"The verdict is positive"

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

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

JoeStrout
Site Admin
Posts: 271
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 7:40 pm
Location: Fort Collins, CO, USA
Contact:

"The verdict is positive"

Postby JoeStrout » Tue Dec 16, 2008 11:52 pm

Please see Alan Boyle's latest report on EMC2's progress, "Fusion We Can Believe In?"

The team has turned in its final report, and it's been double-checked by a peer-review panel, Nebel told me today. Although he couldn't go into the details, he said the verdict was positive.


Finally, some news!

Cheers,
- Joe
Joe Strout
Talk-Polywell.org site administrator

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

Postby Aero » Wed Dec 17, 2008 12:14 am

That's good news! Hey everyone, the review is over! :D
Do you think we can get some information to help our theory forum?
Last edited by Aero on Wed Dec 17, 2008 12:15 am, edited 1 time in total.
Aero

Nanos
Posts: 341
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 8:57 pm
Location: Treasure Island

Postby Nanos » Wed Dec 17, 2008 12:15 am

I wonder when we might get more details.

spaccemonkey
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 3:26 pm

review

Postby spaccemonkey » Wed Dec 17, 2008 12:16 am

I don't suppose that anyone has any information on when the results of the wb7 will be published? Did they attempt fusion, or was this just a test of the confinement? So many questions, so little data. I'd like to just know if this is reasonable or not, do we have a new fusser with no possibility of break even or can we finally get enough clean power? ( I realize that even in a best case model, the latter statement is pie-in-the-sky.)

I've dreamed of a fission powered future my whole life, and it's broken my heart at every turn... still it's a lot cooler than a jet pack.

Shubedobedubopbopbedo
Posts: 62
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 9:38 pm

Postby Shubedobedubopbopbedo » Wed Dec 17, 2008 12:25 am

So Nebel's results were not unambiguous. For the next step in his research I would focus on eliminating the ambiguity. After all, there were many versions and iterations of tokamaks built to understand what was going on inside them. There are countless phenomena unique to tokamaks, and I expect there may be similar phenomena unique to the polywell design as well.

I would give the go-ahead for more experiments. Particularly for measuring devices that yield more data about the plasma while it is running.

There should be a way to verify Bussard's scaling rule by running the same wiffleball device at different power levels and field strengths. But like I said, better devices need to be used to determine what is going on with certainty and high precision.

just_an_observer
Posts: 21
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2008 1:39 pm

NOw that's a nice Christmas present

Postby just_an_observer » Wed Dec 17, 2008 12:27 am

NOw that's a nice Christmas present

icarus
Posts: 819
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 12:48 am

Postby icarus » Wed Dec 17, 2008 12:37 am

I must object to the Polywell following being described as "cult-like".

Bussard was a top class scientist and there are good legitimate reasons why this might work.

Now Tokomak fusions pushers have blundered on with little but blind faith that they can stabilise their plasma trubulence for over 4 decades, all evidence to the contrary, how is that not cult-like.

JoeStrout
Site Admin
Posts: 271
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 7:40 pm
Location: Fort Collins, CO, USA
Contact:

Postby JoeStrout » Wed Dec 17, 2008 1:17 am

icarus wrote:I must object to the Polywell following being described as "cult-like".


It doesn't seem to me that it was. The "cult following" was a reference to the fusor community — but the polywell is not a fusor (and the failure of Seife to understand the distinction just indicates to me that he hasn't looked into it very deeply).

My $0.02,
— Joe
Joe Strout

Talk-Polywell.org site administrator

icarus
Posts: 819
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 12:48 am

Postby icarus » Wed Dec 17, 2008 2:05 am

Joe: it was this paragraph that got me going.

The idea is still way out of the mainstream, however. In his new book about the frustrating fusion quest, "Sun in a Bottle," Charles Seife says that WB-7 and similar contraptions, known generically as fusors, aren't good candidates for power-generating fusion - even though they've attracted "something of a cult following."


Seems like words like "contraptions" and "cult" are easy to throw around but people who are willing to explain, using quantitative physics why Bussard was wrong are thin on the ground. Run the numbers, do the tests and let the chips fall where they may.

Good news all in all I suppose. Even better if we get some data to feed into our Open Source Theory effort though.

I wonder what size will the proposed new test bed be?

Jeff Peachman
Posts: 69
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 2:47 pm

Postby Jeff Peachman » Wed Dec 17, 2008 2:31 am

woo-hoo!
- Jeff Peachman

rj40
Posts: 288
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 2:31 am
Location: Southern USA

Postby rj40 » Wed Dec 17, 2008 3:46 am

This sounds like good news. However, I thought the next step was to just go for it and build the net power machine. The report seems to say that Nebel has backed off of that. Still good news.

djolds1
Posts: 1296
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 8:03 am

Postby djolds1 » Wed Dec 17, 2008 5:29 am

icarus wrote:I must object to the Polywell following being described as "cult-like".

Perfect phrasing if you're trying to discredit a start up challenger.

Which programs provide Seife's paychecks? Whose ox is being gored is always the question to ask.

JoeStrout wrote:The "cult following" was a reference to the fusor community — but the polywell is not a fusor (and the failure of Seife to understand the distinction just indicates to me that he hasn't looked into it very deeply).

Rider's flawed IEC analysis has made the rounds.

Duane
Vae Victis

choff
Posts: 2431
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 5:02 am
Location: Vancouver, Canada

Postby choff » Wed Dec 17, 2008 6:07 am

Happiness, they probably want to build a test machine that can be run steady state to definitely prove it will work, since WB7 only runs in bursts.
I will have to forego the sacrifice of my firstborn, just to satisfy the critics of Polywell. Anybody hear of a company called General Fusion, in this months Popular Science mag. They're building a fusion reactor that will run like a diesel.
CHoff

djolds1
Posts: 1296
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 8:03 am

Postby djolds1 » Wed Dec 17, 2008 8:09 am

choff wrote:I will have to forego the sacrifice of my firstborn, just to satisfy the critics of Polywell.

Let's hold off on that. Blood sacrifice can be powerful, and may still prove necessary.

choff wrote:Anybody hear of a company called General Fusion, in this months Popular Science mag. They're building a fusion reactor that will run like a diesel.

http://www.generalfusion.com/t5_general_fusion.php

Interesting MTF variation. Elegant, simple and possibly scalable.
Vae Victis

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

Postby MSimon » Wed Dec 17, 2008 11:18 am

I don't mind being part of a cult. After all the evidence of the potential was rather thin on the ground when the "promoting" started.

And so far the evidence is still rather thin.

All we know now is that WB-6 has been confirmed. What we don't know is - can it be scaled to a power producer. And for that we need WB-8 (what I used to call WB-7x) a continuous operation machine maybe several of them about the size of WB-7.

Thanks to Doc B, Tom Ligon, Rick Nebel, Joe Strout, Roger Fox, Indrek, Mark of Ask Mark, Art Carlson (who keeps us honest), Alan Boyle, Instapundit, and all the others who have joined in to make the next step possible.

The cult has gained a following.

Yeeeeeeee Haaaaaaaaaaaa!
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.


Return to “News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests