave
PS Hey, anyone is welcome to join my forums here:

http://www.xdr.com/forums

I'm especially interested in Machine Intelligence.

[jmc]

Yes there are a wide variety of subtle methods to increase the fusion rate compared with the collision rate, muon catalysed fusion is not a million miles from breakeven although it is hard to see how it could exceed this threshold.

The problem with main of these techniques, I believe, is the alignment and precise conditions required to enhance the cross-section are so delicate that the two intersecting beams have to be super cool with very little random thermal motion, and ofcourse once they collide the thermal motion skyrockets and the reaction rate plummets.

Wouldn't completely dismiss breakeven via this method, not sure a polywell is the device to do it with though.

[dashxdr]

Yes that's a good point about how the heat generated by the fusion would eliminate the whole environment allowing for fusion in the furst place.

I wonder if something like this might work:

You have a sample cooled to very low temperature. You bombard it with ions of just the right energy level such that most of the ions fuse with the sample. You keep this up as long as you can. A lot of energy will be generated, which will heat the sample up to very high temperature.

Suppose your sample starts at close to absolute zero, and it ends up at 20,000 degrees. You can extract energy by letting the heat flow from 20,000 back to room temperature. Perhaps you get enough energy back to cool the next sample down and start over?

-Dave

[scareduck]

I dunno. Anything that starts with overturning 80 years of cosmology is somewhat suspect to me. It smacks of Eric Lerner, with the caveat that Mayer seems to have learned how to play well with others. I would add that it would be interesting to see his actual CV along with a list of refereed papers citing his 2006 book, if any.

[dashxdr]

I dunno. Anything that starts with overturning 80 years of cosmology is somewhat suspect to me. It smacks of Eric Lerner, with the caveat that Mayer seems to have learned how to play well with others. I would add that it would be interesting to see his actual CV along with a list of refereed papers citing his 2006 book, if any.

I keep thinking that any big change in a Theory Of Everything or Cosmology must take just such a form -- it must buck several generations of research + tradition.

I mean look at the mess we're in. String Theory? It's a joke. Dark matter? Ditto. Adding layer after layer of bandaid fixes just doesn't seem to be touching the elegance and simplicity that so many people believe/hope/suspect/think must be lurking there...

So I think these oddball researchers ought to be encouraged. One of them will likely turn out to be right!

-Dave

[MSimon]

String theory is kind of nice. Maxwell's Equations fall out of it naturally.

That seems encouraging.

[TallDave]

Yeah, Brian Greene's books on string theory are very interesting. It's funny how it kept being discarded, then picked up again as they realized it applied better when more forces were involved.

With the LHC firing up, maybe we'll find some superpartners this year!

[dashxdr]

It's important to note that just because these prevailing theories have some nice features, that doesn't prove they're true.

I mean, in order for String Theory to be accepted at all, it would have to have some compelling aspects.

I've engaged in debates on other forums with people who are religiously faithful. Their take is the bible is so perfect, it must be the product of divine influence. I contend, however, that without the compelling content, the bible would never have caught on. Specifically, the bible is the product of an evolutionary process itself, where the rough edges were smoothed over.

String Theory, prevailing cosmology, current Standard Model theory -- they're all the result of an evolutionary process. But that doesn't make them the truth! And that doesn't mean something can't come along later that is vastly simpler yet explains more.

My take on String Theory is that it doesn't predict anything, you just plug in the numbers and refine the "theory" itself. Just because it's beautiful math (so I hear) ought not to be the sole reason for supporting it.

-Dave

[drmike]

It is beautiful math. But I'm surprised that there's another person on the planet with the same perspective I have! There's hope for intellegent life yet

A lot of people are actually trying to find ways to tie string theory to some physical measurement. The physics community knows they have to or it really is pointless.
They are also hoping the Higgs shows up in the LHC. I expect that even if it does, it
will leave a lot of holes to be filled in. The biggest hole I see is the oscillating neutrino,
the standard model has nothing to say about it. The solar flux proves it, but nothing
explains it. And we still don't really know if neutrinos have mass or not either. We only
have an upper bound (i.e. a limit on measurement). If the mass is different for each flavor,
and the mass is changing as it oscillates, Higgs will have a difficult time dealing with it.

That may be the hook for string theory. For me, it's more like epicycles on epicycles of
the Ptolemy theory.

But you have to admit, it's fun!

[jmc]

Back to the p-wave issue, I wonder if you could have a conveyor belt of super-cooled target aligned in just the right way and a beam of just the right energy, then use the heat from the fusion to drive a refrigerator that realigns the target....

the question is will the energy lost to the target by the average ion exceed the fusion energy?