reddit: We are nuclear fusion researchers, ask us anything

[Joseph Chikva]

P fusion ∝ β^2 B^4 R^3 (5)

This product if admitting that β is not constant daramaticaly differs from considering here product B^4 R^3.
As in any device β is a function of many parameters and varies from 0 to 1.
And when β=0 Pfusion=0 too.
For your reference poloidal β in TOKAMAK is rather high while toroidal field is applied there for improving stability.

And here I see the groundless statements of people about absolute plasma stability in the device as though they have as confinement object not plasma but solid state.
I would believe to those people including for example Dr. Nebel if they would say that as result of theoretical and experimental investigations the certain stability area has been found. And in that area β value from 0.6 to 0.8 can be achieved. As this and this types of instabilities can be damped with the help of this and this ways. And they (instabilities) have acceptable scale. But such an unconditional statement that a beta is equally to 1 in all range of operating conditions is lightly and very unworthy. As turbulence and instabilities even if they have not catastrophic scale are in existence in any plasma device.

Once I wrote here such an analogy.
Let's imagine swimming pool filled to the edges with absolutely quiet water. This is a plasma device with a beta equally to 1.
As soon as there in this pool will appear waves, water will start to overflow and volume taken by water in a quiet condition excluding the water overflow will be less than pool’s volume. And will be dependent on intensity of waves. And only that will be a real β value.

[mvanwink5]

Joseph,
It is my understanding that for convex magnetic fields (such as those employed by polywell), expanding the plasma sphere pushes the plasma into an area of higher B field. That means that constraining forces will increase if your water sloshes in your pool. This is different than in a Tokamak, where a good slosh will see a weaker B field, and hence an instability in containment.
Best regards

[Joseph Chikva]

Joseph,
It is my understanding that for convex magnetic fields (such as those employed by polywell), expanding the plasma sphere pushes the plasma into an area of higher B field. That means that constraining forces will increase if your water sloshes in your pool. This is different than in a Tokamak, where a good slosh will see a weaker B field, and hence an instability in containment.
Best regards

You are talking about the so called " minimum B principle" that was very popular in 70s of last century. By which plasma having diamagnetic properties is retracted in the area with a smaller field while stronger field presses it out from outside.

If to recall history I can say that for example comparing two toroidal devices: TOKAMAK and Stellarator, namely Stellarator creates minimum B in plasma volume while poloidal field outside plasma is stronger and toroidal is comparatively uniform for both devices.
Despite this TOKAMAKs always showed better confinement.

I do not know Polywell’s history well as think that Polywell has not proved yet that it is worthy for studying its history. But I a little bit aware with common fusion history. Not well too though.

Best regards,

[WizWom]

Once again: Polywell does not attempt to confine with the magnetic fields. They only serve to protect the surface of the true electrostatic repulsion confinement.

[Joseph Chikva]

Once again: Polywell does not attempt to confine with the magnetic fields. They only serve to protect the surface of the true electrostatic repulsion confinement.

Once again. You are wrong. Talking about beta therefore your are talking about magnetic confinement concept. In ideal case only electron spices, but after thrmalization reacting ions as well and certainly alpha ash. All mentioned three spices create partial pressure that should be balanced by magnetic pressure.

[KitemanSA]

It is funny to hear (read) that 5 generations of devices were unsuccessful but then beginning from 6-th generation plasma in that type of device is free from any turbulences and instabilities.

It is more funny to hear from you why you think the earlier machines were, "unsuccessful".

I did nat say that before Kiteman did not said that "WB6 is the first successful". And too bad that I do not know Polywell's history.
From this I came to the conclusion that WB1...WB5 were unsuccessful. Simple logic.
Best regards,

Joe and Ladajo,
That "unsuccessful" lable is MY determination of the results from the earlier versions. My determining factor for "success" is "reasonably meeting expectations", which the first many didn't really do, WAY too many losses. Is wasn't until the conformal can / gap "AHAH!!!" occured that the next unit (WB6) started acting like was expected. SUCCESS!!!

If your definition of success is "learned a whole bunch o stuff and MAY have made a bit of fusion" then many of the earlier units were "successful" too.

K?

By the way, Joe,
No one has stated that the earlier machines HAD turbulences and instabilities, so no one suggested that they were "beginning from 6th generation" suddenly free from it. The AHAH was why they kept getting greatly more electron losses than they expected.

The turbulences and instabilities still seem to appear only in your imagination.

[Joseph Chikva]

The turbulences and instabilities still seem to appear only in your imagination.

Only in my imagination? Does plasma in Polywell cease to be the statistical substance consisting of a set of particles interacting among themselves? Do you exclude possibility of emergence of any fluctuations? And if they arise, what mechanism of their suppression? Can they develop and develop into instability which are fed by energy of applied field and injected beams? As in other devices and on the Sun plasma behaves in such a manner. Have Dr. Bussard found a magic spell?

[KitemanSA]

The turbulences and instabilities still seem to appear only in your imagination.

Only in my imagination? Does plasma in Polywell cease to be the statistical substance consisting of a set of particles interacting among themselves? Do you exclude possibility of emergence of any fluctuations? And if they arise, what mechanism of their suppression? Can they develop and develop into instability which are fed by energy of applied field and injected beams? As in other devices and on the Sun plasma behaves in such a manner. Have Dr. Bussard found a magic spell?

Joe,
Please choose a point for your argument and stick to it or let folks know you are changing it.

All your prior communications seemed to imply that "turbulences and instabilities" somehow invalidate the concept of Polywell. Now you talk about "any fluxtuations".

Air flowing over a wing has "fluxtuations". Even LAMINAR flow has fluxuations. And even minor TURBULENT flow still allows a wing to work. Where it becomes a problem is when you get to "stall" conditions. Stall is an instability.

As far as I have seen, Polywell has no more "instabilities" than does a leaky balloon until you over-fill it (beta>1).

[Joseph Chikva]

Instabilities grow up from fluxtuations and are fed from external energy. Even damping they are not dissapiaring but only may have acceptable scale. And because of it I do not believe you and for example Dr. Nebel whey you talk about possibility for Polywell to run at beta=1. "beta>1" means particles losses decresing number density.
And as you know well (I see) fusion power is proportional to square of number density.

[ladajo]

Once again you prove that you refuse or cannot be bothered to read pertinant references and citations to the topic at hand. How can you expect anyone to take anything you say seriously?

If you wish, please, at your leisure, visit the EMC2Fusion.org website. Scroll to the bottom, and look for the link for "history". While you are at it, you could also hit the link for the 2006 IAC paper. And, if you are really feeling adventurous, you can click and read the "findings" link.
If you ever find time to read them let us know. Until then, anything you say will probably make no sense.

I would provide you the actual links, but given I have done it a number of times, I can no longer be bothered.

Simple choice. Continued uninformed arguments on your part making you look silly, ...or not.

Say slowly..."Magnetic Inertial Electrostatic Confinement"...

[Joseph Chikva]

Once again you prove that you refuse or cannot be bothered to read pertinant references and citations to the topic at hand. How can you expect anyone to take anything you say seriously?

If you wish, please, at your leisure, visit the EMC2Fusion.org website. Scroll to the bottom, and look for the link for "history". While you are at it, you could also hit the link for the 2006 IAC paper. And, if you are really feeling adventurous, you can click and read the "findings" link.
If you ever find time to read them let us know. Until then, anything you say will probably make no sense.

I would provide you the actual links, but given I have done it a number of times, I can no longer be bothered.

Simple choice. Continued uninformed arguments on your part making you look silly, ...or not.

Say slowly..."Magnetic Inertial Electrostatic Confinement"...

I do not know Polywell’s history well as think that Polywell has not proved yet that it is worthy for studying its history. But I a little bit aware with common fusion history.

By the way, for example Mr. Kahuna knows very well Rossi's ecat history, Dekfalion and other companies of the same scale.

[Ivy Matt]

Possibly, but I'd say Rossi's skeptics tend to have better memories. In fact, our resident E-Cat alternate historian practically accused us of that fact. But you can't remember what you haven't read, and it has become apparent that you haven't read about where WB≤5 went wrong (or rather, where WB-6 went right. Hint: WB-6 was no larger than WB-4 and actually smaller than WB-5).

(I might also note, for history's sake, that the one Talk-Polyweller who bothered to criticize your proposed confinement method was also a strong critic of the Polywell as well, albeit for different reasons. And now he's no longer around to argue with you.)

[KitemanSA]

Instabilities grow up from fluxtuations and are fed from external energy. Even damping they are not dissapiaring but only may have acceptable scale. And because of it I do not believe you and for example Dr. Nebel whey you talk about possibility for Polywell to run at beta=1. "beta>1" means particles losses decresing number density.
And as you know well (I see) fusion power is proportional to square of number density.

Joe,
Would it make you happy if I said beta almost 1; a heck of a lot closer to 1 than any tok or other toroidal mag field "confinement scheme; so close to one as the really NOT MAKE ANY APPRECIABLE DIFFERENCE; but not EXACTLY 1?

[hanelyp]

Looked up a stat on tokamaks for comparison. from http://www.toodlepip.com/tokamak/records.htm
Highest beta achieved in a tokamak (40%) START, UK

Most such devices operate at far lower beta. Compare to near 100% beta for a polywell.

[Betruger]

Once again you prove that you refuse or cannot be bothered to read pertinant references and citations to the topic at hand. How can you expect anyone to take anything you say seriously?

If you wish, please, at your leisure, visit the EMC2Fusion.org website. Scroll to the bottom, and look for the link for "history". While you are at it, you could also hit the link for the 2006 IAC paper. And, if you are really feeling adventurous, you can click and read the "findings" link.
If you ever find time to read them let us know. Until then, anything you say will probably make no sense.

I would provide you the actual links, but given I have done it a number of times, I can no longer be bothered.

Simple choice. Continued uninformed arguments on your part making you look silly, ...or not.

Say slowly..."Magnetic Inertial Electrostatic Confinement"...

I do not know Polywell’s history well as think that Polywell has not proved yet that it is worthy for studying its history. But I a little bit aware with common fusion history.

By the way, for example Mr. Kahuna knows very well Rossi's ecat history, Dekfalion and other companies of the same scale.

That right there is as good as putting hands to ears and going...