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: Fusion... easy or hard?
Date: Nov 24, 1:47 pm
Poster: Richard Hull
On Nov 24, 1:47 pm, Richard Hull wrote:
Fusion, that is forcing two low Z nuclei together so they fuse and give up energy, is ostensibly easy to accomplish if one talks about d-d or d-t fusion processes.
Tom Ligon notes this in the taped interview I shot. With his exuberant and gesticulating "Fusion is EEEEEE ZEE" statement.
Compared to the billions spent thus far on the effort, any dunderhead armed with about a single kilobuck, a will to do, and some limited skills can actually do fusion on his or her kitchen table within a few months from the outset. They will not be able to measure or quantatize the output, for this low figure , however. The device will be 1.00000000000000000002315% efficient or need about 10 billion times more energy units into the device than it will output in actual fusion energy. However, if the thing is soaked in a water bath and 100% of the waste heat energy is used, you will be over unity. You will not compete economically with any know energy production process!
So, fusion (the process) is easy, indeed, in this narrow context.
Fusion which is a viable alternate energy source and is over unity in a commerically distributable manner, is extremly difficult and, as of yet, not even on the horizon.
Fusion which ignites and self-sustains is just not even discussable as no process or conceivable methodology exists for even imagining such a process on earth or on a laboratory scale.
"Ignition" as it is called would not be over unity for, once started, it would be pure energy with no actual continuous energy input needs or costs other than the fuel product. Ignition would be like a gasoline engine. It will work forever, with only fuel trickling in and no other significant seed energy will be required.
Currently, in man's knowledge of the universe, only stars and maybe cetain nebulae are doing fusion and only stars have ignition. This leaves one with the feeling that ignition is a bulk matter, gravitationally kickstrated and maintain process.
This may be the only way too! We just don't know and can't concieve of how to do it ourselves.
We are often too clever by half and decieve ourselves with knowledge and cogitation that this or that process is easily accomplished based on a few simple observations, and a whole lot of suppositions, assumptions and pie in the sky thoughts of doing "good".
Few roll up their sleeves and get to work, but all who do, learn the road is not only tough going, but half of what they thought they knew as simple theory, is real tough to apply in the real world. Large physical devices and systems working at high energy, and voltage levels require more than just power supplies and simple hookups. Costs fold over geometrically, and soon things are out of hand or spiraling out of control.
Pluggin' away at lower levels where startups, takedowns and total about faces are not economically disasterous or intellectually unberable with the project beholdin' to no one, is where this effort needs to be.
- Re: Fusion... easy or hard? - Nathan K. Nov 26, 7:13 pm
- Re: Fusion... easy or hard? - Richard Hull Nov 29, 8:29 am