Fusion Gene

[KJbushway]

who knows someone can make a small working one in their garage and become billionares.

 

[Bill Morris]

The Polywell approach is good. If the tokamak configuratioin and the polywell configuration were to both be successfullly developed and built, polywell would be better, since it would be hugely cheaper to produce and make a huge difference in the world economy and environmenal issues, especially global warming, plus (as I mentioned before) it can be configured as an excellent fusion rocket motor for interplanatary use and has a minimum size of only 5 feet in diameter, which would make the NASA planners very happy.

Here's the Web site of EMC2 Development Corporation, run by the top physicists Dr. Bussard left in charge when he passed away:

http://emc2fusion.org/

And here's the Talk Polywell forum, which has many highly qualified members, and on which the physicists in charge of the project also post:

http://www.talk-polywell.org/bb/index.php

 

[KJbushway]

They seem to mention in the very beginning that electron's escaping are a bad thing. Which I always thought was a bad thing, but in this forum someone said that it wasn't a real problem.
Second. They also seem to have a problem with both the magnetic config and electron reversal, where the electrons hit the magentic fields and reverse or pass through until they hit a different magnetic field.

 

[KJbushway]

I was reading around and this is what I found.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-9866626-54.html
whats your opinion?

 

[Bill Morris]

Electron leakage was the theoretical argument against it. When one of Dr. Bussard's prototypes demonstrated that the problem was solved, the U.S. Navy put up the money to build another prototype to show that it wasn't a fluke. The first one to demostrate no leakage was built on such a tight budget that it didn't have enough insulation to protect its own components. Extensive tests were done on the next prototype, and indeed the data, scrutinized by Navy scientiests with months of testing, confirm that that problem, the only real scientific argument against polywell reactors, has been addressed. But the Navy still has mousetraps in its pockets and hasn't coughed up enough for a full-scale model. Hopefully, it will be built, but money has been tight in past few years. But still, they could build it for real and still have some unforeseen problem. There are no guarantees, but it sure seems worth gambiling $200 million on, considering the huge payoff it if works, not so much for the Navy, who just wants it to power ships, but for the whole world. The Navy is still spoonfeeding them a few million a year, and the smart boys are doing the best they can on a shoestring budget, mostly designing and redesigning on paper.

 

[KJbushway]

They say you need to spend money to make money.
My theory is look at the sun. Its the closest thing to a perfect fusion generator. Why not try it.

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

They say you need to spend money to make money.
My theory is look at the sun. Its the closest thing to a perfect fusion generator. Why not try it.

Indeed, but in the sense of using space-based solar collectors and microwave downlinks.

 

[Bill Morris]

Well, I explained before on this forum how to use the Sun, in orbit with an array of large sausage-shaped boPET balloons transparant on one side and reflective on the interior of the other, to concentrate sunlight in the center and power a laser to mass-produce positrons (since 1-mm gold plate emits a shower of positrons if zapped with a strong laser) and store them in magnetic bottles to fuel moon shuttles, etc.

 

[sojourner]

The sun's version of fusion is great for generating heat and light, not so much for generating electricity.

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

Probably the opinion of too many scientists and engineers who have their careers invested in a technology that's going nowhere fast.

 

[KJbushway]

Don't know about that. I know that fusion is fusion, yes different forms but all produce energy in some manner wether from just coronal ejections or other means. I wasn't fully able to complete that last post of mine talking about looking at the sun becuase its a huge fusion factory. I meant as far as looking at the sun and using it as an example for what to use.

 

[Bill Morris]

Here's an interesting theory about how the Sun accomplishes fusion from someone with very impressive credentials:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/10640850/110120 Neutron repulsion.pdf

And discussion about it here:

http://www.talk-polywell.org/bb/viewtopic.php?t=2856

By the way, the person with the username MSimon in that discussison forum is a highly qualified physicist and part of the polywell team.

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

^Those ideas are so contrary to the established theories that it's little wonder that the originator has a hard time getting a hearing. It'll take a lot more evidence, theoretical backup, and falsifiable predictions than that brief review article provides. To me, the notion of the Sun having a neutron star at its core and being powered by neutron repulsion seems extremely unlikely for the reasons mentioned in the discussion thread. However, my physics and maths skills are so atrophied now that I wouldn't be sure where to begin demolishing the proposition comprehensively.