Fusion Message Board

In this space, visitors are invited to post any comments, questions, or skeptical observations about Philo T. Farnsworth's contributions to the field of Nuclear Fusion research.

Subject: Re:
Date: Aug 10, 11:49 pm
Poster: Richard Hull

On Aug 10, 11:49 pm, Richard Hull wrote:

Thanks for a superb and obviously well though out posting on stripping. I have printed out this post for my notebook. RH

********************************



This doesn’t help, because if you are measuring neuts at 1 MeV then either side can claim them. Miley would say they have partially thermalized from 2.5.

********************

This is indeed true. It is rather tough to really separate 1mev neuts from 2.45mv neuts with even half way decent equipment in a low flux field.
RH

********************
>
>Miley states that it is stripping which has the “low cross section” (ie reaction probably) compared to D-D at these energies! He also feels that stripping would also give an entirely different neutron energy spectrum. “In our case we ckecked neutron energies and scaling with voltage - both of which agree with D-D fusion. “
>
>However, in followup, it was later determined that Miley did not, in fact , even look for thermal neutrons and has no capability for doing so, but only that the high energy neutrons he found did scale with voltage.

********************

The last sentence above is a stunning statement! A lose, plain, naked, BF3 tube is a very efficient detector of ONLY thermal neutrons. You have to put up a parafin or PE wall to thermalize 1-5mev fast neuts to even get the BF3 to count! If miley uses any BF3 counters, and I assume he does, thermal counting would be a snap!!! Fast neuts in a BF3 tube have a nearly zero cross section whereas true thermals have thousands of barns cross section!

Thanks again for a well done post on the subject. We will still have to pick and choose our outcome, but at least it is from a better platform.

Richard Hull