Not a fuser but also fusion theory.

Please take a moment to introduce yourself in this forum and tell us about your interest. You must use your full real name. We do not allow the used of "handles" and pseudonyms on this site.
Locked
User avatar
hiroyuki_fukada
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2021 12:50 am
Real name: Hiroyuki FUKADA
Contact:

Not a fuser but also fusion theory.

Post by hiroyuki_fukada »

Hello all, I'm from Japan.
Last year, I'd applied for a patent about another fusion method. I think any production publicity would require some contract, but study experience will be free.

https://sites.google.com/view/deepmatri ... olt-fusion

In a nutshell, Lightning Thunderbolt emits gamma-ray, which means nuclear fusion occurs by electric pulse energy. It's also the fusion of the Nitrogen atom that requires much more energy from deuterium. Moreover, to efficiency and minimize, use the of solid or liquid fusion fuels, which about 200 million atomic densities are denser from plasma as Tokamak. The breakthrough is to use the electric insulator or high register for fusion fuels, which generate the energy when electron collision to insulator fusion fuels.

But now I had not been experimental yet. Because it will explode and emit radiation, that is also illegal in Japanese law.
If you could experimentally test, would you please share the information?
Anyway, take it easy for the elderly IT engineer.
--
Kindly Regards,
Hiroyuki FUKADA
https://www.deepmatrixlab.com/thunderbolt-fusion
User avatar
Dennis P Brown
Posts: 3159
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 10:46 am
Real name: Dennis Brown

Re: Not a fuser but also fusion theory.

Post by Dennis P Brown »

Hello and hope your interest in fusion research continues. The fact that 'lighting' produces X-rays due to electron acceleration is well known and the only direct high energy photon conversion process that lighting does perform. Lesser 'known' is the processes in thunderstorms that does produce anti-electrons (positrons) and these do produce the gamma rays when they recombine (the process does not involve lighting, through; rather, due to the intense electric field strength created by the storms - these then, in turn, cause electrons to undergo huge accelerations that create these positrons.) I am not aware of any scientific authority claiming that such gamma rays are produced via thermo-nuclear fusion.

There is absolutely zero fusion of nitrogen in any thunderstorm/lighting based process.

Using lighting to create the energy for fusion is neither practical (due to rarity and unpredictability) and extremely dangerous for those that do study lighting. Yet these reasons alone aren't really the issues - high energy power alone isn't really useful for creating controlled, net gain energy producing fusion - issues of stability of a plasma (low pressure) or uniform compression of the liquid/solid for inertial fusion are very well understood and these instabilities tend to dominate stability/compression processes preventing fusion burn/ignition. Hence, high energy electron beam fusion does not work. In fact, this later work has been done and was determined to be a dead-end.

So lighting will not work under any realistic circumstances.

By the way, you should have introduced yourself here and then posted this topic in the "Other forms of Fusion" section/thread.
User avatar
Paul_Schatzkin
Site Admin
Posts: 993
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2001 12:49 pm
Real name: aka The Perfesser
Contact:

Re: Not a fuser but also fusion theory.

Post by Paul_Schatzkin »

Dennis P Brown wrote: Thu Mar 17, 2022 1:33 pm The fact that 'lighting' produces X-rays due to electron acceleration is well known and the only direct high energy photon conversion process that

the process does not involve lighting,

There is absolutely zero fusion of nitrogen in any thunderstorm/lighting based process.

Using lighting to create the energy
Forgive my confusion, are we missing some 'n's here? 🤣🤷🏻‍♂️

-P
User avatar
Richard Hull
Moderator
Posts: 14991
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 9:44 am
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: Not a fuser but also fusion theory.

Post by Richard Hull »

I was baffled by the original post, but the poster is positing a form of solid state fusion where a huge electrical discharge in and through what might be an insulator with fusion fuel within, might do fusion. The 'N's that you note, I assume are neutrons.

This is like so many other posts of its ilk, asking if someone here might try this out. I do know that there are deuterated polymers and other deuterated chemicals which are offered for sale.

I have discussed, mostly with Frank on occasion, via phone, over a few years about some possibility of fusion in the solid state. Much of this harks back to cold fusion musings where deuterium was loaded into an interstitial metal lattice. The important thing in the concept is the confinement requirement of the Lawson criteria is worked into a much tighter bound deuteron population. Electrical compression and thermalization within the solid state of fusion fuel just might be a path to interesting fusion adventures. This would only be for some avid experimenters who actually can experiment with very special instrumentation in search of the 'N's. I do feel that there is rich unexplored ground in solid state fusion. I do not posit the sacred energy production resulting from this effort, perhaps, just fusion. However, this whole area is an area that has has very little serious effort put into it. The only reason I see for intense exploration is that the effort is abysmally inexpensive to investigate as there are no billion dollar edifices necessary and the work can be investigated at the table top level. The difficulty is there are many directions one might strike out in as fusion theory in the solid state is intrinsically non-extant. Serious study would involve thousands of the money in an intense effort by a knowledgeable person or team.

Those who know nothing and are confused, this had been discussed several times over the years in these forums. For a recent link with discussion go to

viewtopic.php?t=12482&hilit=canr+lenr

Note: As this is an introduction posting, to carry it on further, start another thread in another forum

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
hiroyuki_fukada
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2021 12:50 am
Real name: Hiroyuki FUKADA
Contact:

Re: Not a fuser but also fusion theory.

Post by hiroyuki_fukada »

Thank you for the fuser authority's comments.

I thought fusion fuels are not restricted to any atoms. One of the important requirements for fusion fuels is smaller than the iron atom, including the deuterium. Because the iron atom is the least potential atom for fusion or fission. Even the banana peel could be available, like Back to the Future II movie's MR. FUSION equipment. :-)

The Lightning emits gamma-ray things report was released in Nature 2017.
https://www.nature.com/articles/nature24630
In fact, the positron and gamma-ray emitted by Oxygen isotope breakdown into Nitrogen isotope, which is described in CNO cycle theory.

Richard Hull >
>  Electrical compression and thermalization within the solid-state of fusion fuel just might be a path to interesting fusion adventures. This would only be for some avid experimenters who actually can experiment with very special instrumentation in search of the 'N's.

Adventures are so exciting! Now, I really know solid-state fusion is an unexplored field, from authority's words. Now I could not way to realize them. Also, I really required the relationship to explore furthermore. If you could some experiment things, I'm so happy, also the entire world...? 

Moreover, I want any support for this small or big project. If you introduce some white knight will be so helpful...

Anyway, I appreciate for fusion authority's comment.
--
Kindly Regards,
Hiroyuki FUKADA
https://www.deepmatrixlab.com/thunderbolt-fusion
User avatar
Liam David
Posts: 518
Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2014 5:30 pm
Real name: Liam David
Location: PPPL

Re: Not a fuser but also fusion theory.

Post by Liam David »

I think you're misunderstanding both the findings of the paper and the CNO cycle.

The CNO cycle is a catalytic proton-proton fusion pathway that dominates in stars >1.3 solar masses. The C, N, and O fuse with hydrogen in a number of reactions, producing again C, N, and O, but also He, which then tends to sink to the stellar core. There is a decay 15O -> 15N + e+ + v_e that occurs both in the CNO cycle and in lightning, but lightning does not fuse C, N, O, nor any other element. In lightning, the 15O is produced by endothermic photodisintegration (16O + y -> 15O + n). The neutron moderates and goes on to hit predominantly 14N and 16O, producing 14C, p, 15N, and y particles, and the 15O decays as above. The paper describes several more such reactions and reports measuring the 511keV gammas associated with positron annihilation, as well as gammas produced by deexcitation of metastable 15N. Here is a diagram from the paper you linked:

lightning.PNG

Crucially, while there are plenty of nuclear reactions, there is not a single fusion reaction.

"Lightning" has been used to cause fusion, if you count the various types of pinch machines.

I do not mean to discourage you. On the contrary, please do keep thinking about alternative methods to produce fusion. Just be sure to do the requisite research as it doesn't seem like you quite understand these topics to the necessary depth.
User avatar
Richard Hull
Moderator
Posts: 14991
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 9:44 am
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: Not a fuser but also fusion theory.

Post by Richard Hull »

If we are to monkey with this. ( I am not).... Deuterium is One and only fusion fuel. There are zero.zero other elemental atoms allowed to fuse. Deuterium is the only fusion fuel possible for us or anyone...Period

Liam was kind of crushing the CNO concept, the Gamma ray concept and the positron concept. I will be bold and limit only deuterium to even a remote possibility. No other elements allowed to fuse....Sorry

Richard Hull

P.S. If there is a deep seated interest in this move it to another forum. This needs to be locked NOW!
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
hiroyuki_fukada
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2021 12:50 am
Real name: Hiroyuki FUKADA
Contact:

Re: Not a fuser but also fusion theory.

Post by hiroyuki_fukada »

Hi Liam David,
Thank you for your comments.

Yes, the CNO cycle requires terrible massive energy. However, it occurs in the sun, even only 1.7% of fusion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CNO_cycle
> The Sun has a core temperature of around 15.7×10^6 K and only 1.7% of 4 He nuclei produced in the Sun are born in the CNO cycle.

Moreover, the electron has strong energy, that 1eV equivalent as 11604 Kelvin, which means 10KeV is equivalent to 116,045,250 (100 million) Kelvin, that is DT reaction level. If Nitrogen or Oxygen requires more energy, 1,000 KeV is equivalent to 11,604,525,006 (10 billion) Kelvin.
https://www.translatorscafe.com/unit-co ... lt-kelvin/

However, when we chose fusion fuels, it requires easier to fuse is important. Like the atom included the neutrons more than protons. Almost hydrogen could not induce the fusion, because of lack the of neutrons.

1,000 KeV is already operated in power electronics equipment. But it's too large and expensive for me. My concern is how it requires the energy loss for theory to actual fusion. It's only clarified by experimentation. One of the papers said that about 1/8000 electrons could collide with nuclei of atoms. How many coulombs of the electron requires? Therefore, it requires some experimental tests.

Whatever, I'm so grad for many authority's comments. Thank you so much for your consideration.
--
Kindly Regards,
Hiroyuki FUKADA
https://www.deepmatrixlab.com/thunderbolt-fusion
User avatar
hiroyuki_fukada
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2021 12:50 am
Real name: Hiroyuki FUKADA
Contact:

Re: Not a fuser but also fusion theory.

Post by hiroyuki_fukada »

To Richard Hull
I apologize for the incorrect conversation for the forum. Would you introduce some correct forum?
Thank you for your coordination for the consortium.
--
Kindly Regards,
Hiroyuki FUKADA
https://www.deepmatrixlab.com/thunderbolt-fusion
User avatar
Richard Hull
Moderator
Posts: 14991
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 9:44 am
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: Not a fuser but also fusion theory.

Post by Richard Hull »

Fusion theory forum...Other forms of 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
The more complex the idea put forward by the poor amateur, the more likely it will never see embodiment
Locked

Return to “Please Introduce Yourself”