TallDave wrote:
I gave you two numbers. You haven't told me how many neutrons toks can produce for $2M and $8M. If the number is zero (i.e. can't be done) then Polywell wins at those dollar values.
The 'START' experiment (the forerunner and progenitor to MAST) was, I am lead to believe, around the 1e9 neutrons/s (~1mW fusion power) for GBP100k. I could be wrong on the neutron rate, but I'll stand to be corrected...
Why is this some sort of competition to you? I'd prefer both systems to work out, and in very short order they will compete and one will win or both will find some sort of niche. Both are getting adequate funding at this time.
Now you're just being silly. 100K doesn't even pay for a design or people to operate it.
I'll need a link.
It's not so much the competition, it's just silly to compare cost per neutron in systems of vastly different sizes where exponential power scaling applies.
For the record, I'll say the same thing if we get 100MW from WB-9 and people start comparing neutron counts favorably to small FRC or dpf devices.
Last edited by TallDave on Mon Feb 15, 2010 9:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
n*kBolt*Te = B**2/(2*mu0) and B^.25 loss scaling? Or not so much? Hopefully we'll know soon...
You're the one being silly. The Sun provides the earth with 180PW of power. If Polywell really could achieve an exponential improvement of 3oom/$1M then that'd mean for just $6million more it could generate more power than is delivered in solar radiation to the whole of the earth.... now who's talking silly??
For another $4 million, $13 million total, you could have a Polywell that generates more power than our entire Sun.
Last edited by chrismb on Mon Feb 15, 2010 9:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
TallDave wrote:I already told you no used equipment. It's the cost to build.
You say a lot of things that you said, but I can't see what you said. You've repeatedly made claims in this thread that jsut aren't supported by anything at all.
I'm outta here. You're only going to get sycophants and cult-followers soaking up what you're blithering on about. I was trying to give you a rationalised debate, but I see I've just wasted my time this evening.
Yes, yes, take your ball and go home. You're not the irrational one making unsupported claims.
If anyone knows what the cheapest tokamaks actually produce, I'd like to know. Maybe they do outperform WB-6/7/8, I don't really know. Maybe DPF or FRC do, too. I'm only insisting that we compare like investments and not pretend the relationship is linear.
n*kBolt*Te = B**2/(2*mu0) and B^.25 loss scaling? Or not so much? Hopefully we'll know soon...
TallDave wrote:
Oh for God's sake, be serious! You can't spend $1B building something, sell it for $10M, and then say "Look how great it works for $10M!"
All they "gained" was an old cylindrical vacuum manufacturing vessel (that co-incidentally happened to suit, a tight aspect ratio) and use of some electrical gear. The rest was in the 100k budget. I'm sure they could've done it on new kit for 200k.
TallDave wrote: I'm only insisting that we compare like investments and not pretend the relationship is linear.
But you can't say *it's not linear* then not say what you think it is!
Why do you keep contradicting me? Why can't you defend youself against my complaints on your, supposed, *arguments*? No numbers, no data, nothing.
I come here for a good argument, and all you do is contradict me;
Bussard: Chris, after reading your posts about cost per neutron I'm convinced this technology is worthless. I'm giving up. Here, you can have the deed to all Polywell tech, which shall be yours until such time as it produces a cost per neutron exceeding tokamaks.
chrismb: Well, congrats on finally acknowledging the inevitable. There's my signature, I'll call the trash haulers tomorrow.
Bussard: Aha! Not so fast. You just accepted all the equipment for free! By your own argument, this means the cost per neutron from Polywell is infinite, and Polywell is mine again! Mwahahahaha!
chrismb: What? Clearly you've become irrational. I'm out of here.
n*kBolt*Te = B**2/(2*mu0) and B^.25 loss scaling? Or not so much? Hopefully we'll know soon...
But you can't say *it's not linear* then not say what you think it is!
Yes I can (as I said we don't really know), but anyway I said (or at least implied) it was probably some unknown exponential within that range. It probably turns logarithmic at the top (i.e. beyond a certain number of dollars returns are low). The important point is everyone agrees it isn't linear.
Why do you keep contradicting me? Why can't you defend youself against my complaints on your, supposed, *arguments*? No numbers, no data, nothing
What is this babbling nonsense? I've put out more numbers than you have. You've claimed a 100,000GBP machine with no support at the page you linked. You've made vague complaints that blame me for the results of your equations after I've said they probably don't work. In short, your arguments have been terrible. Now, if we can get back to the actual argument itself...
I'm still open to the idea toks outperform Polywells at low funding levels (it actually wouldn't surprise me since PW is supposed to scale better). I just haven't seen any evidence yet.
n*kBolt*Te = B**2/(2*mu0) and B^.25 loss scaling? Or not so much? Hopefully we'll know soon...
