| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Joe Strout" |
| Date: |
26 Feb 2007 02:00:05 PM |
| Object: |
Robert Bussard's approach to fusion |
I just learned about this today... there's a company called EMC2, under
the leadership of Dr. Robert Bussard. His research and credentials go
way back, and I don't believe he's a con man. Anyway, they've been
developing an approach to fusion called inertial electrodynamic fusion.
In a nutshell, they produce a deep almost-spherical electrical
potential, by confining electrons with magnetic fields. They then drop
ions (e.g., of deuterium) into this potential well, where they
accelerate down to the center and collide, producing fusion.
This work was done under Navy contracts until 2005, and they weren't
allowed to publish technical details, but those contracts dried up and
now they're looking for other funding -- but they're also able to
publish their methods and results. It sounds very promising -- they've
achieved good levels of fusion on their small-scale machines, and worked
out pretty much all the details they need to build a full power plant.
Here's a presentation Bussard gave on the topic at Google:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1996321846673788606
And here's a paper on it:
http://www.askmar.com/ConferenceNotes/2006-9%20IAC%20Paper.pdf
Any reactions?
Best,
- Joe
.
|
|
| User: "Uncle Al" |
|
| Title: Re: Robert Bussard's approach to fusion |
26 Feb 2007 03:32:43 PM |
|
|
Joe Strout wrote:
I just learned about this today... there's a company called EMC2, under
the leadership of Dr. Robert Bussard. His research and credentials go
way back, and I don't believe he's a con man.
[snip]
Interstellar Bussard ramjets cannot work to relativistic speeds. They
are increasingly slowed by their stationary fuel intake. Local
Bussard rams are simply constructed in cylindrical symmetry as
Geiger-Muller tubes with their polarity reversed, internal gas fill of
deuterium plus a trace of methyl iodide, ramp up the voltage to
cascade breakdown, and add ionizing radiation. DOE evaluation of such
as facile cheap tritium sources (D-D fusion branching about equally to
He-3 and H-3) was damning. Back to neutron irradiating Al-Li alloy
rods in a reactor core.
Bussard is not necessarily a con man. He is empirically wrong.
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2
.
|
|
|
| User: "Joe Strout" |
|
| Title: Re: Robert Bussard's approach to fusion |
26 Feb 2007 04:50:12 PM |
|
|
In article <45E351FB.DBD8CC9C@hate.spam.net>,
Uncle Al <UncleAl0@hate.spam.net> wrote:
I just learned about this today... there's a company called EMC2, under
the leadership of Dr. Robert Bussard. His research and credentials go
way back, and I don't believe he's a con man.
[snip]
Interstellar Bussard ramjets cannot work to relativistic speeds.
Um, thanks. Anything to say about the topic of this thread, though?
Bussard is not necessarily a con man. He is empirically wrong.
If you're referring to his old ramscoop work, he clearly acknowledged
the limitations of the idea in his original paper, and admitted that it
probably wouldn't work in practice. However, I'm not asking about that;
I'm asking about his IEF program (see references in the original post in
this thread).
Best,
- Joe
.
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Al" |
|
| Title: Re: Robert Bussard's approach to fusion |
26 Feb 2007 07:39:37 PM |
|
|
Joe Strout wrote:
In article <45E351FB.DBD8CC9C@hate.spam.net>,
Uncle Al <UncleAl0@hate.spam.net> wrote:
I just learned about this today... there's a company called EMC2, under
the leadership of Dr. Robert Bussard. His research and credentials go
way back, and I don't believe he's a con man.
[snip]
Interstellar Bussard ramjets cannot work to relativistic speeds.
Um, thanks. Anything to say about the topic of this thread, though?
Bussard is not necessarily a con man. He is empirically wrong.
If you're referring to his old ramscoop work, he clearly acknowledged
the limitations of the idea in his original paper, and admitted that it
probably wouldn't work in practice. However, I'm not asking about that;
I'm asking about his IEF program (see references in the original post in
this thread).
Local Bussard rams are simply constructed in cylindrical symmetry as
Geiger-Muller tubes with their polarity reversed, internal gas fill of
deuterium plus a trace of methyl iodide, ramp up the voltage to
cascade breakdown, and add ionizing radiation. DOE evaluation of such
as facile cheap tritium sources (D-D fusion branching about equally to
He-3 and H-3) was damning. Back to neutron irradiating Al-Li alloy
rods in a reactor core.
Try not snipping the relevant reply.
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Robert Bussard's approach to fusion |
26 Feb 2007 09:03:41 PM |
|
|
On Feb 26, 5:39 pm, Uncle Al <Uncle...@hate.spam.net> wrote:
Joe Strout wrote:
In article <45E351FB.DBD8C...@hate.spam.net>,
Uncle Al <Uncle...@hate.spam.net> wrote:
I just learned about this today... there's a company called EMC2, under
the leadership of Dr. Robert Bussard. His research and credentials go
way back, and I don't believe he's a con man.
[snip]
Interstellar Bussard ramjets cannot work to relativistic speeds.
Um, thanks. Anything to say about the topic of this thread, though?
Bussard is not necessarily a con man. He is empirically wrong.
If you're referring to his old ramscoop work, he clearly acknowledged
the limitations of the idea in his original paper, and admitted that it
probably wouldn't work in practice. However, I'm not asking about that;
I'm asking about his IEF program (see references in the original post in
this thread).
Local Bussard rams are simply constructed in cylindrical symmetry as
Geiger-Muller tubes with their polarity reversed, internal gas fill of
deuterium plus a trace of methyl iodide, ramp up the voltage to
cascade breakdown, and add ionizing radiation. DOE evaluation of such
as facile cheap tritium sources (D-D fusion branching about equally to
He-3 and H-3) was damning. Back to neutron irradiating Al-Li alloy
rods in a reactor core.
Try not snipping the relevant reply.
Didn't look at the paper, didja?
This looks more like a Farnworth Fusor (and the paper references
Farnsworth, among others), except using dynamic magnetic fields
instead of DC electrostatic fields.
It suggests plain vanilla p-p fusion or p-Boron fusion, and appears
to show promise. Doesn't mention how pure the Boron has to be or the
(fuel) cost of obtaining it. Might manage breakeven or not.
Mark L. Fergerson
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert S" |
|
| Title: Re: Robert Bussard's approach to fusion |
27 Feb 2007 06:31:33 AM |
|
|
On Feb 27, 3:03 am, "n...@bid.ness" <Alien8...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Feb 26, 5:39 pm, Uncle Al <Uncle...@hate.spam.net> wrote:
Local Bussard rams are simply constructed in cylindrical symmetry as
Geiger-Muller tubes with their polarity reversed, internal gas fill of
deuterium plus a trace of methyl iodide, ramp up the voltage to
cascade breakdown, and add ionizing radiation. DOE evaluation of such
as facile cheap tritium sources (D-D fusion branching about equally to
He-3 and H-3) was damning. Back to neutron irradiating Al-Li alloy
rods in a reactor core.
Try not snipping the relevant reply.
Didn't look at the paper, didja?
This looks more like a Farnworth Fusor (and the paper references
Farnsworth, among others), except using dynamic magnetic fields
instead of DC electrostatic fields.
Magnetic fields which trap electrons which then give you electric
fields, as opposed to a metal grid giving an electrostatic field,
thereby eliminating the largest loss associated with the conventional
fusor, ion collisions with the grid.
Neray a ramjet in sight.
It suggests plain vanilla p-p fusion or p-Boron fusion, and appears
to show promise. Doesn't mention how pure the Boron has to be or the
(fuel) cost of obtaining it. Might manage breakeven or not.
According to the pdf, they have experimental evidence suggesting that
it becomes more efficient while scaling mag field, potential
difference and size, and that therefore any energy positive fusion
reaction could in theory be used.
I would have thought it would be worth spending some money on research
into this, given the billions being squandered on the ITER white
elephant.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Joe Strout" |
|
| Title: Re: Robert Bussard's approach to fusion |
27 Feb 2007 09:52:18 AM |
|
|
In article <1172579493.187317.177140@h3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
"Robert S" <roberts218e@gmail.com> wrote:
According to the pdf, they have experimental evidence suggesting that
it becomes more efficient while scaling mag field, potential
difference and size, and that therefore any energy positive fusion
reaction could in theory be used.
I would have thought it would be worth spending some money on research
into this, given the billions being squandered on the ITER white
elephant.
Yes, one would certainly think so. If they have even a small chance of
building a break-even fusion reactor for $150-$200M -- and their
experimental results to date certainly seem to support this -- then it
seems like a no-brainer to have them try. That's a very small
investment for the potential return.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Robert Bussard's approach to fusion |
23 Mar 2007 12:50:21 AM |
|
|
On Feb 27, 8:52 am, Joe Strout <j...@strout.net> wrote:
In article <1172579493.187317.177...@h3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
"Robert S" <roberts2...@gmail.com> wrote:
According to the pdf, they have experimental evidence suggesting that
it becomes more efficient while scaling mag field, potential
difference and size, and that therefore any energy positive fusion
reaction could in theory be used.
I would have thought it would be worth spending some money on research
into this, given the billions being squandered on the ITER white
elephant.
Yes, one would certainly think so. If they have even a small chance of
building a break-even fusion reactor for $150-$200M -- and their
experimental results to date certainly seem to support this -- then it
seems like a no-brainer to have them try. That's a very small
investment for the potential return.
Do you know how Bussard's approach addresses the concerns brought up
by this:
http://scitation.aip.org/getabs/servlet/GetabsServlet?prog=normal&id=PHPAEN000004000004001039000001&idtype=cvips&gifs=yes
research that suggests that non-equilibrium fusion is extremely
challenged?
I'd want to know the answer before I plunk down the $200M..
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Eagleson" |
|
| Title: Re: Robert Bussard's approach to fusion |
23 Mar 2007 08:02:27 AM |
|
|
On Feb 26, 4:00 pm, Joe Strout <j...@strout.net> wrote:
I just learned about this today... there's a company called EMC2, under
the leadership of Dr. Robert Bussard. His research and credentials go
way back, and I don't believe he's a con man. Anyway, they've been
developing an approach to fusion called inertial electrodynamic fusion.
In a nutshell, they produce a deep almost-spherical electrical
potential, by confining electrons with magnetic fields. They then drop
ions (e.g., of deuterium) into this potential well, where they
accelerate down to the center and collide, producing fusion.
This work was done under Navy contracts until 2005, and they weren't
allowed to publish technical details, but those contracts dried up and
now they're looking for other funding -- but they're also able to
publish their methods and results. It sounds very promising -- they've
achieved good levels of fusion on their small-scale machines, and worked
out pretty much all the details they need to build a full power plant.
Here's a presentation Bussard gave on the topic at Google:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1996321846673788606
And here's a paper on it:
http://www.askmar.com/ConferenceNotes/2006-9%20IAC%20Paper.pdf
Any reactions?
Best,
- Joe
A ram fusion source would have worked as a drive. Except certain
variables were not found.
Meaning a source of hydrogen was not present.
A basic theory as the drive was well formed. I liked the exposition,
then was trying, to one-up the design and found it real hard to do
original thinking.
So many years later I finally figured out a design to compete. I have
posted the real one earlier, that makes about 10% of light speed.
So I am a bin ther done that kind of thinker.
I never allowed esoteric drive designs as a rule because energy is
dangerous to handle and to make dense energy requires all sorts of
plasmas and such. mY real drive is a REAL magnetic monopole. It turns
out that atleast in theory artifical magnetic monopoles can be tricked
out of nature.
That said here is a fun design that takes the limit of true theory to
the limit.
A single relation has to be considered and found true for this
design. And it is untested and not easy to refute.
Here is the data.
A f as the shape of the plasma has to effect. And this is new fangled
symmetry theory.
Given that here is the design:
It is just a fancy idea.
"A space as the equilibrium, meaning that location where c appears
equilibium a."
So a symmetry symbol effect on the kind of space defined. Equilibrium
space is a real necessary logical step in my thinking without physical
meaning. It allows all inertial frames to have relative direction.
This is just gerberish because I am just going to state the fancy
iddea with caveotes.
The only allowed symbol to effect would then be- A train.
Abstract relative appearance. Highly contentious but maybe? Can the
symbol effect all frames? I use the term symbol as logical transform
only.
Given the postulate of inertial frame effect, and not just frame
relative existence as second inference may be applied! This is like
postulating that a force developes between frames of reference and not
just bodies withing the frame.
Maybe there is such a space. It has not been tested.
Given a, an exact relation of our symbol may allow theorectical
apppearance of non-conservation. Our symbol is a simple logcial
transform that relates forces found in ALL train frames.
And to test effect as such is the first step. So to design this
machine required a test. And space is huge! As a spiritual man I
believe us living in never ending mystery and wonder. Empty space
just might be a living place for people.
SO the first test was the tacyon. Can things exist!
And to detect them was the easy part. Do systems exist where anomally
appears to violate conservation? And the data point was a meson.
Just take the data. A cause to charge as effect required charge
conservation cause to be assigned. And the cause was found
anomalous. I dispense with charge anomaly by reducing the breath or
extent of ocmpleted theory.
We can not accurately predict the size or charge of matter appearing.
We can only predict the relative force with each occurance! So I use
a small non-cosmology quantum theory. None of the Big Bang new
universe logic is entailed.
Just good old fashion momenta statment in a background. And the space
I refer to is called the fixed background frame of ALL inertial
systems. It has a property of only existing to state force direction.
And to make it a frame causes it to exhibit matter property. So I
allow one step into the land of conjectuer.
I will restart the post soon.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
