Pulsing fusion

For posts specifically relating to fusor design, construction, and operation.
User avatar
Richard Hull
Moderator
Posts: 12089
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 1:44 pm
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: Pulsing fusion

Post by Richard Hull » Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:28 pm

POPS is definitely not arc fusion. It is still questionable if it plays out to any advantage at all. Again, no investigative reports of experimentation done here in these forums.

Pulsed fusion in a sub or near-fusion biased fusor has also yet to be examined in a controlled experimental setup and might turn out interesting as the pulse energy would not have to be that great and could possibly be handled at rep-rates in the 1khz range using conventional and readily obtainable hydrogen thyratrons.

Cold body arc fusion, operated at immense energies, relative to the scale of the device, is more akin to destructive testing than viable fusion work. Same as above....No credible reports of fusion details on this site.

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.

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

Re: Pulsing fusion

Post by Starfire » Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:57 pm

Carl

I am not really interested to continue this - I reiterate; -
>A simple sparkgap filled with D2 will get you a Neutron burst when discharged.
and a focus fusion device proves this - take it or leave lt or build a differiental one for yourself then comment.

User avatar
Carl Willis
Posts: 2841
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2001 11:33 pm
Real name: Carl Willis
Location: Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
Contact:

Re: Pulsing fusion

Post by Carl Willis » Fri Dec 10, 2010 7:22 pm

>I am not really interested to continue this - I reiterate; -
>A simple sparkgap filled with D2 will get you a Neutron burst when discharged.

If you are not interested in continuing, why do you keep bringing this stuff up? So we can just read it uncritically and not express any interest in details?

>and a focus fusion device proves this'

A focus fusion device is not a "simple spark gap."

>build a differiental one for yourself then comment.

YOU are the one commenting about your purported experiments and accomplishments, and YOU owe explanation, not me.

This conflict does touch on the essential character of fusor.net as a reality-based community, one with standards. Play ball or go home--I'm serious.

-Carl
Carl Willis
http://carlwillis.wordpress.com/
TEL: +1-505-412-3277

Conrad Farnsworth
Posts: 135
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2010 1:35 am
Real name: Conrad Farnsworth

Re: Pulsing fusion

Post by Conrad Farnsworth » Sat Dec 11, 2010 6:20 am

Chris,
I honestly dont know what im aiming for. Although it may not be scientifically "correct" or easier, I very much love "adding a dash of this and lets see what happens".

Post Reply