Review article on beam/accelerator driven fusion?
- Richard Hull
- Moderator
- Posts: 15027
- Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 9:44 am
- Real name: Richard Hull
Re: Review article on beam/accelerator driven fusion?
Yes, trying to find out what was what in a hail of Xrays/gamma with its broad spectrum would be a nightmare. The fusor is actually a failed x-ray machine, unless you have a large glass view port. Its x-ray spectrum would be really wierd and contain, virtually, a zoo of energies. Naturally, the bulk of the x-ray flux, at our typically applied potentials, never exit the device.
Richard Hull
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
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
- Dennis P Brown
- Posts: 3189
- Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 10:46 am
- Real name: Dennis Brown
Re: Review article on beam/accelerator driven fusion?
The amount of "proton" produced Bremsstrahlung is essentially zero in a fusor; this is due to the mass difference between electrons and protons. The average rate of electron Bremsstranhlung radiation is 10^13 greater (relative to power radiated) so then any radiation produced by a proton for any given energy - adding the fact that the electron velocities are many orders of magnitude greater than protons for a plasma (again, the mass difference) any such signal produced by a proton at fusor energies would further mean that such Bremsstrahlung radiation is again, essentially zero.
As for frequency of direct head on collisions between protons, this would not be a million to one (resulting in easily 10^16 such direct collisions in a fusor which would produce a huge signal) but, while I am not interested in doing the calculation, it is many orders of magnitude lower than that figure resulting in this, again, being an irrelevant occurrence so that no measurable signal for such an event is likely to be obtained.
Assuming that a collision process (where protons routinely are stopping in a fusor due to head to head collisions) is common and that proton in a fusor can create Bremsstrahlung radiation via interactions with other protons to create a viable signal to measure are, I feel, both inaccurate relative to what really occurs in a fusor and produces so few events as to be not realistic to be measured; these events are so rare as to be utterly irrelevant so I stand by my statements as accurate representations of what can and does not really occur in a fusor.
As for frequency of direct head on collisions between protons, this would not be a million to one (resulting in easily 10^16 such direct collisions in a fusor which would produce a huge signal) but, while I am not interested in doing the calculation, it is many orders of magnitude lower than that figure resulting in this, again, being an irrelevant occurrence so that no measurable signal for such an event is likely to be obtained.
Assuming that a collision process (where protons routinely are stopping in a fusor due to head to head collisions) is common and that proton in a fusor can create Bremsstrahlung radiation via interactions with other protons to create a viable signal to measure are, I feel, both inaccurate relative to what really occurs in a fusor and produces so few events as to be not realistic to be measured; these events are so rare as to be utterly irrelevant so I stand by my statements as accurate representations of what can and does not really occur in a fusor.
-
- Posts: 117
- Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2013 4:46 pm
- Real name: Sven Andersson
Re: Review article on beam/accelerator driven fusion?
It's a challenge, but I think it can be done. It requires, of course, a physics lab; it's nothing you can do at home. First thing you need is a gamma spectrometer. And a very carefully setup experiment, well shielded, from cosmic rays etc. Timing is important; the bremsstrahlung I hypothesize exists, should arrive at the detector, in advance of the gamma rays from the fusion itself.John Futter wrote:Sven
I cannot think how you would measure your "gamma bremsstrahlung" in amonst a ton of x-ray bremsstrahlung as the detector cannot distinguish whether the energy recieved is gamma or x-ray
Something that might be worth trying (to eliminate thermal motion) is to grow perfect crystals of Li-6 or Li-7 and the see what happens if you vary the angle of incident particles. If you experiment with Lithium, that is. Wait, a large, perfect crystal of Lithium-6 hydride (or Li-7), and then bombard it with protons at different angles.
-
- Posts: 117
- Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2013 4:46 pm
- Real name: Sven Andersson
Re: Review article on beam/accelerator driven fusion?
The mechanism for fusion in a Fusor or a Tokamak is just that the fuel nuclei happen to be close in momentum space. This is Charles S. Cagle's mechanism for fusion. He removed his web-page, but you can find it in the link below. Fusion actually has nothing to do with banging nucleii into one another. Read the prophet Sir Charles! He knows everything.Dennis P Brown wrote:The amount of "proton" produced Bremsstrahlung is essentially zero in a fusor;
http://web.archive.org/web/200008172348 ... tents.html
-
- Posts: 284
- Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2014 12:43 pm
- Real name: David Kunkle
Re: Review article on beam/accelerator driven fusion?
I hope you're kidding? Spent some time looking at that site. I'm afraid Sir Charles scores awfully high on the 'ol index: http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html
Commercially available fusion reactors that give off no harmful radiation by 2001? He's a little behind schedule.
Commercially available fusion reactors that give off no harmful radiation by 2001? He's a little behind schedule.
If your experiment needs statistics, you ought to have done a better experiment.
Ernest Rutherford
Ernest Rutherford
-
- Posts: 1850
- Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 10:29 pm
- Real name: John Futter
- Contact:
Re: Review article on beam/accelerator driven fusion?
Sven
Yes you could grow di-lithium crystals and using an antimatter containment device get all that energy for your warp drive
(Ithink this was looked after by Scottie on the USS Enterprise)
PS I work in a nuclear Physics laboratory and what you want to do is not possible until a ready source of
high yielding flux capacitors is to be had ( all rights here to back to the future)
Yes you could grow di-lithium crystals and using an antimatter containment device get all that energy for your warp drive
(Ithink this was looked after by Scottie on the USS Enterprise)
PS I work in a nuclear Physics laboratory and what you want to do is not possible until a ready source of
high yielding flux capacitors is to be had ( all rights here to back to the future)
- Richard Hull
- Moderator
- Posts: 15027
- Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 9:44 am
- Real name: Richard Hull
Re: Review article on beam/accelerator driven fusion?
I too, looked at the URL and the guy is kind of out there. There is a lot of self-proclaimed geniuses with new theories with no real proof or even experiment to back up their claims.
Just as there are many gurus there is also a cadre of enthralled followers for each guru. New energy and free energy sites abound with great promises and zero delivery. It is the nature of man to seek hope and the mission of these gurus to supply that hope.
This fellow's ideas are rather hollow and filled with holes and his efforts contain no real material results.
Richard Hull
Just as there are many gurus there is also a cadre of enthralled followers for each guru. New energy and free energy sites abound with great promises and zero delivery. It is the nature of man to seek hope and the mission of these gurus to supply that hope.
This fellow's ideas are rather hollow and filled with holes and his efforts contain no real material results.
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
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
-
- Posts: 117
- Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2013 4:46 pm
- Real name: Sven Andersson
Re: Review article on beam/accelerator driven fusion?
Flux capacitors?John Futter wrote:PS I work in a nuclear Physics laboratory and what you want to do is not possible until a ready source of
high yielding flux capacitors is to be had ( all rights here to back to the future)
What I claim is that towards the end of the tail of the bremsstrahlung continuum, there can be found traces of radiation that originates from the deceleration of the few nuclei that travel exactly towards a target nucleus. In your opinion, can this radiation be detected? What about my idea of detecting the time of arrival of the radiation?
-
- Posts: 1850
- Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 10:29 pm
- Real name: John Futter
- Contact:
Re: Review article on beam/accelerator driven fusion?
Ah yes
But when did it start
But when did it start
-
- Posts: 117
- Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2013 4:46 pm
- Real name: Sven Andersson
Re: Review article on beam/accelerator driven fusion?
To Futter, Hull and Kunkle: dont write it off as nonsense until you can really be sure that it's nonsense! Cagle's physics that is.
In 1958 two swedish guys claimed that they had been in a fight with UFO-nauts that looked like grey dough. UFO-Sverige has written a long report on the case, many, many pages, interviewed witnesses and so forth. There is, of course no need for any investigation or action of any kind since everyone knows it's just nonsense. However don't write somebody's new physics off before you know for sure!
The great eye opener in my case was reading Cagle's theory on how a fusion bomb really works. Can be found in the part The Physics of Successfull Fusion.
In 1958 two swedish guys claimed that they had been in a fight with UFO-nauts that looked like grey dough. UFO-Sverige has written a long report on the case, many, many pages, interviewed witnesses and so forth. There is, of course no need for any investigation or action of any kind since everyone knows it's just nonsense. However don't write somebody's new physics off before you know for sure!
The great eye opener in my case was reading Cagle's theory on how a fusion bomb really works. Can be found in the part The Physics of Successfull Fusion.
-
- Posts: 284
- Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2014 12:43 pm
- Real name: David Kunkle
Re: Review article on beam/accelerator driven fusion?
"Can be found in the part The Physics of Successfull Fusion." Already looked at that. The biggest things that are a red flag for me are:
One: He spends an awful lot of time trashing accepted physics and mainstream efforts at fusion for my taste. The difficulties and problems facing physics today are no secret- including the chasm between relativity and quantum mechanics. Trashing them infers those clowns are all barking up the wrong tree, but look at my great sounding theory- it must be right.
Two: Maybe if he spent as much time with details on his own theory, it would be a little more palatable. For proof, he claims a few experiments back up his theory- yet absolutely no details or references there! Apparently he has no experimental evidence of his own that any of his theory is sound either.
Three: Probably most important- the proof is always in the pudding. He hasn't so much as built a working prototype for proof of concept, yet he seems to have a sales pitch already. The reactors are completely scalable, completely safe (no radiation), have direct conversion to electricity and near 100% efficient, dirt cheap for the homeowner to purchase, and electricity from them will cost 1/800th of what the utilities are charging. And he has a cute name for it that's already trademarked. If that isn't putting the cart before the horse...I don't know what is.
He claims they will be for sale by 2001. And the copyright on the site is 1997; so 20 years have passed and still, apparently nothing so much as some experimental proof that there is something to his theories. Frankly, it all sends the needle high on my BS meter. The burden of proof is not on the skeptic, it is on those who would posit theories and make outrageous claims. I see nothing resembling proof in the entire site to think that he's onto something important- all indications point to the opposite.
One: He spends an awful lot of time trashing accepted physics and mainstream efforts at fusion for my taste. The difficulties and problems facing physics today are no secret- including the chasm between relativity and quantum mechanics. Trashing them infers those clowns are all barking up the wrong tree, but look at my great sounding theory- it must be right.
Two: Maybe if he spent as much time with details on his own theory, it would be a little more palatable. For proof, he claims a few experiments back up his theory- yet absolutely no details or references there! Apparently he has no experimental evidence of his own that any of his theory is sound either.
Three: Probably most important- the proof is always in the pudding. He hasn't so much as built a working prototype for proof of concept, yet he seems to have a sales pitch already. The reactors are completely scalable, completely safe (no radiation), have direct conversion to electricity and near 100% efficient, dirt cheap for the homeowner to purchase, and electricity from them will cost 1/800th of what the utilities are charging. And he has a cute name for it that's already trademarked. If that isn't putting the cart before the horse...I don't know what is.
He claims they will be for sale by 2001. And the copyright on the site is 1997; so 20 years have passed and still, apparently nothing so much as some experimental proof that there is something to his theories. Frankly, it all sends the needle high on my BS meter. The burden of proof is not on the skeptic, it is on those who would posit theories and make outrageous claims. I see nothing resembling proof in the entire site to think that he's onto something important- all indications point to the opposite.
If your experiment needs statistics, you ought to have done a better experiment.
Ernest Rutherford
Ernest Rutherford
-
- Posts: 117
- Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2013 4:46 pm
- Real name: Sven Andersson
Re: Review article on beam/accelerator driven fusion?
Below are two schematic drawings of H-bombs. In both of them can be seen a grey plate between primary and secondary. What's it for? It transforms gamma rays from the primary to soft X-rays. It is something like 10-15 centimeters thick and made of a high-Z element such as Uranium. It is immediately heated to millions of degrees and is then a completely dissociated plasma that is transparent to soft X-rays, because there are no ions, atoms or molecules in it to absorb such radiation. But there is an awful lot of electrons. They will undergo Compton scattering with the gamma rays from the A-bomb. The thickness of the plate is exactly designed, through simulation and calculation to produce, soft X-rays in the other end. In comes gamma rays and out comes soft X-rays. When they fall on the LiD, there will be a big boom.Sven Andersson wrote:The great eye opener in my case was reading Cagle's theory on how a fusion bomb really works. Can be found in the part The Physics of Successfull Fusion.
Why is this info on the Internet? That is, the pictures I posted. The people who built or today maintain the bombs have such a hazy understanding of how the weapons work that they don't understand that the 'grey plate' is a great secret!
-
- Posts: 90
- Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2012 1:25 am
- Real name: Andrew Haynes
Re: Review article on beam/accelerator driven fusion?
@Sven Andersson
The U-238 taper is for shape charge, explosive wave propagation, the styform is the high cross section which turns to plasma, the U238 reflector is Pyrex
The U-238 taper is for shape charge, explosive wave propagation, the styform is the high cross section which turns to plasma, the U238 reflector is Pyrex
Andrew Haynes
-
- Posts: 117
- Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2013 4:46 pm
- Real name: Sven Andersson
Re: Review article on beam/accelerator driven fusion?
The smokescreen is thick indeed, and won't be lifted anytime soon...Andrew Haynes wrote:@Sven Andersson
The U-238 taper is for shape charge, explosive wave propagation, the styform is the high cross section which turns to plasma, the U238 reflector is Pyrex
- Dennis P Brown
- Posts: 3189
- Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 10:46 am
- Real name: Dennis Brown
Re: Review article on beam/accelerator driven fusion?
I personally would prefer that these types of posts be avoided; wiki has all one needs to build real bombs in its far too accurate details and frankly, I find this stuff unprofessional to post here at a fun, educational fusor forum. Yes, my opinion and not policy in any manner here. But I feel that these types of posts tend to make the site look weapons related and such posts have absolutely no relevance to fusors. Certainly crackpot sites with their ludicrous claims on energy fusion does have a place to be discuses here but pulling in weapon related issues have zero relevance, in my opinion.
- Richard Hull
- Moderator
- Posts: 15027
- Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 9:44 am
- Real name: Richard Hull
Re: Review article on beam/accelerator driven fusion?
I agree with Dennis. Let's stick to amateur fusion efforts and not do some sort of hunt for the mysteries or oddball science theories within weapons.
Richard Hull
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
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