Page 2 of 9
Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2008 4:38 pm
Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2008 9:06 pm
Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2008 9:25 pm
Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2008 9:33 pm
Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 12:40 am
Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 2:51 am
Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 3:43 am
Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 12:48 pm
Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 2:50 pm
Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 3:35 pm
You guys are amazing. The theory of this machine is really weak, but the experimental data is non-existent. The only positive data you have is a number of neutrons that I can count on my fingers. A reactor will have to produce around 10^30 neutrons. ZETA produced millions of neutrons per pulse in the 50's. People got excited about this, but it turned out they were irrelevant because they were not coming from the plasma. I haven't even seen a calculation telling me that 2 neutrons per pulse from a polywell is a lot. Maybe we should be expecting thousands, but the experiments are a dismal failure.
But we digress. The purpose of this thread was to discuss whether there is any reason at all to expect ion convergence. Or have you decided if theory is against you you'll just circle up your eight neutrons and try to wait out the Indians? Some parts of polywell theory are complex, perhaps hopelessly so. This isn't one of them.
Does anyone see any reason to expect the equi-potential surfaces to have irregularities in the radius of less than the order of 10^-1 to 10^-2? Does anyone see any reason to expect significant ion convergence if the irregularities are greater than 10-4 to 10^-3?
Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 3:52 pm
Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 4:29 pm
Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 4:39 pm
Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 5:28 pm
Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 5:45 pm
I hear you ... all we've seen from the earlier work is a wiff of fusion. I'm content, at the moment, to await peer-reviewed results to see if the scent is now stronger, and if the dogs know which way to track.
The point has already been answered that a magrid charged to attract electrons will not attract the sort of ions we expect to form. I allow the possibility of negative ions, but doubt they're much of a factor in such a high-energy environment. Driving ions to the outer wall is certainly a possibility, although in that case I would expect reactions during the big discharges that terminated the WB6 runs, rather than immediately preceeding the discharge and while the well was deep. What reactions would you get in stainless steel at 10 keV? Would the energy of the neutrons be distinguishable from DD fusion? I've recommended methods other than electronic thermalized neutron counters be employed. Bicron 720 comes to mind (fast-neutron specific, and with some neutron energy resolution capability), with a backup of bubble dosimeters (require fast neutrons to make bubbles).
In my test runs, I deliberately tried to saturate the machines with deuterium, but the RGA said I was not having much success ... the gas that blows off in the bright glows remains mostly hydrogen, although you do start to see some HD peaks with continued use. But we've noticed the present EMC2 website photo shows a helium plasma ... I have to wonder if they're deliberately trying to avoid deuterium loading.
I would add that the extensive runs of WB-4, essentially WB-6 with a bad geometry, should have made the same apparent high fusion results if the effect were ions going to the walls. The reports say it produced fusion, but at a rate about three orders of magnitude down from WB-6. The evidence for either is relatively thin, but it does suggest WB-6 was doing something unique and worth looking in to.
I set up the counters to not trigger on electric arcs (I shielded the entire setup strongly and super-filtered the power lines). The result was a background count rate of something like 3 counts per minute. They would not respond to a 20 kV cap-discharge arc right beside the counter. I understand they've now taken this a step or two further. I do understand any concerns about the possibility of false counts due to this cause ... Farnsworth reportedly faked results for one early demonstration before Dr. Hirsch showed an easier way to build fusors that actually worked like a charm.