The Hull prize!

Announcements and items of immediate importance.
DaveC
Posts: 2346
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2001 5:13 am
Real name:

Re: The Hull prize!

Post by DaveC » Thu Apr 12, 2007 8:25 pm

Looks like most of the diffierence in costs or value lies in the use of He costs vs He3 costs. At $3.00 US per cubic meter, 1 mole of ordinary He is about$0.0672 , about 6 -3/4 cents. Compare to Richard's current price for 1 mole of He3 at ~$6600.00 US.

Either way the answer is the same... we need an inprovement of some 10+9 times before, anything looks reasonable economically. So... go for the first factor of 10, as a step. Just nine decade steps, is "all"!

Dave Cooper

George Schmermund
Posts: 262
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 12:51 am
Real name: George Schmermund
Location: Carlsbad, CA

Re: The Hull prize!

Post by George Schmermund » Sun Jun 22, 2008 7:44 pm

Anything obvious in high vacuum is probably wrong.

AllenWallace
Posts: 142
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2002 5:50 pm
Real name:

Re: The Hull prize!

Post by AllenWallace » Mon Jun 23, 2008 4:25 am

>Pulsed or burst mode operation is not allowed.

Why? Bubble detectors take the guess work out neutron detection and pulse power is easier in many cases (cheaper).

Chris Trent
Posts: 291
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 9:24 pm
Real name:

Re: The Hull prize!

Post by Chris Trent » Mon Jun 23, 2008 5:25 am

I'm not Richard, but I can think of at least one reason for disallowing Pulsed mode.

The power measurement calculations simply become too complicated. More than a few professional scientists have been fooled into incorrect results because their instrumentation couldn't properly measure highly irregular power draw. It's very difficult to get the RMS of a spike, or a near instantaneous pulse. A number of so called "free energy" devices have mislead their creators, and sometimes others, due to just this measuring conundrum.

User avatar
Chris Bradley
Posts: 2931
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 11:05 am
Real name:

Re: The Hull prize!

Post by Chris Bradley » Mon Jun 23, 2008 7:06 am

A prize-poster can set any terms they wish. Though in this case some caution and literal accuracy may need definition over two terms:

- pulsed operation - as reflected on in another post, the sun is a pulse operation, albeit 15billion years. Does this also exclude operating off an unsmoothed rectified transformer (50 pulses/sec)? And would it exclude a system that can *just* stay within its operational temperature, but would get too hot a few seconds after the end of the qualifying run (i.e. a 'thermal operation' pulse). I would tend to agree that pulse mode is OK, but is subject to peer review on calculation.

- 'Polywell device'. This might be reasonably be defined as a 'device built by EMC2' as noone else would be able to legitimately claim any copyright over the word, and would therefore mean no devices could ever qualify. Would it include something which has a very slight improvement in it? If so, how slight? Why not just include *any* other amateur device that does not employ a central, enclosing, physical focussing grid, and set the ball off well and truly!

User avatar
Richard Hull
Site Admin
Posts: 10515
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 1:44 pm
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: The Hull prize!

Post by Richard Hull » Mon Jun 23, 2008 1:14 pm

I have considered all suggestions.

This is no long bet. This is a cash award, a prize. No betting involved. A bet involves two parties where equal shares of value are pledged upon a statement. One of the two parties will be richer at the end to the tune of their original bet. I will have no chance at enrichment only a net loss. This is not a bet.

Pulse mode is a mode whereby shots are taken as in, 6 - 500 nanosecond, 200 megawatt discharges in a minute.....2 - 1.5 micorsecond 500kw shots in a minute, etc. This is pulsed operation; microscopic duty cycle systems of high impulse input energy. It is not allowed for most of the reasons offered. Namely, dump enough energy into a gas and you WILL get neutrons. Such a device is valueless. Otherwise, we would have lightning driven power stations.

Unrectified continuous operation from the mains is not a pulsed machine no more than is a washing machine or a tungsten light bulb..

Amateurs will make what they will, patent or not. I wish everyone here would stop assuming that if an amateur made a copyish polywell that they do so to go to market with it or try and end run EMC2. George Miley got very upset when we started back in 1998 and sent a terse letter to me regarding the Daimler patents. A warning shot across the bow.

The the word amateur means amateur. You are doing something for amusement or for educational or entertainment purposes. The prize will only be issued to an amateur.

Finally, and this is key. The prize is offered for only one device. (amateur polywell) The reason being that it was just too wonderful for words and would see us through to a glorious fusion future or so many here have felt. I just wanted to support this wonderment and see it pass over into action as wheelwork and reward same.

The second Prize was offered solely for a specific fusion process, just one process, the reason being that the process is a legend that has never really been done in amateur hands and yet continues to be a gail force wind across the decks here that has no embodiment and, like the great red spot of Jupiter, seems a storm with no purpose or end in sight.

Get me 1,000,000 alphas/sec using p-B11 fusion and get this second prize offering.

No need to get all tangled up here. The rules are clear and simple.

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
Retired now...Doing only what I want and not what I should...every day is a saturday.

Richard Hester
Posts: 1458
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2001 4:07 am
Real name:

Re: The Hull prize!

Post by Richard Hester » Wed Jun 25, 2008 7:18 am

Shoot, if I ever got 10^6 alphas/sec from p-B11(not promising, not even hinting), I wouldn't bother with the prize - I'd publish. That sort of a reaction rate would be newsworthy. I'd be happy with orders of magnitude less, given the difficulty.

User avatar
Richard Hull
Site Admin
Posts: 10515
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 1:44 pm
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: The Hull prize!

Post by Richard Hull » Wed Jun 25, 2008 1:44 pm

I think that there are 4 alphas from the idealized reaction. That's only a tiny 250,000 fusions or reactions per second. Not all that spectacular as hopeful fusion reactions go. Still, it opens the door for direct conversion, in theory. Of course, a simple target fusion system would not be a power system. What p-B11 fusion that has been done is just proof of concept target fusion with p bombarding a B desposited target. Accelerator stuff.

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
Retired now...Doing only what I want and not what I should...every day is a saturday.

User avatar
Paul_Schatzkin
Site Admin
Posts: 654
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2001 4:49 pm
Real name: aka The Perfesser
Contact:

Re: The Hull prize!

Post by Paul_Schatzkin » Thu Jun 26, 2008 12:14 am

I just want to observe that Richard's "prize" here comes up again just after John McCain has tossed up $300-million prize for somebody to come up with a better battery for electric cars.

I think Richard's hundreds of dollars will ultimately prove more valuable to society than McCain's hundreds of millions.

I mean, it really doesn't matter how good your battery is, how long it will hold a charge, how quickly it recharges, or how far you can go on a charge: you still have to CHARGE IT with electricity that comes from SOMEWHERE.

That to me is the great fallacy of the whole "electric car" crusade. It doesn't provide a real alternative, it just shifts the energy production from one source (gas in a tank) to another (coal, natural gas, fission-fired generators).

I think electric vehicles are a great idea. Even better, though, when there is a clean, safe, and inexhaustible supply of electricity, which will come only when somebody figures out fusion (or taps the Zero Point Energy field).

Not that I'm holding my breath, mind you.

--PS
Paul Schatzkin, aka "The Perfesser" – Founder and Host of Fusor.net
Author of The Boy Who Invented Television - http://farnovision.com/book.html
"Fusion is not 20 years in the future; it is 50 years in the past and we missed it."

George Schmermund
Posts: 262
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 12:51 am
Real name: George Schmermund
Location: Carlsbad, CA

Re: The Hull prize!

Post by George Schmermund » Thu Jun 26, 2008 12:31 am

Anything obvious in high vacuum is probably wrong.

Post Reply