more efficient fusor

[Richard Hull]

Roger, the true mass gain due to velocity is not verified to my satisfaction. There IS a RELATIVE kinetic energy gain! Of this there is no doubt. We assume that since there are only two factors in the KE equation, (mass and velocity), that relative mass must have increased.

Obviously, regardless of what is real and what is conjecture or assumption, there are no new charged particles in the fast moving matter. No new electrons, no new protons and, also, no new neutrons. A swelling mass defect?......I do not know.....Nor does anyone else.

The key is that the mass gain is said to be "relative" and this is where the issue lies....and it lies quite dead, I might add. If you weigh yourself at near C you are still the same old weight.

So where is this conjectured, "relative mass" coming from? A far deeper issue than physics can plumb at this moment, I am afraid. Although, I am also afraid that in and effort not to appear emasculated, many well meaning physics gurus may step into the breach offering ad hoc, almost or even generally accepted explainations which may or may not be satisfying to you.

Suffice it to say the in any energy transferance via normal atomic/nuclear reactions using e=mc^2 you are seeing conversions of only mass defect and not, bulk charged matter.

Richard Hull

[longstreet]

That brings up a question I've had for a long time, and that's how black holes don't seem to be semetric it it's treatment of matter and energy. It seems we can throw matter into a black hole, and get random energy back out through hawking radiation. I think this is a classic problem in quantum mechanics because it seems information was lost. Maybe the problem's been solved and I haven't been paying attention.

Carter

[Hayabusa]

Carter,

"It seems we can throw matter into a black hole, and get random energy back out through hawking radiation."

How do we know that the emitted radiation is in fact random? What is the evidence so far?

I wonder about the nature of emitted particles from the D-D fusion reaction.

Are the trajectories of the product particles predictable, if the incident trajectories of the D-D atoms prior to collision are know, or are the product velocity (trajectories) random?

Said in another way:
If it were possible to collide two D-D atoms in a series of collisions, with the exact same incident trajectories for each collision.
Then,
Would the daughter (product) particles depart along like trajectories after each collision?

All responses are welcome...

Rog

[longstreet]

Of course there is no evidence. We don't have many black holes around to run tests on. Good old wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_loss

As for collisions, I think you can just look at it as a kind of scattering problem. I imagine there would be a range of angles of deflection with a probability distribution for the products. Just like with gold foil, you'd probably get a fairly wide angle of "near misses", and fairly sharp regions of "hits". I don't think it's possible to get the exact same angles, however, since this isn't a classical problem.

Carter

[Richard Hull]

Carter is correct. In fusion, the direction or tragectories of the resultant particles is not necessarily the same as the parent particles. Fusion has taken place and the particles will respond randomly, especilly at our low energies of bombardment.

Richard Hull

[Hayabusa]

It sounds like the answer is not known. Still I wounder why some of you tend toward a random result.

Im still thinking of a method of extracting energy from the Fusor. In one of the posts (I believe it was "resonent nuclear battery"), there was talk of organizing the product particles in order to capture their energies. Kinda reminds me of a laser.

Consider a DC motor, When a battery is attached to this motor the shaft will rotate at a certain speed. Now if an external rotating force with a higher speed but same direction were applied to the already rotating shaft, then the motor would become a generator and start pumping energy back into the battery.

Now consider the diagram I have attached (yes its the same one from another thread). The coil shaped inner grid generates a magnetic feild which helps to organize the D atoms before collision (it also causes them to follow a longer path inside the inner grid). After collision the products fly off with a trajectory which is related to the incident, only with added kinetic energy. This added energy is then absorbed by the coil inner grid, which gives us some output current.

I haven't really drawn this out in any great detail as I don't really have much faith in it. My hopes are that they will inspire better ideas.

Rog

[longstreet]

Well, I was actually speeking to collisions. If fusion happens all bets are off as to where the products go. It basically only needs to conserve total momentum. The idea behind direct conversion of fusion energy to electrical can be done simply by having extra grid voltage in the mega-volt range, and as the positivly charge products leave the area, no matter which direction they go they have to climb the potential, which does work on the field. This also stipulates that you gotta keep it from falling back in so you don't then just waste the energy accelerating it back into the chamber. However, this doesn't work for chargless products.

This doesn't work for magnetic fields because a charge can't do work on a magnetic field and a magnetic field can't do work on a charge. Magnetic fields can only change the directions of motion while kinetic energy remains constant.

What happens in a motor is the magnetic effectively changes the direction of the electrons inside the wires. If you can imagine shutting off the voltage, and then somehow turning on the magnet with the electons still moving, the elctrons will turn to collide with the wall of the wire, and the wire will twirl a bit until friction slows it down. Kinetic energy was completely constant here. The mag field didn't do any work. However, the current was destroyed in exchange for a moving wire. A constant voltage does the work, add to the electron kinetic energy as the electron kinetic energy is being converted to the wires kinetic energy. The mag field simply acts as a tool to do this and no energy is actually extract from the magnet. A similar argument can be constructed for generators, but the wire is accelerating the electrons and the magnetic field converts this kinetic energy into a current.

That is only true for constant magnetic fields though. A magnetic field *contains* some amount of energy itself. And this energy can be extracted by destroying the magnetic field, generating a voltage that can do work. That's where I'll leave off, even through that's where the fun just begins...

edit:

I'm not sure how a alternating magnetic field could extract energy, because as soon as the field oscillates it creates an electric field which starts doing work on the charged plasma. So I'm not sure how you get anything out when it seems like it would only heat the plasma. It would seem that would contradict the 2nd law of thermodynamics if you could cool things down that way!

[Richard Hull]

Roger was disucssing organizing the deuterium atoms prior to collision with a mag field.......... Sorry..........neutral atoms don't respond to simple magnetic fields prior to collision and ionization.

If you meant deuterons then that needed to be made clear. A deuteron is not a deuterium atom, it is a deuterium nucleus and this is positively charged and will respond to a mag field. A deuterium atom is neutral and will not respond.

A fine point, but a major one in any discussion.

Richard Hull

[Hayabusa]

Yes, sorry about that.

I was reffering to the ionized atom (deuteron).

What do you think about the use of a static (DC supplied) magnetic coil type inner grid. Also to increase flux density at the inner grid, and eliminate flux between the inner grid and the shell, a core with a low reluctance (the stuff they use to shield TV tubes with) could be used with a gap (vacuum gap) coinciding with the inner grid. I have attached a new picture which tries to show this core (high permeability), and the flux lines that move through it.

This magnetic field would increase the path length inside the inner grid don't you think?

I wonder what effect an AC magnetic field would produce. Of course such an experiment would have to be carried out using different frequencies, to see what effects may occur.

Rog

[Wilfried Heil]

A magnetic field would produce more ions close to the grid, which is exactly where you don´t want them. If possible, they should form farther out, so that the ions can fall though a higher potential difference. The concept would work if the deuterons were accellerated outwards, to a collision with the outer shell.
This is in fact done in some neutron generators, with good results.

[Hayabusa]

"A magnetic field would produce more ions close to the grid, which is exactly where you don’t want them. If possible, they should form farther out, so that the ions can fall though a higher potential difference. The concept would work if the deuterons were accelerated outwards, to a collision with the outer shell.
This is in fact done in some neutron generators, with good results."

Why would the presence of a magnetic field passing ONLY through the inner grid produce ions at the inner grid?

Ions are produced by electrons colliding with the neutral D atoms.

Electrons are more likely to be emitted from the outside surface of the inner grid do to the electrostatic field radiating radially out toward the shell. Is this correct?

Since the magnetic field is weaker outside of the inner grid the electrons will follow a curved path outwards. Hopefully some of these electrons will collide with neutrals and ionize them, they (ions) in turn will then accelerate towards the inner grid do to the electrostatic field.

Once they enter the space of the inner grid they will be force to follow a cork screwed or circular path do to the magnetic field (lengthened path).

Other ions will then enter and hopefully collide with the ions that are already inside the space of the inner grid, and result in a fusion reaction.

I have revised my picture, because I think that the coil producing the magnetic field will produce a distorted magnetic field. Instead I will leave the inner grid as a coil for purely cooling purposes (see my other diagram for cooling method). I have placed the magnetizing coil outside the shell instead. This should produce a more uniform field passing through the inner grid.

What do you think?

Rog

[longstreet]

Well, as I'm sure you already know, tokomaks use magnetic fields to contain their plasma. They don't use them to heat it, just to contain. The problem with this design is that even if you can make the magnetic field strong enough, the ions will smash into your poles, defeating the purpose. That's why tokomaks are torroidal. Perhaps there is legitimacy to a hybrid electrostatic/magnetic fusor, which magnetic fields doing containment, and electric fields doing the heating. But probably not as simple as this particular design. You might look into penning and paul traps as well. There is also an idea by Robert W. Bussard, I think, which creates a multi-poled magnetized inner grid to trap electrons there and to ferry ions away from the grid.

Carter

[Wilfried Heil]

A magnetic field around the grid would make it a Penning ion generator. The ions are produced by collisions between electrons and neutral gas molecules. The magnetic field will just keep the electrons on a longer path close to the grid, than without it.

However, I don´t see how the ions formed in the vicinity of the grid could gain enough energy for fusion in the center of the fusor.

A magnetic field close to the outer electrode might do some good: here we should have a cloud of low energy secondary electrons, which could be guided by a magnetic field. We should then get a higher ionisation rate close to the outer shell.

An electromagnet in the center could do it, but so would a couple of NIB magnets around the outside of the fusor. Has anyone tried this?

[Hayabusa]

Thank you for all the responses.

I came across a links which I would like to share:

http://www.casetechnology.com/source.html

Im going to study this stuff.

Thanks for the references...

Rog