Muon Catalyzed Fusion

For Short Term Learning Discussions ONLY. This area is for CURSORY questions and connecting with other users ONLY. ALL technical contributions need to be made in the appropriate forums and NOT HERE. All posts are temporary and will be deleted within weeks or months. You should have already search the extensive FAQs in each of the forums before posting here as your question may already be answered.
User avatar
Steven Sesselmann
Posts: 2097
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 1:50 am
Real name: Steven Sesselmann
Location: Sydney - Australia
Contact:

Re: Muon Catalyzed Fusion

Post by Steven Sesselmann » Wed Mar 14, 2018 2:06 am

Yes, I agree with Michael, Crockett is very ambitious, but at 16 you can affords to be.

FWIW, there is/was an Australian startup who advertised that they were working on some kind of new muon catalysed fusion, but the operation looked shonky, I more or less suspect they were dishonestly or naively obtaining funds from people who had no idea what the technology means. The web site is still up, but I have no idea if they are still running. http://www.starscientific.com.au/

Steven
http://www.gammaspectacular.com - Gamma Spectrometry Systems
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Steven_Sesselmann - Various papers and patents on RG

ian_krase
Posts: 465
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2016 7:48 am
Real name: Ian Krase

Re: Muon Catalyzed Fusion

Post by ian_krase » Wed Mar 14, 2018 2:52 am

Beam on target systems can be very simple. See this example: viewtopic.php?f=12&t=10791#p71328


This has the advantage of using an order of magnitude less current than a fusor needs. So weaker power supplies can be used.

There are definitely downsides. You need to build an ion gun and design target and suppressor.


There are NO good turbo pumps for cheap on eBay, except for the wise and patient or the very lucky. You need a pump, a matching controller, and the correct cables. A pump that spins easily when blown on or when the pump is rotated (the rotors staying stationary by inertia) is a good sign but no guarantee against a pump with clapped out bearings.

User avatar
Crockett Hensley
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2018 9:39 pm
Real name: Crockett Hensley

Re: Muon Catalyzed Fusion

Post by Crockett Hensley » Fri Mar 16, 2018 3:50 pm

Would it be possible to build a more powerful particle accelerator if, instead of using an ordinary system for electrostatic acceleration, I used charged superconducters to propel the protons?

I've been theorizing about using superconducters in accelerators for quite some time and I believe that, when running high voltage through them, I may be able to cause a sort of capacitance within the superconductors. Once inside the superconductor, electrons, which are normally guided by the path of least resistance through an object, will become disoriented due to the fact that ANY path through a superconductor is a path of least resistance. This means that the electrons should, in theory, just bounce around inside the superconductor like gas in a pressure tank, increasing the overall charge, or pressure (continuing the gas analogy), of the superconductor until eventually the amount of electrons escaping out the positive terminal of the superconductor equals the amount of electrons going into the superconductor from the negative terminal, creating a state of equilibrium (at least in theory, I haven't actually been able to get my hands on any superconductors to test it out). This means that the more voltage I put into the superconductor, the more electrons will be stored by this method of "capacitance" before an equilibrium is established between the input and output of the superconductor, and therefore the superconducter will gain a net negative charge proportional to the voltage of the system. By embedding multiple torus shaped superconductors in the walls of a vacuum tube with a proton source at one end, and giving each successive superconducter greater voltage than the previous one, I should be able to accelerate protons with a fair amount of efficiency. The really nice thing about this system is that the current flowing through the superconductors doesn't matter at all, just the voltage, so the total wattage of the system can be fairly low while still achieving the same magnetic field. I can hopefully use this type of accelerator to generate proton beams of higher-than-normal energy.

I don't know for sure whether this will work, or if anyone has ever tried it before, so any input is appreciated.
Last edited by Crockett Hensley on Fri Mar 16, 2018 7:15 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Tony1of5
Posts: 33
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 1:03 pm
Real name: Anthony ODwyer
Location: 3rd Planet from the Sun

Re: Muon Catalyzed Fusion

Post by Tony1of5 » Fri Mar 16, 2018 5:39 pm

Greetings esteemed fusioneers !

I have been bitten by this Muon catalysed fusion for a year now …

Here are a few questions and points that spin in my mind when considering what appears to be impossible. Please go ahead and say what is not true and help us with some answers !!

The focus of the discussion so far has been about the generation of muons indirectly by proton and pion production then disintegration to muons and the high (huge) energy >1GeV needed.

1) Muon Pair creation: considering pair creation, is there not a route using a gamma ray on a dense target at twice the energy of the muon ..about 212MeV .. ok that’s a lot but it is energy cheaper than the proton route, no !? The game would be to generate 212MeV gammas then look for Muons ?

2) LWFA Ok looking for the way to make 212MeV gammas…one way that I am mulling over and not at all sure of what the energy limit could be, is the use of a femtosecond laser pulse to generate a LWFA laser wakefield acceleration shock and then go looking for Muon in the ejected beam ! The Ultrashort pulse lasers like Ti:sapphire appears able to generate huge energies but for a few femtoseconds. Who knows if then can produce Muons ?

3) Cosmic rays: considering the Muon at sea level has an average flux of about 1 muon per square centimeter per minute. And higher at altitude. http://cosmic.lbl.gov/SKliewer/Cosmic_Rays/Muons.htm Now if introduce that Muon to a bath of D2 liquid .. that could cause about 100 catalytic fusion events . I think these are detectable by xray events. Neglecting capture efficiencies … in 60cm2 surface area that would be about 1 muon per second 100 xray signals / Geiger clicks of (D2) capture per second. Surely it is detectable ???

4) A Muon detector: I have a CSI gamma spectrometer with dust on it from the fusor project. I wonder how to identify cosmic muons in the output spectrum ?? any know how to distinguish (or shield) gammas and electrons from the Muon signatures ? Finally I noticed a Muon detector for 100$ from an MIT democratic scientist … here is the link.
http://cosmicwatch.lns.mit.edu/about
http://cosmicwatch.lns.mit.edu/detector#how

Thanks for reading and Happy St. Patricks day from the Emerald Isle !!
A uud-ddu meets with another uud-ddu and a ddu comes out in a big hurry !

User avatar
Crockett Hensley
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2018 9:39 pm
Real name: Crockett Hensley

Re: Muon Catalyzed Fusion

Post by Crockett Hensley » Fri Mar 16, 2018 9:44 pm

As far as I know, the only particles that have been successfully accelerated using laser wakefield acceleration are particles with extremely small mass (electrons, positrons, etc.), if the process can produce muons, their velocity will probably not be large enough to cause time dilation effects, so they would probably disappear before you could detect them (they only last 2.2μs in their rest frame). Frankly, the chances of muon production from light waves at 212MeV are very low, you might be able to get a few, but you'd probably have to increase the energy significantly in order to get a detectable number of them. This would be a problem for me because generating large amounts of EXTREMELY HIGH ENERGY RADIATION is not what I would call a safe process. I'd like to come out of this without having cancer or being sterilized, so producing tons of gamma rays is not optimal. However, If you have the equipment to detect muons as well as lots and lots of lead shielding, then go ahead and try it (from at least 50 yards away), though I don't know if it will work.

As for the idea of using natural muons from cosmic rays, if each muon were to catalyze 100 D2 fusion events and you had a large enough surface for muon collection, it could, I think, be detectable...... barely. However, since deuterium has such a low density (it is gaseous after all), the chances of a muon actually catalyzing 100 fusion events before going out the other side of the deuterium chamber are extremely low. In order for a fusion event to be catalyzed, the muon has to be within an extremely close proximity to the D2 atoms, and remember that a muon is negative, meaning it is repelled by atoms. In other words, to actually catalyze fusion, the muon has to hit really, exactly, perfectly, just right. In a solid target you can count on this happening due to the great concentration of atoms, but with a gaseous target, there's no guarantee. A single muon entering a chamber full of deuterium gas might only catalyze a few fusion events before escaping, or none at all. That means naturally occurring muons are probably not a good, dependable source of nuclear fusion, at least not detectable amounts of it.

I hope this helps you. The LWFA system, with some modifications, might be able to produce a few muons with enough gamma rays. The only problem with this is detectablity. Be sure to let us know if you have any more ideas, or think of possible fixes to the issues I pointed out.

Post Reply