Real potential energy vs. Virtual potential energy

This forum is for other possible methods for fusion such as Sonolumenescense, Cold Fusion, CANR/LENR or accelerator fusion. It should contain all theory, discussions and even construction and URLs related to "other than fusor, fusion".
User avatar
Richard Hull
Moderator
Posts: 12496
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 1:44 pm
Real name: Richard Hull

Real potential energy vs. Virtual potential energy

Post by Richard Hull » Thu Feb 07, 2008 9:04 pm

In keeping with my past posts I choose to return to a pivotal issue as stated in the title above.

Real potential energy. (PE) is extant if at some time in the past, for any reason, energy has been input to a system and stored there. This harkens back to the hunter gatherer scenario of energy procurement and use.

We gather up stuff, wood, coal, oil, uranium, thorium, etc and put just a bit of added energy to these products to "pull the PE trigger". Having done this, the energy continues to pour out of the system until the "fuel" is spent and it resides at some lowest potential energy, proof against any further, energy ouput at reasonable cost.

Gravitational energy need not be gathered up at all, but merely taken from an environmentally suitable point. (Water fall) This is the, lowest cost and most environmentally sound, massive energy source known to man here on earth.

Geothermal and tidal energies exist also in massive form, but the infrastructure to use tidal power is huge and exists in an ebb and flow situatuion against a continuous need by man. Geothermal is rare and not as conveniently located as water falls.

All of the above processes make use of real, easily released potential energy. Some are so green that only God could have wanted for more. Other's are abominably filthy and create continuing issues. In the mix is the fact that many of the filthiest solutions are also wonderfully massive of output and relatively compact, easily instituted solutions to get one's hand on a gang o' megwatts.

Fusion, at least at the core level, is a form of virtual potential energy. The energy is just not there. The seed energy to start the reaction is horrendous and the tendency for the reaction to self quench demands yet more energy. Finally, it is a poor performer volumetrically in easily started and continuously operated fusion systems. What energy is to be found in fusion is the result of the seed energy working real potential energy stored in the neutron to create what is euphemistically termed, "mass defect". The exothermic nature of fusion is a bit of a deception when operated by the hand of man.

Fusion's issues are many and, yet, remains proof against we hunter gatherers who are used to honest to God potential energy. So far, the price of the promise of virtual PE is too high and the methods to get something for nothing remain, as in the real world, a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow the purview of stellar sized furnaces only.

As stated before, even in stellar fusion the first operation is an energy loser and NOT exothermic. Stars demand a continuous source of energy to keep burning according to stellar fusion theory.

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.

Hector
Posts: 158
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2003 1:15 pm
Real name:
Contact:

Re: Real potential energy vs. Virtual potential energy

Post by Hector » Thu Feb 07, 2008 9:26 pm

I believe that at one point the same was true for fission.

User avatar
Steven Sesselmann
Posts: 2111
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 1:50 am
Real name: Steven Sesselmann
Location: Sydney - Australia
Contact:

Re: Real potential energy vs. Virtual potential energy

Post by Steven Sesselmann » Thu Feb 07, 2008 9:42 pm

Richard,

Potential energy is just that, no real or virtual about it..

The whole universe is most likely created in the form of potential energy. What makes it hard for us to visualize, is that we occupy such a tiny region of the space and time that exists in the Universe.

If the Universe was likened to a skyscraper with 10,000 levels, we live on floors 9,998 and 9,999, and the elevator in most cases only travels to those two floors.

What you call real potential energy is riding the elevator from floor 9,999 to 9,998, but what we are trying to do with fusion is to hack the elevator electronics, to make it to go to one of the lower levels. I think this is what you refer to as virtual PE.

The elevator company has put strong passwords in the software, to prevent accidental travel to the lower floors, this is to prevent the whole structure from collapsing too fast.

Nevertheless, the system is not perfect, and every now and then the lift travels with a small load, to one of the lower levels.

The long term effect of this, is that the top floors are gradually eroding, yes.. material from the top floors is gradually making its way down to the lower levels, and the handsome
structure which once was 10,000 levels will eventually turn into a bungalow.

See, we are nothing but a bunch of hackers

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: 12496
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 1:44 pm
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: Real potential energy vs. Virtual potential energy

Post by Richard Hull » Thu Feb 07, 2008 10:00 pm

How so?

1. Hunter- Gather uranium
2. refine the fuel
3. Put the fuel together with a moderator and control rods

You are off to the races......

Total time from the discovery of the very existence of fission (1938) until the test electric reactor by the navy, (1952) and the birth to megawatts of controlled electricity... a mere 14 years.

From 1938 to Shippingport., PA which put megawatts on the electrical consumer grid (1957) only 19 years.

It took vastly longer than this to develop the oil economy!!!!

Fusion? Still out there twistin' in the wind many decades after discovery and 60 years past the first attempts at fusion reactor design!!!

Fusion - Zero electricity ever produced!
Fusion - Virtually zero over unity run times from billion dollar efforts
Fusion - No self-ignition, self run ever recorded
Fusion - 1952-1985 - real soon now
Fusion - 1985 to date - not quite so real soon now
Fusion - ITER "We will not produce electricity with ITER".
Fusion - The energy of the future and it always will be.

Fission is real PE stored in the nucleus via 100%, good, old fashion endothermic reactions. This is an overburden of energy just itchin' to get out. requiring little or no seed energy to start and continuously run the reaction.

Fusion is virtual or promised PE provided any number of near impossibilities and continuous energy inputs are met and controlled.The promise has always been super big, while the results have been just "wind over the decks".

There is no comparison between a real and virtual PE source. Thus, there is no comparision at any level between fission and fusion.

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.

User avatar
Richard Hull
Moderator
Posts: 12496
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 1:44 pm
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: Real potential energy vs. Virtual potential energy

Post by Richard Hull » Thu Feb 07, 2008 10:12 pm

We see buildings that are millions of times larger self sustaining (stars)

We see that some of the already made star stuff in our building can be made to do star stuff and figure we can hack a 10,000 story building that is turning into a smaller structure into a larger edifice by a slight of hand. Continuously hacking and praying and hoping and believing. I get it now! I see just what you mean....it's a faith based thingy.

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.

User avatar
Steven Sesselmann
Posts: 2111
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 1:50 am
Real name: Steven Sesselmann
Location: Sydney - Australia
Contact:

Re: Real potential energy vs. Virtual potential energy

Post by Steven Sesselmann » Thu Feb 07, 2008 11:24 pm

Richard,

The analogy I used, was...

The Universe = Skyscraper with 10,000 levels (Building)

Our usual Domain = 9,998th. floor with no windows!

Einstein was the first person to tell us that we lived on the 9,998th floor, before him, everyone thought they lived on the ground floor.

Now only some people think we live on the ground floor....

....and I think faith might have something to do with that

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

Hector
Posts: 158
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2003 1:15 pm
Real name:
Contact:

Re: Real potential energy vs. Virtual potential energy

Post by Hector » Fri Feb 08, 2008 2:09 am

I don’t dispute your facts, but I would interject that by historical accounts prior to Leo Szilard’s chain reaction solution fission was just as impractical and as inefficient as fusion is today.

Maybe if we had a multi-approach effort like World War II provided fission research with we might also have practical fusion today. Sorry I’m an optimist, and obviously in the minority.

Chris Trent
Posts: 291
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 9:24 pm
Real name:

Re: Real potential energy vs. Virtual potential energy

Post by Chris Trent » Fri Feb 08, 2008 3:43 am

I wouldn't say you're so much the minority as you think.

Most of the rest of us are jaded with established fusion research channels, and rightly so. Fusion research today is stuck in a rut, Yes even for us.

For the time being, and for the foreseeable future, fusion really is and will remain the energy of the future. I'm just pleased that it is finally becoming evident what a money sink the major current approach to fusion really is.


Despite this disillusionment I am still confident that someday someone will have a happy accident, stroke of genius, or whatever you want to call it; and in an instant fusion will become the power of today, whenever that is.

Hector
Posts: 158
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2003 1:15 pm
Real name:
Contact:

Re: Real potential energy vs. Virtual potential energy

Post by Hector » Fri Feb 08, 2008 5:25 am

I could not agree more; maybe I'm not alone after all.

Starfire
Posts: 1482
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2001 6:14 pm
Real name:

Re: Real potential energy vs. Virtual potential energy

Post by Starfire » Fri Feb 08, 2008 2:04 pm

This thread begs the question - What is energy? and why does potential energy always seek a balance equilibrium?

answer these and your half way there.


Unlike sign charged particles will, in an absolute vacuum seek each other out - from the other side of the universe and beyond. Conversely Like sign particles or fields will go to the other end of the universe to avoid each other. ( in an absolute vacuum ) - now that's something.

But we have got the toys (Fusors ) to experiment with - or are we going just sit on our collective arse and talk about it for ever. Why not construct some serious experiments - My daughter had an experiment named " In search of the Triple" yet to be confirmed. -- three Neutrons ejected from a single reaction event?

Only needs a slow burning fusor and three detectors - - correctly positioned.

or even a simple double - a diametric Neutron ejection perhaps? The text books would have to be re-written.

Post Reply