North Korean Fusion

Point out news stories, on the net or in mainstream media, related to polywell fusion.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

MSimon
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

North Korean Fusion

Postby MSimon » Wed May 12, 2010 4:47 am

*

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/ar ... WMwegltEaw

*

No mention of the type of device.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

bennmann
Posts: 227
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 5:56 pm
Location: Southeast US

Postby bennmann » Wed May 12, 2010 5:52 am

Wouldn't that be ironic.

This thought made me literally LOL:

Does North Korea have a FOIA?

MSimon
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Wed May 12, 2010 6:53 am

It would be very ironic if they were doing Polywell or DPF type experiments.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

MSimon
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Wed May 12, 2010 6:57 am

http://www.seattlepi.com/national/1104a ... usion.html

Experts, however, doubted the North's claim.

"Nuclear fusion reaction is not something that can be done so simple. It's very difficult," said Hyeon Park, a physics professor at Postech, a top science and technology university in South Korea.

Park, who conducts fusion research in South Korea, said the North may have succeeded in making a plasma device and produced plasma, a hot cloud of supercharged particles - only one preliminary step toward achieving fusion.

He said outside experts need to know the scale of the experiment and method of generating plasma to assess the details of the North's claim.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

bcglorf
Posts: 436
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 2:58 pm

North Korean Powergrid

Postby bcglorf » Wed May 12, 2010 1:17 pm

Hmm, I have my doubts about North Korea's claims about revolutionizing the world's power generation. Let's all remember what the North Korean 'revolution' looks like so far, from space:

Image

TallDave
Posts: 3114
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 7:12 pm
Contact:

Postby TallDave » Wed May 12, 2010 2:49 pm

Does North Korea have a FOIA?


Yes, but over there it stands for Fire On Individual Asking.
n*kBolt*Te = B**2/(2*mu0) and B^.25 loss scaling? Or not so much? Hopefully we'll know soon...

Aero
Posts: 1200
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 4:36 am
Location: 92111

Postby Aero » Wed May 12, 2010 3:32 pm

TallDave wrote:
Does North Korea have a FOIA?


Yes, but over there it stands for Fire On Individual Asking.


No, it's "Fire On Idiot Asking." :lol:
Aero

Aeronaut
Posts: 58
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 11:36 am
Location: West Michigan
Contact:

Postby Aeronaut » Wed May 12, 2010 3:56 pm

Remember, international experts think D-T and have no job security in return for producing fusion before 2030, let alone putting DEMO online.

NK, however, seems to have a lot to gain by making an aneutronic DPF work, since that's the cheapest and possibly the fastest set of experiments.
The Power To Get Things Done

D Tibbets
Posts: 2775
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 6:52 am

Postby D Tibbets » Wed May 12, 2010 8:32 pm

Aeronaut wrote:Remember, international experts think D-T and have no job security in return for producing fusion before 2030, let alone putting DEMO online.

NK, however, seems to have a lot to gain by making an aneutronic DPF work, since that's the cheapest and possibly the fastest set of experiments.


Yes, from my limited understanding of what Learner is doing, the demonstration of at least near breakeven P-B11 fusion in a DPF can be pursued on a shoe string budget, both in cost and resources needed. Of course pursuing this to a useful product is another matter. But, N. Korea certainly is capable of focusing on a project and does not suffer from competing viewpoints getting in the way. And, N. Korea certainly likes to brag and that motive alone is enough for them to try something*.

The statement from the S. Korean 'expert' is silly. Plasmas are exceeding easy to create. All you need is fluorescent light, or a grape and a microwave oven. And brief perusal of the fusor community demonstrates how easy it is to do real fusion with deuterium. And, despite it's shortfalls, N. Korea has succeeded (with outside help) in accomplishing the difficult task of developing an atomic bomb.

*The pursuit of something for bragging rights is not necessarily a bad thing. It drove the Space race in the 1960's and it is what athletes do every day.

Dan Tibbets
To error is human... and I'm very human.

Giorgio
Posts: 2693
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 6:15 pm
Location: China, Italy

Postby Giorgio » Thu May 13, 2010 6:06 am

Actually N. Korea is still very far away from producing a nuclear bomb, they did some enrichment, but their last nuclear tests was not even near the power of a nuclear bomb, but more near to a "dirty" bomb.

Than, like you said, bragging about something will push them or someone else to prove or disprove what they brag about, and any tiny help to push the interest on alternate fusion systems is something that is wellcome.

Tom Ligon
Posts: 1870
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 1:23 am
Location: Northern Virginia
Contact:

Postby Tom Ligon » Tue May 18, 2010 6:42 pm

As vague as their statements are, everything they claim would be consistent with them building a Hirsch Farnsworth fusor. I am certain this is well within their capabilities. It would prove they are technologically on par with high school students in the free world.

KitemanSA
Posts: 6114
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Postby KitemanSA » Tue May 18, 2010 9:22 pm

Ouch!

IntLibber
Posts: 747
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 3:28 pm

Postby IntLibber » Mon Jun 14, 2010 2:16 pm

Giorgio wrote:Actually N. Korea is still very far away from producing a nuclear bomb, they did some enrichment, but their last nuclear tests was not even near the power of a nuclear bomb, but more near to a "dirty" bomb.

Than, like you said, bragging about something will push them or someone else to prove or disprove what they brag about, and any tiny help to push the interest on alternate fusion systems is something that is wellcome.


What are you smoking. They certainly have tested a fission bomb, twice at least, so far.

I agree they haven't produced a fusion bomb yet.

ladajo
Posts: 6204
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: North East Coast

Postby ladajo » Mon Jun 14, 2010 3:44 pm

IntLibber wrote:
Giorgio wrote:Actually N. Korea is still very far away from producing a nuclear bomb, they did some enrichment, but their last nuclear tests was not even near the power of a nuclear bomb, but more near to a "dirty" bomb.

Than, like you said, bragging about something will push them or someone else to prove or disprove what they brag about, and any tiny help to push the interest on alternate fusion systems is something that is wellcome.


What are you smoking. They certainly have tested a fission bomb, twice at least, so far.

I agree they haven't produced a fusion bomb yet.


Success of the tests is subjective.
They have built devices and attempted full yield. Percentage of yield seems to be the issue. Strong fast fizzles? Muted Pops? Not sure how you would classify it.

Giorgio
Posts: 2693
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 6:15 pm
Location: China, Italy

Postby Giorgio » Mon Jun 14, 2010 3:53 pm

IntLibber wrote:
Giorgio wrote:Actually N. Korea is still very far away from producing a nuclear bomb, they did some enrichment, but their last nuclear tests was not even near the power of a nuclear bomb, but more near to a "dirty" bomb.

Than, like you said, bragging about something will push them or someone else to prove or disprove what they brag about, and any tiny help to push the interest on alternate fusion systems is something that is wellcome.


What are you smoking. They certainly have tested a fission bomb, twice at least, so far.

I agree they haven't produced a fusion bomb yet.



First - You are confusing between a nuclear TEST and a nuclear BOMB.
Something is building a device able to create a suitable environment for a nuclear fission, something else is having the knowledge, the technicians and the equipment to reduce it to fit inside a bomb.
A quick google search should help you to clarify this difference.


Second - There is no proof until now that the two test explosions was produced from a nuclear fission, the odds are that it was standard explosive:
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/s ... 934/1499-a



Third - Even if (and that is a big IF) it was a nuclear fission detonation, the estimated yield (from the seismic activity monitoring stations) gave indications of less than 1 KTon for first test and a couple of KTon for second test.
This is way off the 20Kton yield of the Hiroshima event.


Fourth - I do not smoke, it's not healthy.


Return to “News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 3 guests