Archived - First neutrons from worlds smallest Fusor!

[TannerOates]

Greetings once again! I am pleased to announce that I have detected neutrons being produced from my newest creation. My detector is a victoreen 488a and the nominal size of the reactor is 1 1/3". The setup I am running right now is temporary and will soon be much smaller. I am currently unaware at what pressure the main chamber was at due to the fact that I do not posses any gauge with that size flange. All details should be in the video link posted below, feel free to ask any questions.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-A-uBkS ... map=%5B%5D


P.S. I will be posting photos of the build and characteristics of the reactor soon.

[Richard Hull]

Nice video, but I have grave reservations. As before asked in another thread, where is the HV going in! A detailed view is needed. The Glassman you claim to be using has what looks like a BNC HV connector on it.....Maybe even an SHV BNC which will not classically support 45 kv. Most such glassmans have an larger specially adapted UHF connector (shell) system and even these usually go no higher than 30kv.

I was rather stunned to see the meter peg at max reading. Where was the CO2 ionization chamber located? Where is the moderator?

A lot of bizarre and uncharacteristic stuff here. No image of a fusion grid system which should be near its melting point at fusion input energies of 45kv, 7.5ma which is, supposedly, the claimed limit of your supply.

What is the grid made of? Where is a voltmeter/ammeter combo to show your input voltage and current?

If I might note my main objections. No real instrumenting of the input. No pressure gauge instrumenting visible. No images of the grid in action. No testing or great details on the neutron measurement/ moderation system. We see only a nice looking set up, a smallish supply with a BNC cable going down to the floor. We see a meter deflecting out of context. No entry point of the HV is highly evident. Way too much voltage claimed to be going into a tiny system with no input insulation visible or inner grid imaging.

A good video will show all of the things needed and full operational adjustment of metering, etc., with a confirming test like removing a moderator and the resultant change in neutron reading.

A neutron counter can count other things than neutrons, as we all know. To my jaundiced eyes, this looks like a rush to fusion to break a size record with zero backgrounding in operating a real or normal fusor while equipped with no suitable insturmentation beyond an ill-understood, untested, neutron counting system.

Please, my fellow fusioneers, chime in on this! I've got to see a good deal more detail before I vote this setup, regardless of the good looking vacuum system shown, into the neutron club. I am highly suspicious.


Richard Hull

[RobertTubbs]

I really don't see any evidence for neutrons, or any real science for that matter.

To be fair, I don't think it's out of malice.

http://tanneroates.com/

The nature of the website pretty much explains the situation we find ourselves in now.

-RT

[RobertTubbs]

Tanner,

I see you took down the website almost as fast as I linked it...

Don't worry, I've got a cache copy right here.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/s ... =firefox-a

-RT

[Chris Bradley]

I do hope he achieves what he is attempting here, and we've not yet got a clear picture either way, but it bodes poorly that there was seemingly no discussion of some of the points raised in his first thread on this.

For my own 'non-fusor' experiments, the information on this forum is, obviously, limited in what it can teach me (or any new experimental form). But in a funny way, for me the forum has always acted as a rather useful 'touchstone' without anything even needing to be posted! By that I mean that I have reported so far that my kit produces no evidence of neutrons. In fact, I have had lots of interesting counts, bursts and other curious phenomena. But at the end of it all, I ask myself, " 'do I have enough that would convince 'fusor.net' ?", and I haven't so I know the evidence is too weak as to an effect worth reporting, and I look again to see if I was kidding myself.

There is nothing wrong with being hopeful and keen to get a result. That's good. But problems always seem to come around when questions are raised, but not addressed, in a response. It's a strength of the forum that it makes robust enquiries of experimental set-ups, not a weakness, and those attempting such work should value the questions posed of their work.

.... just my opinion ....

[Richard Hull]

Michael, a recent claimant, put up a single video that clinched his proof as positive.
Note how he proves his claim in one simple flowing video action.
Short, sweet and proof beyond doubt.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQr8kJ7H ... TA&index=1

Due to a couple of faked attempts to claim fusion, I put up a FAQ last year in an attempt to make clear what was demanded from a fusion claimant to be admitted to the neutron club. I think it is not overly difficult to adhere to. Most of us fusioneers kinda' know what to expect when fusion is real.

I just updated the FAQ to note how to proceed if you wish a video to be sufficient proof, however we still would like an additional writeup in Images du jour with full, detailed data and still images.

viewtopic.php?f=26&t=1125#p4032

Richard Hull

[Carl Willis]

Tanner,

Your system contains some very nice hardware. That vacuum pump is a real gem. And I think the Glassman ML-series 300W power supply has the chops for detectable fusion even though it is a compact design. From the standpoint of your resources, you are on track for neutrons.

But convincing evidence of neutrons involves more than just an observation that the meter moves on a neutron survey meter. X-rays and electronic noise are also potential signal sources. A standard experiment to rule out these sources is the "moderator removal experiment" (do a search in the archives). Alternative experiments may involve shielding the detector with lead to check for influence, or even replacing deuterium in your fusor with another non-fusion gas and operating at similar voltage and current conditions. I am not familiar with the Victoreen 488A, so I don't know what your best option might be, but moderator removal is usually pretty easy to do.

Richard was worried about your feedthrough and HV cable. I am not worried about the cable, since on close inspection of your video it appears to be standard RG-8. Granted, 50 kV is pretty much the top end for this cable, but I've used it myself and know that a special grade of it is often supplied by Glassman for use with their power supplies. What I am curious about is how you measure that voltage. I don't see a voltage divider in your video, nor do I see you using the bulkhead DB-15 (or whatever it is) on the Glassman to tap off its 0-10V output divider or its 0-10V current sense resistor. You should use those features. The control pot on the power supply tells you what you would like it to output, but not what voltage and current conditions actually are.

I would like to see a post describing your system in detail, and documenting it thoroughly with photos. That is pretty much the de facto standard for entering the Neutron Club. A YouTube video is a nice bonus and possibly fully sufficient, although your clips so far are really more like teasers than a comprehensive description.

Good work, and I hope to see more.

-Carl

[JakeJHecla]

This post carries all the hallmarks of fraud. The fact that Mr. Oates refuses to clarify how he's getting 50kV into the chamber combined with the conspicuously absent photo evidence for fusion makes this look too suspicious to be chalked up to a lack of experience. In addition, the website belonging to him linked above is downright bizarre, featuring claims of "fusion based weapons" research and "military solutions," which are surely fictional. It appears the original poster has some "splainin' to do" before anyone takes him seriously.

Edited: Didn't realize he was already a neutron club member.

[Carl Willis]

Well, I'm not yet inclined to call it fraud! That's a weighty accusation, one that carries its own burden of proof.

Entertain a simple alternative hypothesis: This is a high-school junior who has certain ambitions and ideas that look naive, maybe even preposterous, to those of us who are veteran realists on the forum. There you'd have an ordinary explanation for the website's excesses (and some other things that a couple people have found irksome). He ought to explain his gear in more detail, but that's hardly a venal sin.

Let's just not rush to judgement.

-Carl

[Rich Feldman]

> an ordinary explanation for the website's excesses...

Tanner, please spell-check your copy before putting your website back online.

exauahst fueled fusion can be dismissed as a typographical error.

But devestating [sic] capabilities, and technological supiriority [sic], make you sound like a hick. Is English not your native language? If you are a 16 year old with some kind of learning disability, readers here will be more charitable if you own up to it. Or take simple steps to mitigate it. Good luck!

-Rich

[RobertTubbs]

If that website was indicative of anything it's indicative of the kind of integrity he holds himself to. I would from this not only question his claims here, but those of his original inception to the neutron club.

I have nothing more to effectively add.

-RT

[Jim Kovalchick]

I'm with Carl. Let's help the young man with scientific challenge worthy of the traditions of this board. Uniformly applying that approach to all but the obvious will resolve successes and failures alike.

[Carl Willis]

The website means very little. It should not be a focus of further discussion, and I don't find it to be a relevant exhibit to the prosecution of any legitimate point-of-view in the matter at hand (which remains just routine interest in more details about the small fusor). Perhaps the site's quite old. Perhaps Tanner got embarrassed by it and deleted it. Perhaps it served a limited role, e.g. an old class assignment in e-commerce or somesuch, or a placeholder for later additions. Lots of ordinary possibilities could excuse what some people find to be its weaknesses. If Tanner had advertised that URL here as a source of information, then it would be relevant to the discussion. But he didn't, and it's not.

Eyes on the ball!

-Carl

[TannerOates]

Well after a day of being away from my computer not checking my thread on the Fusor forums, I have to say that I am disappointed. I see that my admittedly archaic and forgotten development website has been cited and used against me for relentless psychological and moral attacks. I simply experimented with a website design ***FOR A SCHOOL PROJECT*** and now have become victim to attacks on my mental aptitude and moral character from my people I have an immense amount of respect for. Since I was away for the majority of the day, allow me to adress each individual post. Let it be noted that in my opinion when peers and adults makes such unprofessional and maligning comments to a minor there should be moderation from an admin on the website, but I do agree that each of you are entitled to your own opinions regardless how deeply offensive they are to me.

1.) Richard Hull: The glassman I own can most defiantly produce -45kv@7.5ma, and have used this EXACT power supply in my first claim to fusion about 11months ago. This claim received no question about my PSU. That being said, I do believe it is unfair to say that I have "zero backgrounding in operating a real or normal fusor while equipped with no suitable insturmentation beyond an ill-understood, untested, neutron counting system". I say this because you have seen, posted, and confirmed my last experiment. I do recall a photo being posted of "the grid in action", I do even recall you posting in that very same thread. The grid is made of Tungsten wire. I am not trying to enter the neutron club simply because of the fact I am already in it. I am currently working on an electronic readout for the glassman ml series that will give precise readings of input voltages. There is absolutely input insulation as there is with every other fusor on this forum. Again, as I said in the first post, I am posting a full write up on the design of the reactor (yes even the power supply). I am trying my best to find a vacuum gauge. Once again, I beg your patience.

2.) Robert Tubbs: I appreciate your ability to be understanding of a 16 year old's website for a school project. I was humiliated when you found it, so I took it down quickly in a now futile attempt to keep the thread topic professional. Quickly, you reposted a copied version of the website for all to see. I did send you an email attempting to sort things out in a less destructive way, but to no avail. Then you used this to judge my personal integrity as a person. I can now only thank you for what you have done, I now realize my mistake in leaving the site up after the school assignment was completed, and I am deeply sorry if I have offended you an in way.

3.) Chris Bradley: Thank you for your best wishes on my endeavors, rest assured that I am taking all questions into account and will be answered in my coming project break down.

4.) Carl Willis: Carl, thank you for your extremely constructive post! Throughout the few years I have been browsing these forums, not once have I found any information in your threads by any means questionable. I will include all relavant information in the coming project description. Thank you again.

5.) Jake J Hecla: I do not understand how so many get hung up on the trivial aspect of my power supply. The simple answer for this is, I lead the output of the PSU to the input of the feedthrough for the chamber, the exact same way every other Fusor on this forum operates. Your comments about my school project are much appreciated and are very useful to my personal growth.

6.) Rich Feldman: Well, besides for your post having absolutely nothing to do with Fusion, Fusors, or science in general and is simply a direct attack on a school web design project there is not much I can say to you. I am sure that many would find your comment pertaining to the assumption I have a learning disability offensive. So please take steps to mitigate that.



Thank you for all of your remarkably professional comments and patience.

[Daniel Firth]

Do you still have the bubble detector? If I remember correctly, they're guaranteed for 3 months, but can work for longer. It looks like you've had yours for about a year.

If you still have it, give it a try in tandem with your Victoreen 488A.

I like to run my fusor right up to max voltage for a control run, taking note of background counts & see that no bubbles are forming. (This also makes sure it's not counting X-rays). Then I do a deuterium run, making sure there is a significant boost in detector counts, as well as bubbles forming. (I only have 20kV to use, so mine takes a few minutes to get a few bubbles).

Finally, the fast neutron test. Take the detector out of the HDPE moderator and ensure the counts plummet to background (or really close) levels. I only have eBay images to go off of, but it looks like it's fairly easy to take the tube out of the 488A, remove the moderator, and put the tube back in. Make sure to not have the moderator sitting next to the tube; it can act as a reflector.

Maybe you have already this covered in your write up, but sufficient proof of the above would allay concerns.

And speaking of that... the links in my Images du Jour thread are now broke! I need to reply with the new links.

[Carl Willis]

Or better yet, Tanner should start a new discussion in "Construction & Operation" or "Neutron Detection", and populate it with support related to his neutron measurement. Images Du Jour is intended to be a transient image directory and it gets purged from time to time. (I wonder if that wouldn't be a blessing for a number of posts in the present thread.)

Aside from the neutron detection procedure, my big question about Tanner's "world's smallest" fusor is whether the voltage he thinks is being put on the grid really is, because that would be a remarkable accomplishment for a feedthrough that is in no way expected to perform to that voltage on account of its size. That's why I recommend that he actually take some readings from the handy 0-10V divider that Glassman provides. My suspicion is that while he may have the power supply setpoint pot up there at 45 kV, the output may be bogged down at max current and delivering just a fraction of that voltage.

Use Images du Jour ONLY to post images that, in all likelihood, will not be around for long.

-Carl

[Conrad Farnsworth]

Tanner,

While I am not here to comment on your moral and/or intellectual character, it is important that you see past the way people can be anal. "Good" science lies within peer review. I would definitely appreciate a video walk through addressing your systems in full. My largest concern is that of your feed through and neutron detection system (but that's been addressed). From what I see, it appears to be a nylon flange cover with a coaxial cable JB welded to it. Any chance we can get a closer look?

-Conrad

[Rich Feldman]

Hey Tanner,
I apologize for picking on the speling in your web design project. That was irrelevant to the thread topic, and I hope it was uncharacteristic of my fusor.net posts. Will plead "had a bad day". On the bright side: at fusor.net, high achievers get to practice handling antagonism and ridicule with grace and confidence.

Am looking forward to seeing more details about your setup. Richard Hull has written a comprehensive checklist. Regarding imaginary contests of priority: Is a first-neutron date as relevant as the (un-arguable) date that a report meets a standard of completeness?

Re. your 45 kV and 7.5 mA: I stand with those who are skeptical in the absence of measurements. How hard or expensive can that be? Control settings and nameplate ratings don't count without validation. (That's a scientist's or engineer's perspective. Businessmen focus on empirical results and repeatability.) I think you might be a contender for World's Least Instrumented Working Fusor.

[Richard Hull]

My first posting did indeed give a list of my issues with this particular effort regardless of any acceptance of previous efforts. This is a new effort. I made no claims of fraud regarding this effort. I merely called into question the completeness of the claim and begged other folks who have done fusion to comment. Most agree that more is needed.

Anyone with any significant electrical knowledge will know that electrical loading in an active gas plasma can literally be anyhting based on pressure and the voltage applied. Gas can glow at a few hundred volts and if the voltage is raised, the current can go into the full ampere or hundreds of ampere range, but most often, the supply voltage falls to its knees when this is attempted, especially in smaller, low power supplies. This is why it is absolutely critical to meter the voltage and current at the supply output or with a supplied divider system within the supply itself. The pressure must agree with claimed voltages and currents. Thus, information about all three values during fusion will be demanded.

The emphasis on neutron detection methods is also critical.

I realized you are not claiming membership into the neutron club. You are already there. You are claiming something of note, however, that would be added to the neutron club. "The smallest fusor ever". This special title is already claimed and proven by someone else. If you wish to take it away from the current owner, all that we ask is to prove it to all present in a sufficient and acceptable manner.

I hope that all the preceding posts will amplify the concerns of many here related to this particular effort.

As relates to posts being purged here, the rules are fully stated and have long been in effect. This post is archived with no deletions expected or needed. It shows how we handle critical reviews and couldn't supply an overview of this process better, in spite of some of the unrelated aspects commented upon.

As Carl notes to all, "keep your eye on the ball".

Richard Hull