In one word or less.

For posts specifically relating to fusor design, construction, and operation.
Post Reply
electron
Posts: 16
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2012 6:14 am
Real name:

In one word or less.

Post by electron » Tue Jan 29, 2013 1:35 pm

In one word or less,

Your strongest reason why fusion will never happen using a fusor,

Power density- James Brown.

Jack Puntawong
Posts: 151
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 1:10 am
Real name: Kunakorn Puntawong
Location: Bangkok, Thailand
Contact:

Re: In one word or less.

Post by Jack Puntawong » Tue Jan 29, 2013 2:01 pm

"It does"

It produces fusion. D-D fusion in a fusor produces neutron which are detected by many fusioneer here. ( over 50 actually)

There's a BIG different between "fusion" and "break-even fusion". Fusor will never produce energy more than it consumes but it will produce fusion.

Jack Puntawong

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: In one word or less.

Post by Carl Willis » Tue Jan 29, 2013 3:30 pm

As Jack said, fusors DO produce fusion. Routinely. Hence the detection of neutrons and the "Neutron Club" and the many neutron activation experiments that people like to do with fusors. This is now the second or third time you've been told this to no apparent effect.

To be picky now, "power density" is two words. Less than one word would be zero words, in which case you wouldn't have anything to say. You're remarkably close to having nothing to say even as it is. Power density sometimes gets discussed, with the point occasionally being made that fusion power density is plausibly higher in the center of fusors than in center of the Sun. The Sun is obviously a self-sustaining fusion reactor and fusors are not, so the crux of the issue with energy recovery and efficiency lies in a more nuanced understanding of the problems. Zero, one, or even two words don't convey that understanding.

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

User avatar
Richard Hull
Moderator
Posts: 11532
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 1:44 pm
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: In one word or less.

Post by Richard Hull » Tue Jan 29, 2013 3:37 pm

We can't use one word or less to describe fusion in general or the fusor in particular. There are too many caveats and too many qualifiers and points for a discussion to open upon. Jack got it right with his expanded dialogue.

From a discussion long, long ago..........All fusors have a net energy output exceeding the input. You just can't capture and use all of it. You have all the waste heat, radiative products, etc due to the power input, plus that sub micro-watt of real fusion energy that was created.

So, in theory and in reality, we always get more energy out than we put in to the process, provided we actually do some fusion. This point related to the physics is clearly understood by most here, while smiling broadly.

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.

electron
Posts: 16
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2012 6:14 am
Real name:

Re: In one word or less.

Post by electron » Tue Jan 29, 2013 4:42 pm

Sorry jack the question if sentenced correctly was suppose to refer to ,what in your mind is the one particular part of the fusor that prevents break even fusion, example could have been.
The inner grid will always be destroyed.

As to carl I'm not sure what your problem is but there is really no need to talk to me the way you do.
I have nothing against u.

Richard as much as I would have like to explain why I believe power density turns out to be the part that Critically fails. It's apparent you will always know more than I.
Just so you know Carl's comments don't bother me but yours did, that was until I realized you couldn't
care less and u know what that fair enough.

Jack Puntawong
Posts: 151
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 1:10 am
Real name: Kunakorn Puntawong
Location: Bangkok, Thailand
Contact:

Re: In one word or less.

Post by Jack Puntawong » Tue Jan 29, 2013 4:55 pm

If you paraphrase it that way, then I'll have to say that its the "grid".

The inner grid has always pose a problem. In Dr. Robert Bussard's work of "Polywell", he wanted to get rid of the inner grid by capturing electron at the center using magnetic fields. The density of the electrons in the middle causes the positive ions (deuterium, tritium, etc) to accelerate toward the center, thus fusing each other.

In my opinion, a polywell is well beyond an "amateur" effort due to the limited budget that we have. Polywell uses tremendous energy to create a magnetic field (using expensive super conducting magnet if I'm correct). Any way, check out the following for more information on the Polywell:

Dr. Robert Bussard's google talk

Prometheus Fusion Perfection ( Mark Suppes amateur work on Polywell)

http://www.fusor.net/files/EMC2_FusionToPost.pdf

Brian_Gage
Posts: 70
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 9:04 pm
Real name: Brian Gage
Location: Duncan, British Columbia

Re: In one word or less.

Post by Brian_Gage » Tue Jan 29, 2013 4:59 pm

In one word: Error.

Fusion constantly happens in fusors. At a loss, energy in vs. energy out, but still fusion, still producing neutrons.

Perhaps a misstatement about sustained power production?
Regards, Brian

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: In one word or less.

Post by Carl Willis » Tue Jan 29, 2013 6:06 pm

I'm CLOSING this thread. It's not a "construction and operation" topic, and even if it were properly placed in the Theory forum, it would still be disparaged as vapid. Any argument claiming that it packages wisdom in "one word or less" is empty almost by definition.

Contributors need to realize that the target audience here is people who build devices that do real fusion. When considering whether or not to start a thread, ask yourself whether you have a point to make that is original, carefully-considered, meaningfully-supported, and not obvious to folks with a hands-on understanding. And it helps if it is posted in the right forum. That's due diligence before hitting "submit". Posters who don't consider the audience and attempt to lecture from a deficit of experience with the topic run the risk of saying something silly and eliciting churlish responses for it.

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

Post Reply