F.I.C.S. Fusion a new concept in fusion

It may be difficult to separate "theory" from "application," but let''s see if this helps facilitate the discussion.
User avatar
Steven Sesselmann
Posts: 2108
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 1:50 am
Real name: Steven Sesselmann
Location: Sydney - Australia
Contact:

F.I.C.S. Fusion a new concept in fusion

Post by Steven Sesselmann » Sat Jan 14, 2012 7:02 am

Hi Guys,

With the recent publication of my patent application, the FICS fusion concept is now on the table for discussion and experimentation.

As the actual patent document is hard to read, I have produced a short video (18 minutes) to explain the concept and the ideas that I am working with.

http://youtu.be/YKbbKNt7jq8

If anyone is interested in seeing or reading the actual patent application, it can be found at WIPO here..

http://www.wipo.int/patentscope/search/ ... 9&maxRec=3

(better to read the pdf as WIPO use ocr to convert text to web, which unfortunately introduces a lot of nonsense.)

I will deal with the building of the FICS fusion reactor in the Fusor Construction forum.

Have fun, and please ask if there is something I have not made clear.

PS: This video was done in one take, no rehearsal and no edits, please excuse my occasional stumbling.

Steven
http://www.gammaspectacular.com - Gamma Spectrometry Systems
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Steven_Sesselmann - Various papers and patents on RG

User avatar
Richard Hull
Moderator
Posts: 11367
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 1:44 pm
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: F.I.C.S. Fusion a new concept in fusion

Post by Richard Hull » Wed Jan 18, 2012 2:53 pm

Excellent video! Thanks for sharing your ideas. I do not see this concept working for a number of reasons, mainly in that once again you are attempting to herd ions and regardless of various brilliant ideas, loses tend to always overcome gains, thus requiring more input energy to support the proposed process.

From what I was able to gather, your process is rather complicated in that a number of steps in it must go exactly as planned with results that, in the final case, will be self sustaining or at least not a net loss.

Without delving into the negative minutia, I would like to see you complete your work, (and it looks as if you are well underway), and or find an adherent here who will work with your idea and report back to us on the relative merits or pitfalls found. This is what you did with the "STAR" concept which was a good idea, at first, but just did not pan out.

You are certainly one of the most active thinker-doers here and this alone puts you in a special star circle among us. I applaud this with all my heart.

Richard Hull
Progress may have been a good thing once, but it just went on too long. - Yogi Berra
Fusion is the energy of the future....and it always will be
Retired now...Doing only what I want and not what I should...every day is a saturday.

JamesC
Posts: 120
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 9:32 pm
Real name: James Caska

Re: F.I.C.S. Fusion a new concept in fusion

Post by JamesC » Thu Jan 19, 2012 6:04 pm

Good Stuff Steven, always great to see new ideas being persued into reality 'against the odds'

So am I along the right track to imagine that what you are trying to do is create a (relatively) cool plasma which is compressed by the 100KeV but still cool. Almost a liquid of D+ ions. With the hope being that without the heat the average D+ seperation can be quite small, perhaps small enough to trigger a long range qantum tunnelling effect as an alternate fusion mechanism to tranditional kinetic coloumb barrier penetration. Perhaps the same something that has been hinted at in various cold fusion results.

-- Following with interest.

JC

User avatar
Steven Sesselmann
Posts: 2108
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 1:50 am
Real name: Steven Sesselmann
Location: Sydney - Australia
Contact:

Re: F.I.C.S. Fusion a new concept in fusion

Post by Steven Sesselmann » Thu Jan 19, 2012 8:15 pm

Thanks again to Richard for breaking the ice on this one, when you throw a curve ball, the posts often go a bit quiet.

James, your analysis is fairly close to the mark. If my theory (the one where the electron is nothing more than an anti-proton at very low potential) , then the Coloumb barrier ought to become lower at the rate of.

The mass energy potential of +1 hydrogen ion at ground potential, less the ions negative potential divided by the total mass energy at ground potential.

So at -100 kev potential a factor of ((10^9) - (10^5)) / (10^9) = 0.9999

Now since the current fusor energy quotients are in the order of 10^-11, a lowering of the Coulomb barrier by a factor of 10^-4 might be significant.

Thanks for your feedback...

Steven
http://www.gammaspectacular.com - Gamma Spectrometry Systems
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Steven_Sesselmann - Various papers and patents on RG

User avatar
Chris Bradley
Posts: 2931
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 11:05 am
Real name:

Re: F.I.C.S. Fusion a new concept in fusion

Post by Chris Bradley » Thu Feb 02, 2012 11:38 pm

Hi Steven,

I wanted to get a chance to hear out the whole of your video before commenting. (Sorry, few opportunities to do that, these days.) Richard has already given you the brownie badge for that one - a continuous, confident dialogue to camera for that long is an achievement in itself!

I agree very much with James C too; its good to see ideas be crafted and manifest in something real. (Hi, James! Glad to see you are still keeping an eye on the forum!) Unfortunately, being able to turn an idea into existence in no way means it'll work (as we both well know!).

In the hope of providing some reassurance and encouragement, I will quote from Tesla's autobiography (that a recent thread here encouraged me to revisit);

> "[The] ultimate purpose [of invention] is the complete mastery of mind over the material world, the harnessing of the forces of nature to human needs. This is the difficult task of the inventor who is often misunderstood and unrewarded. But he finds ample compensation in the pleasing exercises of his powers and in the knowledge of being one of that exceptionally privileged class without whom the race would have long ago perished in the bitter struggle against pitiless elements"

Anyhows, moving along.. I have the following points for discussion on your theory/comments;

1) You say in your video; "The electrostatic potential of the atom is what determines its energy in the energy potential well", with further comments indicating that you think a 1+ ion that has dropped through 100kV (say) will *have* 100keV energy. I'm unclear whether this is exactly what you are saying, but it may or may not have 100keV energy. It depends on its history getting to that point. If it has collided with a load of stuff on the way, it may have passed [some of] that 100keV of energy on to other particles along the route. If I understood what you said, you seem to be saying that the reason a fusor *doesn't* work so well is because there are *too many* of these high energy ions loitering in the centre of a fusor. This isn't so. What you find there, at the centre, is a thermalised mass of what-were-once high energy ions along with (and mostly) background atoms that have picked up the energy of the fast ions in thermalising collisions leading to a Maxwellian distribution of energies way way lower than the original ions' energies.

2) The arrangement to recover the energy for self-sustaining operation seems to rely on the fusion products travelling conveniently and in a well-behaved manner back up the accelerator tube. Surely, most of the fusion products would collide with the reaction chamber walls, as they are emitted isotropically?

3) If a [say] 2 MeV proton makes its way up to the end of the tube, I believe you are saying this will impart its electrical energy and drive the circuit around. Well, I'm sure it will, but its *electrical* energy is only 1eV. I don't think you'll sustain any useful current with that.

4) This bit worries me and either means we may find a smoking hole where Sydney once was (!), or you've not thought about feedback control: If a reaction becomes self-sustaining and is to be limited by external electrical resistance control, then how do you know you will have enough control over it to stop it going critical? I mean, if any reaction puts out more energy than it needs to maintain it, and that the reaction rate increases with more energy feedback, then you have the criteria there for an uncontrolled, exponential, spontaneous increase in reaction rate. What do you see would limit the reaction rate, excepting your proposed electrical control (for which I don't see any way of determining how fast the control needs to/can be adjusted to maintain control of the reaction rate)?

User avatar
Steven Sesselmann
Posts: 2108
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 1:50 am
Real name: Steven Sesselmann
Location: Sydney - Australia
Contact:

Re: F.I.C.S. Fusion a new concept in fusion

Post by Steven Sesselmann » Fri Feb 03, 2012 1:54 am

Chris,

Your questions are well thought out as always. Answering your questions to the best of my current understanding as follows....

1)

In my video I explained that “The energy potential of an ion is a function of where on the electrical potential energy scale it was separated from it’s electron.” Take a moment and think about this, it is fundamental to understanding the nature of matter, for in my video I was talking about an electrostatic potential energy well of -100 Kev, but in reality, what we call ground potential is in the order of +1 Gev ., we know this because it is the mass energy of the proton, and what we call -100 Kev is actually +999 900 000 Volts potential. By changing our point of reference, we can see that mass itself is nothing more than electrostatic potential, and what is often referred to as mass defect is simply matter existing at an electrostatic potential lower than ground.

[snip - removed a false paragraph here]

As you correctly state, the ions in a standard tea kettle fusor will thermalize and have a range of energies, and at some point reach equilibrium. The outwards pressure being the thermal energy from the fusing atoms and the inwards pressure of the ions loosing energy from colliding with other ions. One of the points i think Rider makes, is that this Maxwellian ion distribution can never reach the point of ignition in a standard fusor.

I do not believe this to be the case when a plasma is mechanically confined to a hollow cathode. If a thermal plasma forms in a confined space at low potential, it relies on its temperature in order to escape. In the FICS configuration which has a single ended accelerator tube the escape temperature is a function of it’s electrostatic potential.

So providing we can maintain a hot thermal plasma inside a hollow cathode, ions are held in check, or herded into a corner as Richard might say, but being confined at such a low potential is not where such light elements wish to be. The lighter elements exist naturally above ground potential, and given a chance they will want to get back to where they belong, so they pull a trick out of the hat, and fuse. (In a similar way as a King in a game of chess, uses the towering move to escape check mate).

By fusing, deuterium nuclei combine to form Tritium or He3, and a proton or a neutron, and post fusing these new particles obtain the necessary kinetic energy needed to escape the potential energy well.

2)

It has always been a belief, that fusion is a random event, and that particles are emitted isotropically, however I speculate that nature will once again do its thing, and that 50% of the fusion products, if they occur in FICS, will be directed so that the maximum energy escapes up the tube, for the same reason that toothpaste comes out the top when you squeeze the tube, it’s the direction of lowest resistance.

3)

FICS fusion stands for Fusion Induced Charge Separation, and one of the outcomes I am hoping for is that electrical energy can be harnessed by the process of allowing the fast fusion products to escape up the accelerator tube to ground, and directing the electrons via an electrical circuit to ground. While the proton escaping to ground only has a charge of +1, it has travelled upwards through a potential of say 100,000 volts, ergo for the electron to rejoin the proton, it must likewise traverse a potential of 100,000 volts. From this configuration we can see that kinetic energy of a +1 charge moving through a 100 kev potential can be turned into electron current. Converting high voltage to high current can be done by traditional means.

4)

As I obviously believe that FICS will work, I probably would be lying if I said I was not a little bit concerned, but only a little. It should be possible to prevent a catastrophe, by limiting the negative potential of the cathode. given the current construction of FICS, I very much doubt that the cathode could fall to a lower potential than around -60 to -70 Kev, without arching across somewhere, and if a plasma was sustained at that potential the fusion rate will probably be similar to a fusor at the same potential and pressure.

A simple safety measure that I am considering is a pre set spark gap to ground, which could be tested and adjusted prior to an experiment on any given day. If set to around 60 kev. I think the experiment would be safe(ish).

Were I to surround the cathode in a tank of dielectric oil, there could be a risk that the cathode would fall to much lower levels, and who knows what might happen.
(Hey, if you guys at the NIF read this, you might want to give it a try, it will be a heck of a lot cheaper than what you are constructing at the moment... )

Steven
http://www.gammaspectacular.com - Gamma Spectrometry Systems
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Steven_Sesselmann - Various papers and patents on RG

User avatar
Richard Hull
Moderator
Posts: 11367
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 1:44 pm
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: F.I.C.S. Fusion a new concept in fusion

Post by Richard Hull » Fri Feb 03, 2012 3:11 pm

It is to be remembered that 100% of the fusion produced protons are at ~3mev. In a 100kev accelerator they are going to go pretty much where they damned well please at the moment of creation and not give a hoot in hell about a whimpy 100kev potential. (pardon the vernacular, used for emphasis only).

The protons will not effectively feel any anisotropic pressure or experience any herding effect due to any forces in your system. It is safe to assume pretty much isotropic scatter on those puppies along with the 3He, T and Neuts. This is provided 60 or so years of research work in the nuclear research field is any gauge.

Good luck with the cat herding. "movin', movin', movin', keep them kitties movin, though their disapprovin' ....." (adapted old TV show, "Rawhide", theme song.)

Richard Hull
Progress may have been a good thing once, but it just went on too long. - Yogi Berra
Fusion is the energy of the future....and it always will be
Retired now...Doing only what I want and not what I should...every day is a saturday.

JamesC
Posts: 120
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 9:32 pm
Real name: James Caska

Re: F.I.C.S. Fusion a new concept in fusion

Post by JamesC » Fri Feb 03, 2012 5:08 pm

>Hi, James! Glad to see you are still keeping an eye on the forum

Hi Chris, yes I like to keep an eye out for some of the more exotic possibilities. I know the core of the forum is about construction and thats a worthy goal but I like following what you, steven and Doug are doing as you are seem to be doing the most exploritory work.

I am slowly forging my ideas into a design I am calling a Phase-Lock-Fusor with Scattering Energy recovery. I am not as far along as steven ( wow steven ) but my ideas dont require any exotic physics just really amazing enginneering well beyond my present budget - I keep waiting for my software business to take off to fund it all!

> In a 100kev accelerator they are going to go pretty much where they
>damned well please at the moment of creation and hot give a hoot in
>hell about a whimpy 100kev potential

Since this is speculative physics, speculating that it might be the potential gradient that triggers a directional fusion event is about the best we could hope for.

Steven:
I liked really liked your earlier thoughts and alternative view on spacetime. I admit to not fully grasping every aspect but I really hope your theory on mass = potential are right and hence unlock new possibilities for fusion. It would amazing to see.

Cheers,
James

Dan Tibbets
Posts: 578
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2008 5:29 am
Real name:

Re: F.I.C.S. Fusion a new concept in fusion

Post by Dan Tibbets » Fri Feb 03, 2012 5:27 pm

Several points I do not understand. You accelerate ions into the hollow cathode, but as the ions approach the cathode, they are accelerated even more and will exit the opposite side with the same energy as they had from the ion gun. Granted if there are collisions, the ions path may be randomized, but the angular momentum change does not have to mean KE change, if they bounce sideways their momentum will cause them to hit the internal wall of the hollow cathode. Only down scattered ions would spend more than ~ 1 pass inside the cathode before exiting the opposite side or hitting the wall. Essentially, I do not see how you decelerate most of the ions so that they stay inside the cathode. Also, the transparency of the cathode (even worse than a open grid) precludes reuse of ions. Unless you can keep the ions monoenergetic the ions will reach the cathode walls. And, this assumes the monoenergetic ions are contained by some means. How is this done. The Polywell claims to do this electrostatically, but it uses excess electrons contained by magnetic fields to create a central vertual cathode that will be the bottom of the ions potential well. You do not have this virtual cathode. If you are involking Gauss Law within the hollow cathode, the ions would not see the charge on the cathode walls, once it was inside the sphere, but it would still have the momentum it achieved from the ion gus and the attraction of the cathode as it approached it.

If you somehow cool the ions so that they are at very low KE, the ions will last longer inside the hollow cathode, but still they will only last ~ 1 pass. I don't know if this could result in increased densities- there is no containement, except perhaps a small amount for down scattered ions.

You mention that the electrons act as essentially anti protons. I do not see the justification for this. Certainly massive 'electrons'- Muons may greatly decrease the Coulomb barrier, and an 'electron' with the mass of a proton would work even better. I have read that 'heavy electrons' are part of some cold fusion theories, and there are strange things that happen in crystals and semiconductors, etc. If your device duplicates this effect, and it is real, there may be advantages over the same effect in a solid, but the densities involved would be tiny (if my claim of lack of containment is valid) and the fusion rates would be correspondingly lower, or the input ion current would need to be correspondingly higher.

Or, perhaps you are saying the low energy (?) ions are hitting the cathode interior walls and the fusion is occurring there. But, wouldn't this be the same as beam- target fusion at very low energies. Fusion would be extremely rare and the ions would only have one chance before giving up it's KE ( a gridded fusor may allow up to ~ 20 chances, and a Polywell perhaps a million chances. Granted, an anti- proton mass electron would probably more than make up for this shortfall, but how you derive this massive electron is a complete mystery to me.

Dan Tibbets

User avatar
Steven Sesselmann
Posts: 2108
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 1:50 am
Real name: Steven Sesselmann
Location: Sydney - Australia
Contact:

Re: F.I.C.S. Fusion a new concept in fusion

Post by Steven Sesselmann » Fri Feb 03, 2012 10:13 pm

Richard,

The odds are against me and 60 years of fusion research might still get the better of my idea, but let's give it a try and see.

Maybe the kittens will be better behaved if they are born in the bag, and come out in an orderly fashion when the bag is opened...

Be patient, I am suffering the frustrating wait for parts at the moment...

Steven
http://www.gammaspectacular.com - Gamma Spectrometry Systems
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Steven_Sesselmann - Various papers and patents on RG

Post Reply