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: Random after supper ideas.
Date: Oct 28, 4:37 pm
Poster: Scott Stephens

On Oct 28, 4:37 pm, Scott Stephens wrote:

>>The high grid loss is probably in large part the result of nonfusing collisions thermalizing (randomizing) the ballistic paths of the ions, causing them to fall into the grid.

>But from where?
> do we have a distorted electric field that focuses plasma onto the grid?

The grid pulls oppositely charged ions into it, unless they have enough energy (most should) to zoom past.

>Just simple thermal collisions? Outer plasma striking the grid?

Yes. Take a bowl and put a few pins arrayed around a ring in it and let a marble roll down the bowl, and up the side. Notice occasionaly a marble hits a pin. Now if you made a very big bowl, used very tiny marble, and then began using more and more marbles, you would find eventualy collisions knock them off radial paths, so they oscillate up the bowl walls with less energy and eventualy fall in.

Now if you excite the marbles with a vibrating bowl with vibrating waves, they bunch, follow energy flux paths, and lost energy is replace.

But they don't collide like they use to, so they may not fuse. Better to use microwaves on electrons to focus them into a virtual grid structure; tetrahedral E-guns (microwave helicon cans) excite a E-torroid or soliton which is a virtual grid for ions. The electron charge-mass and magnetic moment is so much greater than that of the postive ion that it would respond much better to microwaves.

>>In the old (before PC) days they use to put grids in a saltwater bath to plot the E-fields.
>Got more details?

Maybe Richard Hull does? I just have read & heard that they use to design vacuum tubes by putting the grids in salt water and using a hi-z probe to measure the e-field so they could plot it.

>Has this been done or can it be done for the
>3D fusor grids?

No doubt (IMHO). But why when PC's are available that can handle it now? But after some encounters with PC's, a bowl of saltwater might be faster and far less frustrating.

Can a non conducting liquid
>be doped to give a model of a fusor?

You would need a very hi-z probe that couldn't tolerate dirt and contamination. Best use saltwater (and clean the grid so it won't corrode).

>Yep, lucky Ben, but now do you have a program I can use?

Several months ago I was looking at a DIY FEM (finite element analysis) using Java and assembly for the matrix crunching. But deciding to study a bit more first, I'm not so sure I shouldn't use a better suited program that I can plot equations with - such as Mathematica or Mathcad.

I need to know -
- how to model a plasma in the simplest but most effective way. This will depend on fusor geometry, and my accelerators and grids. I want to use trapped microwave accelerating modes to study interacting nonlinear ion-acoustic vibrations, E-toroids and vortices.

I probably need a cray and a team of mathematicians and programmers.

>>Know an efficient way to brew some?

>Looking at what few high school physics
>books I have here, you can have 1.02Mev Gamma
>ray interact with a neuclus.A radioactive
>decay giving off a anti-electron. Some other
>exotic reaction. Of what little I know of anti-matter the the radioactive decay
>method seems to have fewer risks.

You can find some stuff about it on the web. The Pair Production is not what they do commercialy (such as at Fermi lab). IIRC antimatter is the most expensive substance.

I would look at other fringe areas like hydrinos (moreover the destabilization and conversion of electrons from particle to photon (anihilation) and metastable nuclear isotopes; gamma lasing based on the mossbauer effect.

I'll bet if common (ubiquitous) nuclie can be destabilized into nuclear decay modes in high ionization states, it would be a well-guarded secret, and would develop a black market and an aura of dissinformation like the alleged 'red mercury'.

Lookup "AIP Update #500: transfer of energy from nuclear reactions to atomic electrons 8.31.00"
on the AIP listserver or checkout the archive here for my old posts on fusors and gamma lasers.