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: MHD
Date:
Poster: Scott StephensOn , Scott Stephens wrote:
>I guess having a information about MHD,
>magnetic fluid dynamics could not hurt
>here as well. That could be another reason
>the fusor action was mis-under stood at the
>time.The MHD theory they used in the 1960's
>was totaly wrong compared to what it really
>is.
MHD offers the possibility of using reactive, electrodynamic accelerations and nonlinear focusing, compression and direct energy transduction.
A very good web site is at http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/ , describing ExB and polarization drift. These are ion, low frequency instabilities. Microwave Langmuir instability, transverse to the magnetic field occur too, which I need to find out more about. Along with the temperature, density and magnetic gradient affects.
I think rather than striving to achieve a very 'dull' plasma, avoiding instability, like big Tokamaks do, using those instabilities in a converging self consistant way is the key to fusion.
This will probably require a two front attack, with iterative computer simulations and physical prototypes. One fascinating property of magnetized plasmas (such as cavitons) are that you create them, and then as you add energy they can evolve, changing parameters. A control system nightmare journey through chaos :-)
Which is why, as in some former posts, I suggest starting the plasmoids with high-energy pulses.
> Some ideas can be wrong and will never change
>like the real reason a airplane wing flies.
>(forces produced by air vortex's, not Bernoulli's
>equation)
For small insect and hummingbird wings, as I understand.
Scott