FP Generation

[rjaypeters]

WRT Third language. When I started learning my third language (Deutsche) I noticed a depressing phenomenon I labeled the "Third Language Blues." I tried to put everything I was learning about my third language in the framework of my second language (la francaise). Took me a while to overcome.

I thought it a personal oddity until I noticed a friend learning Russian (her third) who was mistakingly speaking Spanish (her second). Then I remembered brain scans of multi-language speakers which show our first language is mostly housed in one part of our brains, but all other languages use other parts (but the same parts) of our brains.

Perhaps Gospodin Chikva is having Third Language Blues?

[rcain]

...Perhaps Gospodin Chikva is having Third Language Blues?

.. or perhaps that has nothing to do with it...?

[Joseph Chikva]

...Perhaps Gospodin Chikva is having Third Language Blues?

.. or perhaps that has nothing to do with it...?

Simply I know fusion and thought that I have placed my thoughts in forum where fusion is discussed.
And what we discuss about?
• is pinch possible in beams?
• Do particles interact magnetically during coherent motion?
• Probability of the reaction (Oppenheimer-Philips) discovered as I understand as some intermediate result in course of accumulation of knowledge of nuclear reactions.

Everyone who familiar with fusion at the lowest level will answer on these questions:
• yes
• yes
• zero
regardless to how he speaks English.

But instead they on 104 pages! discuss swindle of Rossi.
May be you people (gospoda) have nothing to do with fusion?

116 already

[MSimon]

Joseph,

It is difficult to understand you. Thus Rossi 116 and you 20 or so.

Now if you could find some one with a better grasp of English to post for you you might make better progress.

The alternative is to post equations and diagrams. Those languages are more universal.

[Joseph Chikva]

Joseph,

It is difficult to understand you. Thus Rossi 116 and you 20 or so.

Now if you could find some one with a better grasp of English to post for you you might make better progress.

The alternative is to post equations and diagrams. Those languages are more universal.

Ok. You are right

In one of his post:

...there is no magnetic effect between ions moving at the same speed...

in another post:

... then just remember that the magnetic field an ion produces is not one in its inertial frame - a bunch of ions all moving together generate no magentic field that the others experience. With as many electrons coming one way as ions the other, for space charge neutrality - where's the magnetic field gonna come from?

I gave him the following link:
http://academic.mu.edu/phys/matthysd/web004/l0220.htm
Magnetic Field of a Moving Charge
Where is written:

Two protons with a vertical displacement of r between them move in the x-y plane parallel to the x-axis at the same speed v (small compared to c). When they are both at x = 0, what is the ratio of the electric/magnetic forces between them ?

And the ratio is the following:
v^2/c^2
Better you can see reading that link - that's short and simple.
Thanks.

[chrismb]

The V is the velocity in the co-ordinate frame.

In the frame of the particles, V=0, so 0=FB/FE => B=0.

[Joseph Chikva]

The V is the velocity in the co-ordinate frame.

In the frame of the particles, V=0, so 0=FB/FE => B=0.

No, they (two protons) have equal velocity v in fixed frame of reference x-y.
And B not equal to zero considering motion in that x-y.

[rcain]

...
And what we discuss about?
• is pinch possible in beams?
• Do particles interact magnetically during coherent motion?
• Probability of the reaction (Oppenheimer-Philips) discovered as I
...

• yes
• yes
• zero
...

i believe that last should not be 'zero' but 'quantifyable'.

[chrismb]

The V is the velocity in the co-ordinate frame.

In the frame of the particles, V=0, so 0=FB/FE => B=0.

No, they (two protons) have equal velocity v in fixed frame of reference x-y.
And B not equal to zero considering motion in that x-y.

B not equal zero IN XY FRAME. True.

But B = 0 IN PARTICLES' FRAME

[Joseph Chikva]

...
And what we discuss about?
• is pinch possible in beams?
• Do particles interact magnetically during coherent motion?
• Probability of the reaction (Oppenheimer-Philips) discovered as I
...

• yes
• yes
• zero
...

i believe that last should not be 'zero' but 'quantifyable'.

Chris said that I will get only or mainly O-P instead target fusion reaction.

I am repeating once again:
O-P stripping
D(2)+X(A)=p+X(A+1)
So,
• for D+T reaction with birth of hydrogen nucleus with 3!!! neutrons (I think that only very special laboratory methods could measure the occurring of that reaction)
• for D+He3 that is a target reaction (Chris said "you will have high energy particle instead of fusion" when my target is namely to get those high energy particles)
• for p+B11 I do not know what may be stripped here? If proton – as I remember I did not propose to use hadron collider, if B11 - yes, that should be "stripped" as we should get 3 alpha-particles.

[Joseph Chikva]

The V is the velocity in the co-ordinate frame.

In the frame of the particles, V=0, so 0=FB/FE => B=0.

No, they (two protons) have equal velocity v in fixed frame of reference x-y.
And B not equal to zero considering motion in that x-y.

B not equal zero IN XY FRAME. True.

But B = 0 IN PARTICLES' FRAME

So, you agree that in another frame of reference moving relative the beam particles suffer magnetic field from each other?

[chrismb]

So, you agree that in another frame of reference moving relative the beam particles suffer magnetic field from each other?

Yes, in another frame it looks like they are having a magnetic effect on each other.

But it cannot be a [net] pinching force because if you look at it in their frame then there is only a repulsive electrostatic force.

[rcain]

...But it cannot be a [net] pinching force because if you look at it in their frame then there is only a repulsive electrostatic force.

should that read 'an apparent residual electrostatic repulsive force'?

[Joseph Chikva]

So, you agree that in another frame of reference moving relative the beam particles suffer magnetic field from each other?

Yes, in another frame it looks like they are having a magnetic effect on each other.

But it cannot be a [net] pinching force because if you look at it in their frame then there is only a repulsive electrostatic force.

Ok, you make progress.
I would like to say you more: for any frame of reference magnetic force of parallelly moving particles never exceed electrostatic repulsion but will become equal only in case if v=c.
• Now let's consider ions from electron frame of reference.
• Then electrons from ion frame of reference.
Partial compensation of space charge+mafnetic field.
May they pinch or no?
That's all. Thanks.

PS: You also can take into consideration that number density of particles in different frames are not invariant and calculated with the help of well-known Lorenz conversions. By the way this is G.I. Budker’s approach.

[chrismb]

Ok, you make progress.

I never said any different. You have made progress if you now comprehend me.

I would like to say you more: for any frame of reference magnetic force of parallelly moving particles never exceed electrostatic repulsion but will become equal only in case if v=c.

You still do not seem to get it. In who's frame? Mag and electric forces are relative, so you cannot say 'one or other will be greater or lesser'.

• Now let's consider ions from electron frame of reference.
• Then electrons from ion frame of reference.
Partial compensation of space charge+mafnetic field.
May they pinch or no?
That's all. Thanks.

I've never disputed an additional current can cause a pinch. Quite the opposite. This whole discussion was about your claims that like charges in a beam self-pinch. You seem to me now accepting that the cannot.

But in your 'invention', the current would have to be so high that I expect you would be pumping >>terawatts into an electron beam to achieve what you say you want to do. It is for you to show the calculation of feasibility, not for me to numerically demonstrate my expectations.