laser ICF + Sonofusion = BSF

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".
Post Reply
Scientist M.A.D.
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2012 4:51 am
Real name:
Contact:

laser ICF + Sonofusion = BSF

Post by Scientist M.A.D. »

CLAIMS

I claim:

1. A device for generating fusion energy comprising:
a.) spherical inner chamber
I. with a reflective interior surface, for the purpose of preventing
heat loss and lowering the temperature in which ignition occurs
II. with provisions for pumping electromagnetic radiation inside
the chamber, so that the fluid inside can be used as a laser gain
medium and also for the purpose of optically tracking the fuel
b.) spherical outer chamber
I. surrounding the inner chamber
II. with provisions for acoustic & electric transduction, enabling
pre-ignition movement and compression of the fuel and also
enabling post-ignition harvesting of the blast’s kinetic energy
c.) space between the two chambers
I. filled with a fluid
i. that is an acoustical medium
ii. that cools the inner chamber
d.) space inside the inner chamber
I. filled with a fluid that
i. circulates as an efficient high-temperature coolant
ii. encapsulates gaseous fusible fuel inside of a bubble
iii. is transparent to selected electromagnetic frequencies
iv. is a laser gain medium that can amplify selected frequencies,
so that the inner chamber can function as a spherical laser cavity
v. is an acoustical medium, enabling fuel transport and compression
vi. blocks x-rays, preventing damage to the chamber walls
vii. absorbs neutrons, preventing the escape of hazardous radiation
viii. breeds tritium, replenishing the supply of easily ignitable fuel
ix. slows fuel dispersion during combustion, increasing burn-up fraction
2. A method applying to the device according to claim 1 where said method
accurately determines the location of a bubble using the technique of
multi-occultation triangulation.
3. A method applying to the device according to claim 1 where said method is used
to move a bubble by manipulating the pressure in its local environment, based on
the ideas that
a.) a bubble’s size is determined by the background pressure
b.) a bubble’s direction of motion coincides with the buoyant force and is determined
by the pressure gradient
c.) the interplay between the buoyancy force and drag force causes large bubbles to
move faster than small bubbles when subjected to the same pressure gradient
d.) fluctuations in the background pressure can be synchronized with fluctuations
in the pressure gradient, so that, even though the bubble is pulsating backwards
and forwards in tiny steps, large overall displacements can be accumulated.
4. A method applying to the device according to claim 1 where said method causes
thermonuclear ignition in a bubble of fuel, comprising
a.) positioning the fuel at the focus of a spherical laser cavity so that
i.) the fuel will not be able to effectively cool by radiating away light
ii.) the reactors structural components are well shielded from the explosion,
making larger yields and higher gains possible
b.) making the cavity laser-active, by pumping it with enough light to cause
an upper-state population inversion
c.) squeezing the fuel, so that
i.) the fuel becomes hot and radiates brightly (sonoluminescence)
ii.) the fuel’s radiation creates an outgoing laser cascade
iii.) the fuel is in a state of pre-compression when the cascade returns
iv.) the fuel is further heated and compressed by the powerful laser effect
d.) containing (preventing dispersion of) the fuel, so that
i.) the fuel can self-heat, lowering the energy required for drivers
ii.) a greater fraction of the fuel gets burnt, increasing the gain
iii.) low-temperature volume ignition is possible


Return home.
User avatar
Richard Hull
Moderator
Posts: 14992
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 9:44 am
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: laser ICF + Sonofusion = BSF

Post by Richard Hull »

Claims are easy to make. Here we demand proof before recognising that much of anything of value exists in claims, patent apps, etc. Wild ideas are just that to us.

We don't even care about net power production claims. We find that when well understood fusion occurs, there is measurable nuclear debris flying about. We demand this measurement first, indicating that genuine fusion has, indeed, taken place. Without this evidence, all claims of fusion are just so much wind over the decks.

Arm chair expounders, while amusing, can't trump hardware, nuclear measurements and hands-on action.

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
User avatar
Carl Willis
Posts: 2841
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2001 7:33 pm
Real name: Carl Willis
Location: Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
Contact:

Re: laser ICF + Sonofusion = BSF

Post by Carl Willis »

Mike, this is now your third post doing little more than dropping an off-site link to your homepage. Fair enough once in your intro, but you don't want any of us getting the impression that you're link spamming.

I'll second Richard's comment about so much wind over the decks. To the extent that your idea has merit, it will become manifest only through your commitment to building and testing it. Reality has a well-known habit of frustrating all the fanciful schemes that get announced here, and, unlike the patent office, experimentation will quickly and rudely point out the shortcomings of a concept.

-Carl
Carl Willis
http://carlwillis.wordpress.com/
TEL: +1-505-412-3277
User avatar
Chris Bradley
Posts: 2930
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 7:05 am
Real name:

Re: laser ICF + Sonofusion = BSF

Post by Chris Bradley »

As a pro se applicant with allowed patents, I can tell you that you are well advised to study past patents very closely for several months before attempting to write your own. If you have never seen an allowed patent that looks and sounds like your own, then you need to take note. If you do take a look at other patents, you will find allowed patents have a short, neat intelligible title, and similarly clear claims, with clear instructions for how to make the thing without any further [guess]work to make it run.

Examiners can be very helpful to pro se applicants who make a good attempt. (In fact, it is part of the job for USPTO examiners to provide support to pro se applicants.) Examiners are also very tolerant of those with good ideas who don't really get to grips with 'the ropes' in the first round of rejections.

However, in the case of this kind of gobbledegook they get rather ratty and I anticipate you are likely to get little help, but instead a terse rejection. They will weigh up if it is an applicant and application that are worth putting their effort into to get to an allowable state. This application looks to me to be somewhat too far off the mark.

If you are serious at progressing the application, you'll be needing to do some work. You should have good responses prepared to address the following matters; i) the claims are unspecific and replete with terms that do not specify, with required clarity, the claimed subject matter, ii) the invention is not enabled, iii) undue experimentation will be required, iv) there is no credible assertion that the invention will perform the claimed utility.

Unfortunately, this means you currently have neither the viable hardware or measurements Richard has plainly pointed out are absent, but you don't have a viable patent application either! Both matters are found wanting, if you want to be taken seriously.
User avatar
Chris Bradley
Posts: 2930
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 7:05 am
Real name:

Re: laser ICF + Sonofusion = BSF

Post by Chris Bradley »

Mr Mike,

I have just looked through the USPTO notes on your application so far. Well, it cheered me up - I am amused!

In an attempt to be helpful to you, I'll tell you why your 'Oath' has been rejected 4 times: The reason for these rejections (and you've still not made the oath correctly) is that you have filed the wrong oath! You have filed an oath to practice as a patent attorney!

The following form is the oath to be completed and submitted with a USPTO patent application; PTO/SB/01: http://www.uspto.gov/forms/sb0001.pdf .

Curiously, many of the applications I have studied miss the oath in their initial application and have to submit it later. Even patent applications from practising patent attorneys. Not sure why. The requirement (and where to find the form) is made plain enough when applying.
User avatar
Steven Sesselmann
Posts: 2127
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 9:50 pm
Real name: Steven Sesselmann
Location: Sydney - Australia
Contact:

Re: laser ICF + Sonofusion = BSF

Post by Steven Sesselmann »

This one receives a high score...

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html

Steven
http://www.gammaspectacular.com - Gamma Spectrometry Systems
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Steven_Sesselmann - Various papers and patents on RG
RobertTubbs
Posts: 209
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 1:49 pm
Real name:

Re: laser ICF + Sonofusion = BSF

Post by RobertTubbs »

Mike, you've mistakenly posted in the wrong forum.

This is the forum in which your contributions belong.

list.php?bn=fusor_deleted&here=1222437139

Warm Regards,
Robert Tubbs
Scientist M.A.D.
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2012 4:51 am
Real name:
Contact:

Re: laser ICF + Sonofusion = BSF

Post by Scientist M.A.D. »

Sorry everyone, I meant no disrespect when I called your reactors toys. It was an unintentional faux pas, not intended to stir up this hornet nest. Besides, toys can be valuable as learning tools, and they’re fun to play with too!

I don’t want to sound pompous, so let me reintroduce myself. I’m a high school dropout, having no English training beyond 7th grade. I’m employed as a blackjack/poker dealer. But, I like learning; I programmed all the simulation code for my invention, know enough Calculus to teach a class, act as my own patent attorney, and, most recently, created a website. (please don't visit)

I don’t’ want people thinking I’m a link spammer, so can someone please edit (or delete) my posts, to remove the hyperlinks pointing to my website? Sorry, I did not realize posting those links would be frowned upon. In fact, I’m getting so much traffic now, I’m afraid my provider will shut me down. Besides, I’m not ready for visitors yet; I’m still trying to improve the layout.

Someone told me that if I wanted to be taken seriously I should begin building a prototype. I disagree. It would not be wise to begin construction on a very expensive prototype before ascertaining the potential merit. You guys are supposed to be smart, so, I'm asking you, does my invention have any merit?

I’m always being accused of talking gobbledygook. What can I say, maybe I am insane?

Thanks,

M.A.D. scientist

P.S. You can delete this post too.
User avatar
Chris Bradley
Posts: 2930
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 7:05 am
Real name:

Re: laser ICF + Sonofusion = BSF

Post by Chris Bradley »

Mike A Deeth wrote:
> Someone told me that if I wanted to be taken seriously I should begin building a prototype. I disagree. It would not be wise to begin construction on a very expensive prototype before ascertaining the potential merit. You guys are supposed to be smart, so, I'm asking you, does my invention have any merit?

I don't think that is a question that can be answered. You may receive responses regarding *opinions*, but with 60 years of fusion research and far out claims, you really do have to push the boat out and get some hardware up and running.

The most perfectly formed ideas of how to achieve fusion have so far come to naught when the realities of instabilities have taken their effect in a real experiment, so an imperfectly formed idea is going to fare even worse when exposed to critique.

You have to build it. If you can't build the whole, you'll have to figure out how can you chew off a small enough chunk to demonstrate it might be in the right direction. You have to figure that out, you are the only one to do it....... together with the chap who also filed a similar patent to yours... as below....
Attachments
deeth_prior_art.jpg
User avatar
Paul_Schatzkin
Site Admin
Posts: 993
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2001 12:49 pm
Real name: aka The Perfesser
Contact:

Re: laser ICF + Sonofusion = BSF

Post by Paul_Schatzkin »

"10 points for each claim that quantum mechanics is fundamentally misguided (without good evidence). "

Oh, that IS rich!

--P
Paul Schatzkin, aka "The Perfesser" – Founder and Host of Fusor.net
Author of The Boy Who Invented Television: 2023 Edition – https://amz.run/6ag1
"Fusion is not 20 years in the future; it is 60 years in the past and we missed it."
Frank Sanns
Site Admin
Posts: 2119
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2002 2:26 pm
Real name: Frank Sanns

Re: laser ICF + Sonofusion = BSF

Post by Frank Sanns »

Mike,

If you wrote this as a parody you were successful. ha ha. If you wrote with any seriousness, you need to find another profession. I looked at it quickly and can only say that essentially every single claim that you have put down is false. It would take me half an hour just to explain what is wrong in the any one section. Just trying to provide some accurate feedback from a scientific perspective.

Frank Sanns
Achiever's madness; when enough is still not enough. ---FS
We have to stop looking at the world through our physical eyes. The universe is NOT what we see. It is the quantum world that is real. The rest is just an electron illusion. ---FS
Scientist M.A.D.
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2012 4:51 am
Real name:
Contact:

Re: laser ICF + Sonofusion = BSF

Post by Scientist M.A.D. »

Frank, sorry this rebuttal is so long. I felt it necessary to completely answered all of your objections, and, in conclusion, with all of your arguments refuted, you must agree with me. : - )

Thanks, I appreciate your support.


Frank S. wrote:
> Mike,
>
> If you wrote this as a parody you were successful. ha ha. If you wrote with any seriousness, you need to find another profession. I looked at it quickly and can only say that essentially every single claim that you have put down is false. It would take me half an hour just to explain what is wrong in the any one section. Just trying to provide some accurate feedback from a scientific perspective.
>
> Frank Sanns
User avatar
Chris Bradley
Posts: 2930
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 7:05 am
Real name:

Re: laser ICF + Sonofusion = BSF

Post by Chris Bradley »

If you want to get smart with the wordplay, then you would be better off spending your time contemplating what responses you will give to the examiner. Smart-alec answers won't wash with the USPTO. You need to know how you will address the matters I've mentioned above;

i) the claims are unspecific and replete with terms that do not specify, with required clarity, the claimed subject matter, ii) the invention is not enabled, iii) undue experimentation will be required, iv) there is no credible assertion that the invention will perform the claimed utility.

plus I am sure you will get examiners comments that match what I posted for you to consider, wrt the prior art.
Frank Sanns
Site Admin
Posts: 2119
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2002 2:26 pm
Real name: Frank Sanns

Re: laser ICF + Sonofusion = BSF

Post by Frank Sanns »

Mike A Deeth wrote:
> Frank, sorry this rebuttal is so long. I felt it necessary to completely answered all of your objections, and, in conclusion, with all of your arguments refuted, you must agree with me. : - )
>
> Thanks, I appreciate your support.
>
>
> Frank S. wrote:
> > Mike,
> >
> > If you wrote this as a parody you were successful. ha ha. If you wrote with any seriousness, you need to find another profession. I looked at it quickly and can only say that essentially every single claim that you have put down is false. It would take me half an hour just to explain what is wrong in the any one section. Just trying to provide some accurate feedback from a scientific perspective.
> >
> > Frank Sanns


I will elaborate briefly on just one section of your proposal with my comments in CAPS:

a.) positioning the fuel at the focus of a spherical laser cavity so that--WILL IT LEVITATE SINCE ALL MATERIALS WILL VAPORIZE AT THESE TEMPERATURES.
i.) the fuel will not be able to effectively cool by radiating away light--WILL IT NOT RADIATE PROPORTIONAL TO T^4?
ii.) the reactors structural components are well shielded from the explosion,
making larger yields and higher gains possible--WHAT IS THE SHIELD MATERIAL THAT CAN DO THIS AND HOW IS IT SUPPORTED? HOW DOES YOUR "PUMP" ENERGY GET IN IF THERE IS A SHIELD THERE?
b.) making the cavity laser-active, by pumping it with enough light to cause
an upper-state population inversion--WHAT IS THE LASING MEDIUM AND WHAT IS THE EXCITATION MECHANISM?
c.) squeezing the fuel, so that
i.) the fuel becomes hot and radiates brightly (sonoluminescence) ARE YOU GOING TO DETONATE AN ATOMIC BOMB TO ACHIEVE THIS COMPRESSION? AND THIS IS NOT SONOLUMINESCENCE.
ii.) the fuel’s radiation creates an outgoing laser cascade HOW DO NEUTRONS STIMULATE ELECTRONS FOR LASING ACTION?
iii.) the fuel is in a state of pre-compression when the cascade returns--WHAT IS PRE-COMPRESSION, IS THAT LIKE UNCOMPRESSED?
iv.) the fuel is further heated and compressed by the powerful laser effect EVEN IF THE OUTGOING ENERGY WERE LASER PUMP ENERGY, WHICH IT IS NOT, IT STILL WOULD NOT MEET THE CONDITIONS FOR LASING


I will spare you and the group with any further elaboration but I hope you are getting the point.

Frank Sanns
Achiever's madness; when enough is still not enough. ---FS
We have to stop looking at the world through our physical eyes. The universe is NOT what we see. It is the quantum world that is real. The rest is just an electron illusion. ---FS
jcs78227
Posts: 35
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2010 5:57 am
Real name:

Re: laser ICF + Sonofusion = BSF

Post by jcs78227 »

Thought I'd comment on your "I claim" post.

I see you filed a patent: http://ip.com/pdf/patapp/US20120014491.pdf

http://ip.com/patapp/US20120014491

Mike A Deeth wrote:
> CLAIMS</center></h2>
>
> I claim:
>
> 1. A device for generating fusion energy comprising:
> a.) spherical inner chamber
> I. with a reflective interior surface, for the purpose of preventing
> heat loss and lowering the temperature in which ignition occurs
[Preventing (reducing) heat loss will result in temperatures higher than what you would have previously been able to achieve. Regardless, how would this lower the temperature at which ignition would occur? Some other factor would have to be modified. Retaining more thermal energy just means you can get to the ignition temperature faster.]
> II. with provisions for pumping electromagnetic radiation inside
> the chamber, so that the fluid inside can be used as a laser gain
> medium and also for the purpose of optically tracking the fuel
["...provisions for pumping electromagnetic radiation..." ??? EMR of what nature?
UV, VL, IR, RF? What's the channeling method?
> b.) spherical outer chamber
> I. surrounding the inner chamber
[An outer chamber would tend to surround the aforementioned inner chamber]
> II. with provisions for acoustic & electric transduction, enabling
> pre-ignition movement and compression of the fuel and also
> enabling post-ignition harvesting of the blast’s kinetic energy
[There's a lot being glossed over in the word "provisions"...essentially you have a grand idea, as many here have (and a few have even taken from words to design to prototype), but you haven't done more than make a claim as your opening act. The question is, why do you need our help? You already filed a patent back in 2010 (attached). Focusing on just one part of this grand statement could provide years of work for the educated, experienced, and well-funded lone researcher--I can't imagine what your handicap is going to be having dropped out of HS, having no higher education, little, if any experience, and unknown funding.]
> c.) space between the two chambers
> I. filled with a fluid
> i. that is an acoustical medium
> ii. that cools the inner chamber
[The space will be filled with a fluid (to be determined), that is an acoustical medium (Hint: sound will propagate through essentially any medium, though the quality and suitability for your application will vary.) It is redundant to state that the fluid will be an acoustical medium, only that you will be exploiting the acoustical properties of the "fluid." While writing about exploiting the fluid, you are also needing a fluid that will work as a coolant of the inner chamber. This might just be the easiest challenge, should you have access to the facilities to test a myriad of substances for suitability.]
> d.) space inside the inner chamber
> I. filled with a fluid that
> i. circulates as an efficient high-temperature coolant
> ii. encapsulates gaseous fusible fuel inside of a bubble
> iii. is transparent to selected electromagnetic frequencies
> iv. is a laser gain medium that can amplify selected frequencies,
> so that the inner chamber can function as a spherical laser cavity
> v. is an acoustical medium, enabling fuel transport and compression
> vi. blocks x-rays, preventing damage to the chamber walls
> vii. absorbs neutrons, preventing the escape of hazardous radiation
> viii. breeds tritium, replenishing the supply of easily ignitable fuel
> ix. slows fuel dispersion during combustion, increasing burn-up fraction
[Well, that's not very many requirments...anybody at the fusor forum have a suggestion on this one?]
> 2. A method applying to the device according to claim 1 where said method
> accurately determines the location of a bubble using the technique of
> multi-occultation triangulation.
[What's the first step to multi-occultation triangulation?]
> 3. A method applying to the device according to claim 1 where said method is used
> to move a bubble by manipulating the pressure in its local environment, based on
> the ideas that
> a.) a bubble’s size is determined by the background pressure
> b.) a bubble’s direction of motion coincides with the buoyant force and is determined
> by the pressure gradient
> c.) the interplay between the buoyancy force and drag force causes large bubbles to
> move faster than small bubbles when subjected to the same pressure gradient
> d.) fluctuations in the background pressure can be synchronized with fluctuations
> in the pressure gradient, so that, even though the bubble is pulsating backwards
> and forwards in tiny steps, large overall displacements can be accumulated.
[Sounds like classic bubble behavior]
> 4. A method applying to the device according to claim 1 where said method causes
> thermonuclear ignition in a bubble of fuel, comprising
> a.) positioning the fuel at the focus of a spherical laser cavity so that
> i.) the fuel will not be able to effectively cool by radiating away light
> ii.) the reactors structural components are well shielded from the explosion,
> making larger yields and higher gains possible
[It's a good thing fusion is "clean" because the reactor having to suffer the occasional explosion would eventually cause a problem. What did I read about tritium? The reactor is where these explosions are taking place; shielding or not, it better be some incredible structural support.]
> b.) making the cavity laser-active, by pumping it with enough light to cause
> an upper-state population inversion
[You still think this is a wild idea?]
> c.) squeezing the fuel, so that
> i.) the fuel becomes hot and radiates brightly (sonoluminescence)
[Several places you refer to sonoluminescence with this definition...sono = of or having to do with sound energy; rarely acoustics. luminescence = emission of light by some mechanism. Thus sonoluminescence would have me thinking it has something to do with light being generated by the influence of sound energy on a process. Indeed, Wikipedia has a simple definition that is close enough.]
> ii.) the fuel’s radiation creates an outgoing laser cascade
> iii.) the fuel is in a state of pre-compression when the cascade returns
> iv.) the fuel is further heated and compressed by the powerful laser effect
> d.) containing (preventing dispersion of) the fuel, so that
> i.) the fuel can self-heat, lowering the energy required for drivers
> ii.) a greater fraction of the fuel gets burnt, increasing the gain
> iii.) low-temperature volume ignition is possible
[It all seems so simple to you. Where is the mathematics? Where is the rationale or reasoning that you can say after an initial start up this will be over-unity. Sorry if I'm the pessimist. My fusor produces neutrons, it was a project and a good one at that, but I think I am echoing others here when I say you are in the wrong place. Aside from theoretical questions on the forum, this is way beyond what an amateur fusioneer is going to be achieving, (correct me if I'm wrong) at the amateur level at home or in our labs at work...]

Take the hint...

Regards,
-Jonathan
Scientist M.A.D.
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2012 4:51 am
Real name:
Contact:

Re: laser ICF + Sonofusion = BSF

Post by Scientist M.A.D. »

Mike A Deeth wrote:

> CLAIMS</center></h2>

>

> I claim:

>

> 1. A device for generating fusion energy comprising:

> a.) spherical inner chamber

> I. with a reflective interior surface, for the purpose of preventing

> heat loss and lowering the temperature in which ignition occurs

[Preventing (reducing) heat loss will result in temperatures higher than what you would have previously been able to achieve. Regardless, how would this lower the temperature at which ignition would occur? Some other factor would have to be modified. Retaining more thermal energy just means you can get to the ignition temperature faster.]


Ignition is a term that applies in situations where the energy gain (from fusion) exceeds the energy losses (from all cooling channels). In situations where an increase in fuel temperature causes the fusion rate to increase faster than the cooling rate, positive feedback will lead to higher and higher fuel temperatures, resulting in a runaway reaction. The ideal ignition temperature is defined as the lowest temperature at which ignition can occur. If the rate of cooling can be decreased (for example, by reflecting EMR back into the fuel), then the temperature at which self-heating exceeds cooling (aka the ideal ignition temperature) will be lower, because fewer fusion reactions would be required to maintain the fuel at a given temperature.

> II. with provisions for pumping electromagnetic radiation inside

> the chamber, so that the fluid inside can be used as a laser gain

> medium and also for the purpose of optically tracking the fuel

["...provisions for pumping electromagnetic radiation..." ??? EMR of what nature?

UV, VL, IR, RF? What's the channeling method?


I think 872 nm laser diodes could pump the Nd:glass (~1055 nm) coolant. Fiber-optic cables could be used for delivery into the sphere. The quantum defect is 83%. The projected cost is less than 1 cent per Watt of peak diode power. The electrical-to-optical efficiency is over 70%, which is an order of magnitude better than NIF‘s flash lamps, and by selecting a glass with sufficiently high Nd3+-doping concentration, absorption efficiency can be near unity. Modeling shows that ~50% of the excited ions decay when the diode pump pulse is ~365 microseconds. And, compared to NIF, BSF saves an additional 10%, because it does not consume power cooling three thousand laser slabs.


> b.) spherical outer chamber

> I. surrounding the inner chamber

[An outer chamber would tend to surround the aforementioned inner chamber]


Patents require precision. A counterexample: outer- and inner-planets.


> II. with provisions for acoustic & electric transduction, enabling

> pre-ignition movement and compression of the fuel and also

> enabling post-ignition harvesting of the blast’s kinetic energy

[There's a lot being glossed over in the word "provisions"...essentially you have a grand idea, as many here have (and a few have even taken from words to design to prototype), but you haven't done more than make a claim as your opening act. The question is, why do you need our help? You already filed a patent back in 2010 (attached). Focusing on just one part of this grand statement could provide years of work for the educated, experienced, and well-funded lone researcher--I can't imagine what your handicap is going to be having dropped out of HS, having no higher education, little, if any experience, and unknown funding.]


I’m not impulsively driven to start construction on some half-baked plan. If my invention is destined to fail (which everyone seems to think it is), then it must have weaknesses. I want to focus on the weak spots, so an accurate assessment of its feasibility can be made. Where should I look?


> c.) space between the two chambers

> I. filled with a fluid

> i. that is an acoustical medium

> ii. that cools the inner chamber

[The space will be filled with a fluid (to be determined), that is an acoustical medium (Hint: sound will propagate through essentially any medium, though the quality and suitability for your application will vary.) It is redundant to state that the fluid will be an acoustical medium, only that you will be exploiting the acoustical properties of the "fluid." While writing about exploiting the fluid, you are also needing a fluid that will work as a coolant of the inner chamber. This might just be the easiest challenge, should you have access to the facilities to test a myriad of substances for suitability.]


Perhaps I’m missing the point, but doesn’t use of the term “acoustical medium” imply some intention to exploit acoustical properties? Yes, just about any liquid would work, but I only considered hydraulic fluid.


> d.) space inside the inner chamber

> I. filled with a fluid that

> i. circulates as an efficient high-temperature coolant

> ii. encapsulates gaseous fusible fuel inside of a bubble

> iii. is transparent to selected electromagnetic frequencies

> iv. is a laser gain medium that can amplify selected frequencies,

> so that the inner chamber can function as a spherical laser cavity

> v. is an acoustical medium, enabling fuel transport and compression

> vi. blocks x-rays, preventing damage to the chamber walls

> vii. absorbs neutrons, preventing the escape of hazardous radiation

> viii. breeds tritium, replenishing the supply of easily ignitable fuel

> ix. slows fuel dispersion during combustion, increasing burn-up fraction

[Well, that's not very many requirments...anybody at the fusor forum have a suggestion on this one?]



Here are two fluids I considered: the molten salt (LiF)a(Be2F)b(NdF3)c and the glass mixture (SiO2)a(PbO)b(Li2O)c(Nd2O3)d.

> 2. A method applying to the device according to claim 1 where said method

> accurately determines the location of a bubble using the technique of

> multi-occultation triangulation.

[What's the first step to multi-occultation triangulation?]



Sorry, my patent application contains 100+ pages of details, the section titled “Archimedian Spiral Detector“ paragraphs [0092]-[0099] has an explanation. I would post a link, but I don’t want to be called a link-spammer, so you‘ll have to go find it yourself, sorry. : - (

> 3. A method applying to the device according to claim 1 where said method is used

> to move a bubble by manipulating the pressure in its local environment, based on

> the ideas that

> a.) a bubble’s size is determined by the background pressure

> b.) a bubble’s direction of motion coincides with the buoyant force and is determined

> by the pressure gradient

> c.) the interplay between the buoyancy force and drag force causes large bubbles to

> move faster than small bubbles when subjected to the same pressure gradient

> d.) fluctuations in the background pressure can be synchronized with fluctuations

> in the pressure gradient, so that, even though the bubble is pulsating backwards

> and forwards in tiny steps, large overall displacements can be accumulated.

[Sounds like classic bubble behavior]


A bubble’s movement and position is controllable, from a distance, like a tractor beam.


> 4. A method applying to the device according to claim 1 where said method causes

> thermonuclear ignition in a bubble of fuel, comprising

> a.) positioning the fuel at the focus of a spherical laser cavity so that

> i.) the fuel will not be able to effectively cool by radiating away light

> ii.) the reactors structural components are well shielded from the explosion,

> making larger yields and higher gains possible

[It's a good thing fusion is "clean" because the reactor having to suffer the occasional explosion would eventually cause a problem. What did I read about tritium? The reactor is where these explosions are taking place; shielding or not, it better be some incredible structural support.]


Yes, my calculations indicate that the inner metal sphere would need to be about 0.25 meters thick, for yields of 4.7 GJ.


> b.) making the cavity laser-active, by pumping it with enough light to cause

> an upper-state population inversion

[You still think this is a wild idea?]


I don’t’ understand, please elaborate.


> c.) squeezing the fuel, so that

> i.) the fuel becomes hot and radiates brightly (sonoluminescence)

[Several places you refer to sonoluminescence with this definition...sono = of or having to do with sound energy; rarely acoustics. luminescence = emission of light by some mechanism. Thus sonoluminescence would have me thinking it has something to do with light being generated by the influence of sound energy on a process. Indeed, Wikipedia has a simple definition that is close enough.]



Um… yes. What is your point?

> ii.) the fuel’s radiation creates an outgoing laser cascade

> iii.) the fuel is in a state of pre-compression when the cascade returns

> iv.) the fuel is further heated and compressed by the powerful laser effect

> d.) containing (preventing dispersion of) the fuel, so that

> i.) the fuel can self-heat, lowering the energy required for drivers

> ii.) a greater fraction of the fuel gets burnt, increasing the gain

> iii.) low-temperature volume ignition is possible

[It all seems so simple to you. Where is the mathematics? Where is the rationale or reasoning that you can say after an initial start up this will be over-unity. Sorry if I'm the pessimist. My fusor produces neutrons, it was a project and a good one at that, but I think I am echoing others here when I say you are in the wrong place. Aside from theoretical questions on the forum, this is way beyond what an amateur fusioneer is going to be achieving, (correct me if I'm wrong) at the amateur level at home or in our labs at work...]



Thanks for asking. The mathematics is sprinkled throughout the patent application, all 100+ pages. Every question you asked (above) has already been addressed in the patent application, and in much more thoroughly than my answers here.


Take the hint...



…I’m waiting.

Regards,

-Jonathan

Scientist M.A.D.
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2012 4:51 am
Real name:
Contact:

Re: laser ICF + Sonofusion = BSF

Post by Scientist M.A.D. »


Frank, : - )

a.) positioning the fuel at the focus of a spherical laser cavity so that--WILL IT LEVITATE SINCE ALL MATERIALS WILL VAPORIZE AT THESE TEMPERATURES.

Sorry, I’m confused. Levitate what? The gaseous bubble of fuel? What temperatures? The temperature inside the reactor changes with each pulse. Please elaborate.


i.) the fuel will not be able to effectively cool by radiating away light--WILL IT NOT RADIATE PROPORTIONAL TO T^4?

Yes, but its more complicated. During compression, the plasma inside the bubble gives off volumetric bremsstrahlung radiation, having a power loss of 5.34x10-23 n2 T0.5 erg s-1 cm-3. This radiation becomes thermally equilibrated in an opaque medium of which only the blackbody surface emission is observed for strongly driven bubbles, according to the Stephan-Boltzmann law, Q/A = s T4. But, it is important to realize that, because the inside of the sphere reflects electromagnetic radiation, the rate of reabsorption taking place at the surface of the bubble occurs in direct proportion to the rate of emission. The surface of the bubble obeys Kirchoff‘s Law: “emissivity equals absorptivity“ on a per wavelength basis, so that an object that does not absorb all incident light will also emit less radiation than an ideal blackbody. For a given laser intensity (W/cm2), the temperature (K) on the surface of a laser heated bubble can be calculated, using the constant s = 5.67x10-12W/cm2K4. When dealing with non-black surfaces, the deviations from the ideal blackbody behavior are determined by both the geometrical structure and the chemical composition.

ii.) the reactors structural components are well shielded from the explosion,

making larger yields and higher gains possible--WHAT IS THE SHIELD MATERIAL THAT CAN DO THIS AND HOW IS IT SUPPORTED? HOW DOES YOUR "PUMP" ENERGY GET IN IF THERE IS A SHIELD THERE?

Sorry, I should have explained, it is the coolant material itself that acts as a shield.

b.) making the cavity laser-active, by pumping it with enough light to cause

an upper-state population inversion--WHAT IS THE LASING MEDIUM AND WHAT IS THE EXCITATION MECHANISM?

The coolant is doped with a rare-earth element, like Nd, making it laser-active.

The coolant inside the sphere gets laser-pumped, using fiber-optic feed lines.

c.) squeezing the fuel, so that

i.) the fuel becomes hot and radiates brightly (sonoluminescence) ARE YOU GOING TO DETONATE AN ATOMIC BOMB TO ACHIEVE THIS COMPRESSION? AND THIS IS NOT SONOLUMINESCENCE.

High temperatures can be achieved inside of a bubble if a spherical arrangement of piezoelectric actuators outside the bubble are triggered simultaneously, causing an intense pressure wave to be constructively amplified as it travels across an incompressible fluid toward the bubble. Starting the laser cascade does not require extremely high temperatures, so atomic bombs are unnecessary. (figure 18)


 
ii.) the fuel’s radiation creates an outgoing laser cascade HOW DO NEUTRONS STIMULATE ELECTRONS FOR LASING ACTION?

Sorry, I was referring to the temperature dependent black-body electromagnetic radiation, not neutron radiation.

iii.) the fuel is in a state of pre-compression when the cascade returns--WHAT IS PRE-COMPRESSION, IS THAT LIKE UNCOMPRESSED?

No, I meant to say that the fuel is in a state of high acoustical compression when the laser cascade returns, so that the laser can increase the compression even further.

iv.) the fuel is further heated and compressed by the powerful laser effect EVEN IF THE OUTGOING ENERGY WERE LASER PUMP ENERGY, WHICH IT IS NOT, IT STILL WOULD NOT MEET THE CONDITIONS FOR LASING

You are mistaken, the laser energy comes from the diode-laser pumps. This energy is fed in through fiber-optic cables and disperses inside the sphere prior, causing an Nd dopant population inversion. The liquid laser medium has properties that satisfy conditions for amplification of black-body emissions.


I will spare you and the group with any further elaboration but I hope you are getting the point.




Frank Sanns


 

The patent you mentioned, titled “Tabletop nuclear fusion generator,” is a non-functional tinker-toy, incapable of generating efficient power or high neutron flux. I agree with the USPTO’s decision, that the invention is not “useful.” It cannot produce efficient nuclear fusion. It is nothing like my thermonuclear power plant. Thermonuclear reactors have to be big so that the fuel can be maintained at sufficiently high densities, temperatures, and under a long enough confinement time to burn significant amounts of fuel with energy gain. They should also have shielding, more than a meter thick, to contain dangerous neutrons.
User avatar
Chris Bradley
Posts: 2930
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 7:05 am
Real name:

Re: laser ICF + Sonofusion = BSF

Post by Chris Bradley »

Mike A Deeth wrote:
> I’m not impulsively driven to start construction on some half-baked plan. If my invention is destined to fail (which everyone seems to think it is), then it must have weaknesses. I want to focus on the weak spots, so an accurate assessment of its feasibility can be made. Where should I look?

Without even beginning to address the physical aspects, the point I'd say is terribly weak is the maths.

Unless you can represent it in a mathematical form, then you have no hope of progressing the idea. *This* is what you should AND CAN look at - you only need a bit of paper.

The thing is - as far as I can tell you're claiming pumping liquid glass with lasers to induce fusion in gaseous bubbles within it. OK, sounds like a plan. Now tell us the specifics - how much power will these lasers need to generate to accomplish this, what temperature will this lead to in the glass versus the bubbles of fuel, how much heat are you hoping to reflect, how efficient will it be (losing 30% efficiency in the shells at 10kW is 3kW, can you shells be made to handle that power) etc., etc..

These types of questions are what makes your patent application 'indefinite'.

What you have is an idea whose scope [let alone mechanisms] have yet to be defined in enough detail to determine any quantities you might need to create this device. Maybe it does work, but maybe it needs to be 800,000 miles in diameter for it to work.

Here's an example; I have an idea where you feed hydrogen into an evacuated space, and the force of gravity alone will pull it all together so close that fusion will happen.

It's a great idea!!! But we *know* that needs to be 800,000 miles in diameter!!! So unless you can turn your idea into a bunch of equations then it is impossible to deduce the bondary parameters of what you need to do. And if you can't find enough information on it, then maybe it's because *you* need to try pumping liquid glass with lasers first to see what happens.

Do the lasers need to be 10W lasers and 1us pulses, or do they need to be 10 petawatt lasers with 10 femtosecond pulses? Who the heck knows?

So what you have to ask yourself is; this is a blank piece of paper in front of me and I have access to the most powerful personal computers in history, so powerful they could blow my mind clean off. Do I think I'm lucky enough to solve fusion power for humanity? Well, do ya'!?
User avatar
Carl Willis
Posts: 2841
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2001 7:33 pm
Real name: Carl Willis
Location: Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
Contact:

Re: laser ICF + Sonofusion = BSF

Post by Carl Willis »

>I’m not impulsively driven to start construction on some half-baked plan.

There, you said it yourself: "half-baked."

This thread will be closed since it is becoming a noisy distraction and is quite distant from our community's experience with real, small-scale, experimental fusion. Indeed the hodge-podge of half-baked ideas in evidence could be critiqued from a myriad of different directions, but most fundamentally for the purposes of forum discussion viability, this is stuff that stands a zero-point-zero percent chance of theoretical or practical development in its current state. The discussion so far tells us pretty much all we need to know about the discussion to come: sarcasm, chest-thumping, bickering about irrelevant details, and a steadfast reluctance from the inventor to reduce his idea to practice or break it down into bite-sized chunks.

When (if) the time comes that this is a "fully-baked" idea, let's have a new thread to treat the new developments. To me, fully-baked means practically approachable, supported by credible scientific precedent, and serious (as evidenced by leveraging the appropriate expertise and making tangible investments in preliminary research). That may seem like a high bar for introducing new ideas to our site, but ideas are a dime a dozen and we have to draw the line somewhere.

Thanks for your understanding.

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

Return to “Other Forms of Fusion - Theory, Construction, Discussion, URLs”