Rules for Claiming Fusion Clarification
Rules for Claiming Fusion Clarification
Rule 2a requires a picture of the inside of the device, but my chamber doesn’t have provisions for a viewport. Will the forum accept a claim if all of the other information is provided in sufficient detail?
- Richard Hull
- Moderator
- Posts: 15039
- Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 9:44 am
- Real name: Richard Hull
Re: Rules for Claiming Fusion Clarification
Yes, if all the other information is correct. Good photos of the entire setup will suffice.
Along with the other requirement data. The most important is an image of your neutron detection scheme and instrumentation. We, normally, would like to see your effort develop over a period of time.
Richard Hull
Along with the other requirement data. The most important is an image of your neutron detection scheme and instrumentation. We, normally, would like to see your effort develop over a period of time.
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
Re: Rules for Claiming Fusion Clarification
I'm fairly certain my device is producing neutrons, but I'm waiting for a bubble dosimeter to confirm.
- Richard Hull
- Moderator
- Posts: 15039
- Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 9:44 am
- Real name: Richard Hull
Re: Rules for Claiming Fusion Clarification
Can you show us some photos of your entire setup now?
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
-
- Posts: 39
- Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 9:03 am
- Real name: Cristiano Machado
- Location: São Paulo - Brazil
Re: Rules for Claiming Fusion Clarification
Hello Joe,
Very nice setup. Did you already tested it with deuterium?
Regards,
Cristiano
Very nice setup. Did you already tested it with deuterium?
Regards,
Cristiano
Re: Rules for Claiming Fusion Clarification
Yes. I detect neutrons at a supply voltage greater than -15kV (capable of -50kV). In addition, my Geiger counter seems to indicate I can activate silver to 2-3x background.
- Dennis P Brown
- Posts: 3190
- Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 10:46 am
- Real name: Dennis Brown
Re: Rules for Claiming Fusion Clarification
I second that point, that is a very well done setup.
I assume you have a neutron detector (the image of the plastic box with leads.) If so, data counts vs time with and without the moderator. Its a good idea to do at least one run without deuterium to get a noise baseline with the plasma (at normal voltage and using air as the active media.) For the deuterium runs provide system parameters: detector distance from center, voltage, current and system pressure. Do a number of runs - 10 to 12 total (5 or 6 with mod/5 or 6 without.)
Also, you can (since you have Ag foil) provide/collect Ag activation data; that can be manual - i.e. counts from the GM detector and plot rate vs. time of the decrease from the activated Ag. Again, do a number of runs (4 - 8 total), provide deuterium pressure, system current and exact voltage. That is, activated the Ag for 2-4 runs with your moderator in place. Then provide Ag counts data without moderator (again, 2-4 runs.) Provide duration times the Ag was activated for as well. Also, include your rooms normal background count without the fusor running. Provide Ag foil distance from chamber center.
Publish either just the neutron detector results and/or the activated Ag here and I think those results should be enough. People here can ask questions and you can answer them.
I assume you have a neutron detector (the image of the plastic box with leads.) If so, data counts vs time with and without the moderator. Its a good idea to do at least one run without deuterium to get a noise baseline with the plasma (at normal voltage and using air as the active media.) For the deuterium runs provide system parameters: detector distance from center, voltage, current and system pressure. Do a number of runs - 10 to 12 total (5 or 6 with mod/5 or 6 without.)
Also, you can (since you have Ag foil) provide/collect Ag activation data; that can be manual - i.e. counts from the GM detector and plot rate vs. time of the decrease from the activated Ag. Again, do a number of runs (4 - 8 total), provide deuterium pressure, system current and exact voltage. That is, activated the Ag for 2-4 runs with your moderator in place. Then provide Ag counts data without moderator (again, 2-4 runs.) Provide duration times the Ag was activated for as well. Also, include your rooms normal background count without the fusor running. Provide Ag foil distance from chamber center.
Publish either just the neutron detector results and/or the activated Ag here and I think those results should be enough. People here can ask questions and you can answer them.
- Richard Hull
- Moderator
- Posts: 15039
- Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 9:44 am
- Real name: Richard Hull
Re: Rules for Claiming Fusion Clarification
I think he is waiting for a bubble detector (proof positive)
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
- Rich Feldman
- Posts: 1472
- Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2009 6:59 pm
- Real name: Rich Feldman
- Location: Santa Clara County, CA, USA
Re: Rules for Claiming Fusion Clarification
The check list used to include a picture of the maker with the fusor.
I guess that rule was dropped some time around 2016. Anybody remember why?
I guess that rule was dropped some time around 2016. Anybody remember why?
All models are wrong; some models are useful. -- George Box
- Richard Hull
- Moderator
- Posts: 15039
- Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 9:44 am
- Real name: Richard Hull
Re: Rules for Claiming Fusion Clarification
I will go there and add that rule as well. It was mostly generated as our youngest fusioneer had a great system and I wanted to see if he was for real. He was.
Edit:
I just checked and in part 2 line section ( a) I already had a note that a photo of the fusor and claimant is requested.
I did update and add a few lines to the old 2016 rules and moved it to the top of the pile in admin and construction forums.
viewtopic.php?f=47&t=12424
I even mentioned it in the dramatic example
viewtopic.php?f=18&t=7893
Richard Hull
Edit:
I just checked and in part 2 line section ( a) I already had a note that a photo of the fusor and claimant is requested.
I did update and add a few lines to the old 2016 rules and moved it to the top of the pile in admin and construction forums.
viewtopic.php?f=47&t=12424
I even mentioned it in the dramatic example
viewtopic.php?f=18&t=7893
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