Hi, im just starting on the road to Fusor-dom, and I have the stupidest questions. Can anyone list the 'important' formulas, and how to use them and/or their importance? If possible, could they be algebraic based? Its sad, but I am not in Calculus, i am in Ap Geometry, and Algebra 2..
Thanks so much!
newbie questions...
-
Carl Willis
- Posts: 2841
- Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2001 7:33 pm
- Real name: Carl Willis
- Location: Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
- Contact:
Re: newbie questions...
It is impossible to "boil down" a complex physical reality into a list of formulas to be applied in lieu of conceptual understanding.
Math, like other tools, can easily be misused if the user does not have an appropriate feel for the problem he is trying to solve. One probably wouldn't ask for a master carpenter's tools and upon receipt presume himself to be a master carpenter; and yet all the time people seek out the "formula" for some physics or engineering problem and upon application presume their work to be reliable. It rarely is. We need to move away from our glorification of tools, and focus on cultivating understanding.
-Carl
Math, like other tools, can easily be misused if the user does not have an appropriate feel for the problem he is trying to solve. One probably wouldn't ask for a master carpenter's tools and upon receipt presume himself to be a master carpenter; and yet all the time people seek out the "formula" for some physics or engineering problem and upon application presume their work to be reliable. It rarely is. We need to move away from our glorification of tools, and focus on cultivating understanding.
-Carl
Re: newbie questions...
What you just asked is not a stupid question, but it's kind of like asking "how does a car work?" The scope of the question is so vast, that it can't be answered without writing a book.
So, read up a bit on the workings of a fusor, and ask questions that are closer to what you really want to know. There are formulas for power supplies, vacuum systems, chemical reactions, particle physics, grid geometry, electric and magnetic fields, some are simple [V=I*R], some are very complex.
Scott
So, read up a bit on the workings of a fusor, and ask questions that are closer to what you really want to know. There are formulas for power supplies, vacuum systems, chemical reactions, particle physics, grid geometry, electric and magnetic fields, some are simple [V=I*R], some are very complex.
Scott
-
Chris Bradley
- Posts: 2930
- Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 7:05 am
- Real name:
Re: newbie questions...
As far as understanding calculating the nuclear reaction that could be going on, I generally reference people to;
http://fds.oup.com/www.oup.co.uk/pdf/0-19-856264-0.pdf
and you could also try;
http://www.kayelaby.npl.co.uk/atomic_an ... 4_7_4.html
The rest is electrical circuit theory and gas discharge processes. Anything else you want to know is hard-reference-searching-work /research /guesswork and/or "other".
http://fds.oup.com/www.oup.co.uk/pdf/0-19-856264-0.pdf
and you could also try;
http://www.kayelaby.npl.co.uk/atomic_an ... 4_7_4.html
The rest is electrical circuit theory and gas discharge processes. Anything else you want to know is hard-reference-searching-work /research /guesswork and/or "other".
-
Richard Hull
- Moderator
- Posts: 15024
- Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 9:44 am
- Real name: Richard Hull
Re: newbie questions...
Carl's eloquent words need no real addition beyond a "Here, here" or "well spoken".
Math is a tool, a valuable tool and there is no escaping it when needed.
It depends on the depth and path you choose as to how much the math tool will be needed.
For making a fusor, the math is carpenter math. For operation the 4 operators are the same (+,-,x, /) but the math is electrical math, ohms law and such. For detection and crude efficiency and neutron numbers, (data reduction). A tiny bit of elementary plane and solid geometry might be used.
A good tenth grader in second year algebra could handle all the math needed to build, operate and report on the operation of a fusor in a creditable manner. The question falls back on Carl's key point. Could or would a tenth grader take the time and energy to achieve the understanding at core levels of the fusion process? Could a tenth grader accumulate and claw his or her way through the multiplicity of scientific and technical disciplines needed to build and safely operate a fusor?
The answer is based partially on gifts of the genes, on whether one has squandered a youth playing video games instead of study and the use of the hands and mind in useful or productive activities but more fittingly on the motto " where there is a will, there is a way."
Good luck
Richard Hull
Math is a tool, a valuable tool and there is no escaping it when needed.
It depends on the depth and path you choose as to how much the math tool will be needed.
For making a fusor, the math is carpenter math. For operation the 4 operators are the same (+,-,x, /) but the math is electrical math, ohms law and such. For detection and crude efficiency and neutron numbers, (data reduction). A tiny bit of elementary plane and solid geometry might be used.
A good tenth grader in second year algebra could handle all the math needed to build, operate and report on the operation of a fusor in a creditable manner. The question falls back on Carl's key point. Could or would a tenth grader take the time and energy to achieve the understanding at core levels of the fusion process? Could a tenth grader accumulate and claw his or her way through the multiplicity of scientific and technical disciplines needed to build and safely operate a fusor?
The answer is based partially on gifts of the genes, on whether one has squandered a youth playing video games instead of study and the use of the hands and mind in useful or productive activities but more fittingly on the motto " where there is a will, there is a way."
Good luck
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
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
-
Chris Bradley
- Posts: 2930
- Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 7:05 am
- Real name:
Re: newbie questions...
Richard Hull wrote:
> Carl's eloquent words need no real addition beyond a "Here, here" or "well spoken".
Excepting that it didn't say anything helpful, it was near perfect!!
Carl Willis wrote:
> It is impossible to "boil down" a complex physical reality into a list of formulas to be applied in lieu of conceptual understanding.
>
But surely conceptual understanding arises from the "boiling down" of complexities and the process of doing so? We may have, and even share, basic ideas on what the ions and electrons are up to (and, indeed, it is mostly basic +-/* and F=ma=Eq which should be realised from an application of a bit of thought and Newton/electrostatics) but we don't go around with a head full of all the complex physical realities, we take the top most dominant effects and think about those. It is in the nature of scientific investigation to assume the simplified model first, then consider the variations to that from the observed reality. An iteration of conceptualisation then occurs, hopefully concluding in some degree of understanding.
As has been said before, there are many many ways to ionisation but, e.g., I would challenge anyone to say they are thinking about all the possible ways this can happen simultaneously (or even sequentially) in their heads whilst they are contemplating their build. And isn't this exactly a case of boiling down the complexities??
That is not to say Carl's words are in error, but I would suggest that they serve as a warning rather than as a helpful guiding answer to initiate some thinking over the processes. If equations exist, however over-simplified, they certainly help me begin to come to terms with a conceptual understanding, so that reverse process (of simple equations to basic conceptual understanding) frequently happens as well.
> Carl's eloquent words need no real addition beyond a "Here, here" or "well spoken".
Excepting that it didn't say anything helpful, it was near perfect!!
Carl Willis wrote:
> It is impossible to "boil down" a complex physical reality into a list of formulas to be applied in lieu of conceptual understanding.
>
But surely conceptual understanding arises from the "boiling down" of complexities and the process of doing so? We may have, and even share, basic ideas on what the ions and electrons are up to (and, indeed, it is mostly basic +-/* and F=ma=Eq which should be realised from an application of a bit of thought and Newton/electrostatics) but we don't go around with a head full of all the complex physical realities, we take the top most dominant effects and think about those. It is in the nature of scientific investigation to assume the simplified model first, then consider the variations to that from the observed reality. An iteration of conceptualisation then occurs, hopefully concluding in some degree of understanding.
As has been said before, there are many many ways to ionisation but, e.g., I would challenge anyone to say they are thinking about all the possible ways this can happen simultaneously (or even sequentially) in their heads whilst they are contemplating their build. And isn't this exactly a case of boiling down the complexities??
That is not to say Carl's words are in error, but I would suggest that they serve as a warning rather than as a helpful guiding answer to initiate some thinking over the processes. If equations exist, however over-simplified, they certainly help me begin to come to terms with a conceptual understanding, so that reverse process (of simple equations to basic conceptual understanding) frequently happens as well.
-
Richard Hull
- Moderator
- Posts: 15024
- Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 9:44 am
- Real name: Richard Hull
Re: newbie questions...
I just created the first FAQ in the Introduce Yourself forum, explaining to the newbie that it is up to them and not us, except by chance osmosis, to pick up on most everything related to the fusor, fusion, math, machine tool operation, etc. It is up to them just how deep they wish to plum the depths.
You can just wade in these waters here and make a cracker jack fusor or you can explore the depths of core issues. It is your choice. The laundry list of equations for a wader is almost non-existant and most math is obvious to the meanest intelligence.
If you want to scubba dive in the shallows of the bay, the list of needed mathermatical equations and aids is real and of some short length.
For those in a deep diving pressure suit, the list grows to a more formidable length as toe dipping in some disciplines just won't cut it.
For those in a deep submersible, academic training and many texts are needed to contain or present a vast range of complex equations needed to explore first principles needed to build the ultimate supposed understanding based on the best of current knowledge..
We are back to the question..... What are your goals? This is a question that few newbs have even yet asked of themselves or have understanding enough to even formulate a good answer.
Who among us are to be assumptive enough to produce a "must have" laundry list of equations for the young ninth grader, the auto mechanic, the machinist, The curious amateur scientist or the degreed engineer arriving here with the nebulous question, "what equations do I need to make a fusor?" or any other typically nebulous newbie question that is impossible to answer to completeness.
If an answer that sounds like a warning that the subject is deep or shallow based on where you want to position yourself is in itself nebulous then let them depart nebulously confused, as they arrived. The fleet of wit will take the admonition to heart and at least attempt to wade and in that discover the depths to which they are at home and at peace with the effort.
The auto mechanic will make his fusor, either demo or real, and then depart a wiser and enriched man. The ninth grader might have a fire lit that was not there or one stoked to red heat that was already burning, inspiring him to attain a Phd in physics, much like our own Carl Willis. I saw Carl go from this young high schooler to currently moments away from his Phd. As I once taught, helped and inspired him, so he now teaches me.
Carl's answer in this case comes from a man that has made the trip and are felt equally by myself to be solid advice, even if taken as a warning. I feel the requester understands that he is on a journey that he must ultimately control; perhaps the first such journey of his life, the first really big project.
The help we give will be in relation to his effort as percieved by us. All he needs is here. We have spent years creating FAQs, answering the same questions over and over How hard is he really willing to work to mine it out? He will find his sea legs in all this, I am sure. He sounded bright.
Perhaps someone might undertake a "must have" or a "kinda must" have laundry list of equations as a FAQ in the "Fusor Construction" or "Fusion Theory" forums. I will not be so presumptive, as one might just chase off "Joe the plumber" should he exercise due dilligence and read all the FAQs. It's all a crap shoot.
Richard Hull
You can just wade in these waters here and make a cracker jack fusor or you can explore the depths of core issues. It is your choice. The laundry list of equations for a wader is almost non-existant and most math is obvious to the meanest intelligence.
If you want to scubba dive in the shallows of the bay, the list of needed mathermatical equations and aids is real and of some short length.
For those in a deep diving pressure suit, the list grows to a more formidable length as toe dipping in some disciplines just won't cut it.
For those in a deep submersible, academic training and many texts are needed to contain or present a vast range of complex equations needed to explore first principles needed to build the ultimate supposed understanding based on the best of current knowledge..
We are back to the question..... What are your goals? This is a question that few newbs have even yet asked of themselves or have understanding enough to even formulate a good answer.
Who among us are to be assumptive enough to produce a "must have" laundry list of equations for the young ninth grader, the auto mechanic, the machinist, The curious amateur scientist or the degreed engineer arriving here with the nebulous question, "what equations do I need to make a fusor?" or any other typically nebulous newbie question that is impossible to answer to completeness.
If an answer that sounds like a warning that the subject is deep or shallow based on where you want to position yourself is in itself nebulous then let them depart nebulously confused, as they arrived. The fleet of wit will take the admonition to heart and at least attempt to wade and in that discover the depths to which they are at home and at peace with the effort.
The auto mechanic will make his fusor, either demo or real, and then depart a wiser and enriched man. The ninth grader might have a fire lit that was not there or one stoked to red heat that was already burning, inspiring him to attain a Phd in physics, much like our own Carl Willis. I saw Carl go from this young high schooler to currently moments away from his Phd. As I once taught, helped and inspired him, so he now teaches me.
Carl's answer in this case comes from a man that has made the trip and are felt equally by myself to be solid advice, even if taken as a warning. I feel the requester understands that he is on a journey that he must ultimately control; perhaps the first such journey of his life, the first really big project.
The help we give will be in relation to his effort as percieved by us. All he needs is here. We have spent years creating FAQs, answering the same questions over and over How hard is he really willing to work to mine it out? He will find his sea legs in all this, I am sure. He sounded bright.
Perhaps someone might undertake a "must have" or a "kinda must" have laundry list of equations as a FAQ in the "Fusor Construction" or "Fusion Theory" forums. I will not be so presumptive, as one might just chase off "Joe the plumber" should he exercise due dilligence and read all the FAQs. It's all a crap shoot.
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
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
Re: newbie questions...
Thanks for all the quick answers! As to my 'goals', which are as of yet still slightly generic, I want to first build a demo fusor, at a lower vacuum, and then later, mov eon to high vacuums.
Thanks so much!
Thanks so much!
Re: newbie questions...
Oh, I just realized who you were! An acquaintance of mine, Heidi Baumgartner, recommended your site for my research! I have been practically inhaling your thesis paper!
-
Carl Willis
- Posts: 2841
- Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2001 7:33 pm
- Real name: Carl Willis
- Location: Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
- Contact:
Re: newbie questions...
Hi Chris,
>Excepting that it didn't say anything helpful, it was near perfect!!
Sorry I didn't say anything that helped you.
Not everything I say is helpful to everyone, and it scarcely needs mentioning that a few things are not really intended to be helpful to anyone (there's a little troll in all of us, right?). However, my response here is actually pitched to refocus the guy with the question onto issues that matter, rather than to have him continue his goose chase for formulas stripped of their essential physics context. I don't think by going that route that he helps himself.
>But surely conceptual understanding arises from the "boiling down" of complexities
I agree. This is what I said:
>It is impossible to "boil down" a complex physical reality into a list of formulas to be applied in lieu of conceptual understanding.
If you conceptually understand a real phenomenon, then your "boiling down" process (which involves making assumptions) is likely to preserve the applicability of the result to the reality being considered and is an important method in science. But if you attempt the process WITHOUT conceptual understanding (i.e. "in lieu of"), which is what I believe is going on when you ask for a formulary, it is likely that you will not employ valid assumptions and the result will not be applicable to reality. Do you understand what I am saying here?
As an example, Scott brought up "Ohm's Law", V = I*R. This happens to be inapplicable to many electrical components, particularly gas discharges like fusors. Current is not proportional to voltage in most gas discharges. If you use Ohm's Law for fusor calculations, such as P=I^2*R to calculate the power dissipation in a fusor at an anticipated current I using an R value from a previous Ohm's Law calculation, you're gonna be wrong. This doesn't mean Ohm's Law is wrong, it just means that it is conditionally applicable, and if you as an engineer or physicist take it out of context, it may result in wrong calculations. I am opposed to supplying "formulas" because of this common issue, and I often bust folks' chops for the misuse of math tools when they are arrears in conceptual grounding.
-Carl
>Excepting that it didn't say anything helpful, it was near perfect!!
Sorry I didn't say anything that helped you.
Not everything I say is helpful to everyone, and it scarcely needs mentioning that a few things are not really intended to be helpful to anyone (there's a little troll in all of us, right?). However, my response here is actually pitched to refocus the guy with the question onto issues that matter, rather than to have him continue his goose chase for formulas stripped of their essential physics context. I don't think by going that route that he helps himself.
>But surely conceptual understanding arises from the "boiling down" of complexities
I agree. This is what I said:
>It is impossible to "boil down" a complex physical reality into a list of formulas to be applied in lieu of conceptual understanding.
If you conceptually understand a real phenomenon, then your "boiling down" process (which involves making assumptions) is likely to preserve the applicability of the result to the reality being considered and is an important method in science. But if you attempt the process WITHOUT conceptual understanding (i.e. "in lieu of"), which is what I believe is going on when you ask for a formulary, it is likely that you will not employ valid assumptions and the result will not be applicable to reality. Do you understand what I am saying here?
As an example, Scott brought up "Ohm's Law", V = I*R. This happens to be inapplicable to many electrical components, particularly gas discharges like fusors. Current is not proportional to voltage in most gas discharges. If you use Ohm's Law for fusor calculations, such as P=I^2*R to calculate the power dissipation in a fusor at an anticipated current I using an R value from a previous Ohm's Law calculation, you're gonna be wrong. This doesn't mean Ohm's Law is wrong, it just means that it is conditionally applicable, and if you as an engineer or physicist take it out of context, it may result in wrong calculations. I am opposed to supplying "formulas" because of this common issue, and I often bust folks' chops for the misuse of math tools when they are arrears in conceptual grounding.
-Carl
-
Carl Willis
- Posts: 2841
- Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2001 7:33 pm
- Real name: Carl Willis
- Location: Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
- Contact:
Re: newbie questions...
Yes, Heidi asked me what I would suggest to "someone building a fusor for the first time" at lunch up in New Jersey. Didn't know that someone was you. Well, the world's a small place.
I think what I said was that I would recommend you read through the forums at fusor.net, become a good opportunist at surplus shops, and don't rush. Pretty generic, really. I hope my thesis paper helps you out and if you have questions, just ask. If you have specific plans for your fusor, mention them here and you'll likely get very appropriate advice.
Are you part of Heidi's cyclotron effort?
-Carl
I think what I said was that I would recommend you read through the forums at fusor.net, become a good opportunist at surplus shops, and don't rush. Pretty generic, really. I hope my thesis paper helps you out and if you have questions, just ask. If you have specific plans for your fusor, mention them here and you'll likely get very appropriate advice.
Are you part of Heidi's cyclotron effort?
-Carl
Re: newbie questions...
no, im not in her cyclotron group. I just met her about a month ago on Skype. I think i sen tyou an email vie the link on your website..I was asking for some good books to read on Fusor theory, and the components involved.
-
-
-
Chris Bradley
- Posts: 2930
- Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 7:05 am
- Real name:
Re: newbie questions...
Carl Willis wrote:
> in lieu of conceptual understanding.
Yes, I misread this sentiment of yours. mea culpa! Also, to a fault, I always tend to look at questions verbatim rather than what the actual intent (or lack of diligence) was on behalf of the questioner. Non-enumerated answers appear to have been satisfactory in this case.
> in lieu of conceptual understanding.
Yes, I misread this sentiment of yours. mea culpa! Also, to a fault, I always tend to look at questions verbatim rather than what the actual intent (or lack of diligence) was on behalf of the questioner. Non-enumerated answers appear to have been satisfactory in this case.
-
Carl Willis
- Posts: 2841
- Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2001 7:33 pm
- Real name: Carl Willis
- Location: Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
- Contact:
Re: newbie questions...
Did I answer your emails? I don't recall. Because my email is public I have my spam filter cranked up to its most brutal state. If I answered I hope what I wrote was useful.
-Carl
-Carl
Re: newbie questions...
no you didnt, but i guess i can just ask you here!
What are some good books to read for a thorough understanding of the theory involed with a Fusor, and related topics?(most preferably, ones whihc can be deciphered by a 9th grade student..)
Thanks!
What are some good books to read for a thorough understanding of the theory involed with a Fusor, and related topics?(most preferably, ones whihc can be deciphered by a 9th grade student..)
Thanks!
-
Carl Willis
- Posts: 2841
- Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2001 7:33 pm
- Real name: Carl Willis
- Location: Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
- Contact:
Re: newbie questions...
My list of "good books" contain texts that are more applied than theoretical in character, and none specifically relate to fusion. Here are a few. These are all very readable and accessible books.
1. F. E. Terman. "Radio Engineer's Handbook." McGraw-Hill, 1943
2. G. F. Knoll. "Radiation Detection and Measurement." Wiley, 2000
3. J. Strong. "Procedures in Experimental Physics." Prentice-Hall, 1944
4. J. H. Moore, C. C. Davis, M. A. Coplan. "Building Scientific Apparatus." Addison-Wesley, 2002
5. E. C. Pollard, W. L. Davidson. "Applied Nuclear Physics (2nd Ed.)." Wiley, 1951
The fusor itself is an example of a gaseous electronic device, so a book on gaseous electronics or plasma physics is missing from this list and would serve you well. I don't keep around any at the house, and I have yet to find what I would call a good plasma physics textbook.
-Carl
1. F. E. Terman. "Radio Engineer's Handbook." McGraw-Hill, 1943
2. G. F. Knoll. "Radiation Detection and Measurement." Wiley, 2000
3. J. Strong. "Procedures in Experimental Physics." Prentice-Hall, 1944
4. J. H. Moore, C. C. Davis, M. A. Coplan. "Building Scientific Apparatus." Addison-Wesley, 2002
5. E. C. Pollard, W. L. Davidson. "Applied Nuclear Physics (2nd Ed.)." Wiley, 1951
The fusor itself is an example of a gaseous electronic device, so a book on gaseous electronics or plasma physics is missing from this list and would serve you well. I don't keep around any at the house, and I have yet to find what I would call a good plasma physics textbook.
-Carl