Another Couple of Fusion articles

It may be difficult to separate "theory" from "application," but let''s see if this helps facilitate the discussion.
Post Reply
ijv
Posts: 32
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2001 10:23 pm
Real name:

Another Couple of Fusion articles

Post by ijv »

A press release from Sandia, apparently they have managed to produce neutorns using their Z machine and a pulsed power fusion scheme.

http://www.sandia.gov/news-center/news- ... trons.html

And another article on a rare charge symmetry violating fusion reaction apparently observed at Indian Uni. (they observed an average of 5 events per day on a two month run).

http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=11174

A question for Richard Hull, how do your views on fundamental particles fit in with things like pions, which people say they have detected?.
3l
Posts: 1866
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2001 3:51 pm
Real name:

Re: Another Couple of Fusion articles

Post by 3l »

Yeah but they have yet to produce a breakeven reaction.
The juice they pour into that machine is enough for a small community.
The problem remains how much bigger and at what temperature.
Even with a great neutron flux like 10^9 the cost per neutron is huge for the z machine.
They are making progress but the cost when I first reported on the z machine was running at 60-75 cents per neutron.
They have succeeded in lowering the cost down to 12-20 cents per neutron but a fission reactor with a ten kg U235 core generates neutrons at .0003 cents each!
They are closer but they still have a long road.
To contrast it to our effort Jon's Rosenstiel's 10^8 mega neutron flux output is only a scale of ten removed from their results.
Jon's machine fits on a small workbench and plugs into the wall.
So tell me which is the more advanced concept?

Keep on Fusing!
Larry Leins
Fusor Tech
User avatar
Richard Hull
Moderator
Posts: 14992
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 9:44 am
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: Another Couple of Fusion articles

Post by Richard Hull »

My thoughts are basically as follows....

If it can be seen as a track in a bubble chamber, cloud chamber, or if neutral, can be detected via a single unequivocal secondary reaction, then it is real. Thus, the bulk of the mesonics are real and represent some as yet not understood interim debris where atoms have been decimated by forces not found in ANY common universal reaction, but instead, have undergone impacts by particles accelerated to energies far outside that found in even the most intense stellar furnaces. Such mesonic debris has only been found as a result of cosmic ray bombardment of normal matter or in man-made accelerators in the Bev range and beyond. All of this is abnormal to what might be termed normal universal conditions. Mesons of all sorts are an abomination to nature at the current universal energy density. As such, the longest lifetimes are on the order of a microsecond and the shortest, in the sub-nanosecond range. Thus, I feel that mesons are NOT constituents of any atom, but a form of matter which was stable at some distant epoch in time where the energy density of the universe would support their extended existence. That energy density is reproduced for the instant of extreme violence noted above in extreme collisions. Now loose in a kinder, gentler universe, they evaporate quickly. I don't hold with quarks, bosons, and the like as they are not detectable directly. They are a product of the imagination and any proof of their existence is through inferred tertiary reactions and over-tortured statistics.

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
The more complex the idea put forward by the poor amateur, the more likely it will never see embodiment
User avatar
Richard Hull
Moderator
Posts: 14992
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 9:44 am
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: Another Couple of Fusion articles

Post by Richard Hull »

Jon's fusor is a continuous machine the z machine is a pulsed deal. Jon's 10e8 figure boils off every second he has the power cord plugged into the wall. It is not a one shot system.

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
The more complex the idea put forward by the poor amateur, the more likely it will never see embodiment
Jon Rosenstiel
Posts: 1494
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2001 1:30 am
Real name: Jon Rosenstiel
Location: Southern California

Re: Another Couple of Fusion articles

Post by Jon Rosenstiel »

Larry, Somehow you added a couple of zero's.... Actually my fusor is in the low 10^6 n/s range.

Jon Rosenstiel
3l
Posts: 1866
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2001 3:51 pm
Real name:

Re: Another Couple of Fusion articles

Post by 3l »

Sorry about that!
I thought one of our members had cracked the 10^8 mark.
But the fusor still compares very well against the against the z machine on just electrical consumption alone.

Keep on Fusing!
Larry Leins
Fusor Tech
ijv
Posts: 32
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2001 10:23 pm
Real name:

Re: Another Couple of Fusion articles

Post by ijv »

So if you can't see it, it doesn't exist? ;-)

Come to think of it thats pretty much the attitude that Einstien took towards the aether.

What do you mean when you say that the current energy density of the universe doesn't support the extended exitnace of mesons?. I wasn't aware that particle half lives were affected by any external factor.
Brett
Posts: 86
Joined: Sat Feb 22, 2003 1:25 pm
Real name:

Re: Another Couple of Fusion articles

Post by Brett »

An interesting figure of merit; The price of a neutron. ;) How's a hydrogen bomb stack up, do you suppose?
3l
Posts: 1866
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2001 3:51 pm
Real name:

Re: Another Couple of Fusion articles

Post by 3l »

I can answer that one.
A hydrogen bombs neutron has a cost per neutron in the .01 cent range.
How so?
It is well above the cost of a fission reactor's neutron in the .0003
cent range.
The problem is the fact that a bomb dismantles itself in a microsecond before the reaction can really get efficient.
The fission trigger that heats the H bomb is also self dismantling.
When a atom bomb goes up only 1% the mass of that assembled is actually converted to energy.
Nearly all the assembled parts of the bomb are wasted.
They have studied this problem for years and years.
An H bomb power plant will never produce enough electricity to recover the cost of making the H Bomb. James Tuck figured that each detonation would lose on average 2-3 millions dollars.
Gotta be a better way!

Keep on Fusing!
Larry Leins
Fusor Tech
Richard Hester
Posts: 1519
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2001 12:07 am
Real name:

Re: Another Couple of Fusion articles

Post by Richard Hester »

The Sandia announcement appears to be much ado about nothing. If I had megajoules of stored energy at my command and all I could come up with was a lousy billion neutrons, I'd hang my head in shame. The U. of Illnois group has attained this level with a cylindrical pulsed fusor and a much more modest energy expenditure.
3l
Posts: 1866
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2001 3:51 pm
Real name:

Re: Another Couple of Fusion articles

Post by 3l »

Gives a pulse guy hope doesn't it.
I have gotten big burst with my little pulsed machine.
It plugs in the wall and only uses 1026 joules.
It is one shot so far but I'm going back to continous pulses now that I've got the right grid.
The spherical fusor seems to be giving better results than cylinder fusor.
The increased focus has a major advantage in production of neutrons....hotter ....noisier
The big washer method is working with minor errosion.
Dirrect electric drive has it all over the xray pulse method.
If I can straighten out the detection part,I'll bet I've got good numbers....activation at a foot in silver causes my geiger counter to go nuts. I know it's not emi due to the fact it is way after the shot.

Keep on Fusing!
Larry Leins
Fusor Tech
User avatar
Richard Hull
Moderator
Posts: 14992
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 9:44 am
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: Another Couple of Fusion articles

Post by Richard Hull »

In answer or discussion to Ivan's question.

Real, stable, sub-atomic matter, and there are only two pieces of stable matter, the proton and electron, are happy anywhere in the universe. The third most stable particle, the neutron, is itself an ungodly system of stable particles which, outside the nucleus, does have a tremendously long existence, as unstable particles go, of over 10 minutes, on average.

All other known real particles have virtually no existence in the universe as we know it. (<1usec) They are only seen when BEV nuclear violence occurs. One conclusion that might be drawn by a reasonable mind might be that they are only found at extreme energy densities. Another reasonable thought, though a stretch not quite on the order of the quark, might be that they are not extant in the atom at all, but are forms of matter formerly common in ultra, super dense energy situations which we replicate in the large accelerators or occur for fleeting moments in cosmic ray events.

One thing is for sure, no natural atomic processes involve the production or emission of mesons. Mesons are only found in the most violent ripping assunder of normal matter.

For this mind, personnally, the only real matter consists of electrons and protons and that is it. Neutrons are nuclear glue forged only in stars and locked into matter there and there alone. All other real particles (mesons) are the rebirth of ancient matter when energy densities were such that their actual extended existence was fully supported by nature. Once they fly out of the energy field of their birth in this time, in this universe, at normal universal energy densities, (nanoseconds), they evaporate in any of a vast number of ways and fashions even into making primary particles! Remember, they are a form of proto-matter for me so if a particluar meson of huge energy decays to an electron or a proton then that is what it did for a living long ago as the universe calmed down.

You asked, specifically, why I assume the half life or shortness of life span of these vapor particles is related to energy density. I say why not? Got any other logical or reasonable explanations as to why they don't like hanging around like the proton and electron? They are only seen in super ergic environments and I am unaware of the possibilty of a 100kev meson. Mesons are found in the high mev range.... minimum. Of course, blind acceptance of the lifetimes without thinking about why is always a safe bet.

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
The more complex the idea put forward by the poor amateur, the more likely it will never see embodiment
guest

Re: Another Couple of Fusion articles

Post by guest »

I had this thought after reading your message, and this is pretty much pulling something out of air, so take it with a grain of salt.

What if there are only a few of subatomic particles and all other detected particles are really the same, but at different energy states. For instance, in hot atoms, electrons jump to high electron shells. Some form of particle shells might exists that create these odd ball masses. The more energy the particle has, the larger the shell and mass. When hot atoms cool, the electron spits out a photon and returns to a lower shell level. This could explain why these particles have extremely short lives. The energy level of the particles decays are reverts to a stable energy state, just like an electron does.
User avatar
Richard Hull
Moderator
Posts: 14992
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 9:44 am
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: Another Couple of Fusion articles

Post by Richard Hull »

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. It is certainly another possible thought on the observed data. Certainly your or my thoughts are no more or less fanciful that the quark zoo.

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
The more complex the idea put forward by the poor amateur, the more likely it will never see embodiment
Post Reply

Return to “Fusor and/or General Fusion Theory (& FAQs)”