The use of symbols in math takes a long time to stabilize. You really have to read a paper carefully and see what each author decides to use for what a symbol means. What really pisses me off is when authors use the same symbol to mean different things on the same page!! Physicists are notorious for that.
This is probably a good place to pull up equations and discuss them though. I would think all of us combined can figure out what something actually means.
Fusion litelature and website suggestions
who are you?
Zixinus,
You are obviously well educated. One of my biggest problems with the wiki is the "lack of traceability" for each and every statement made. In that vein, please explain who you are, and what credentials you have.
You are obviously well educated. One of my biggest problems with the wiki is the "lack of traceability" for each and every statement made. In that vein, please explain who you are, and what credentials you have.
What does Wikipedia's problems have to do with me?Zixinus,
You are obviously well educated. One of my biggest problems with the wiki is the "lack of traceability" for each and every statement made. In that vein, please explain who you are, and what credentials you have.
EDIT:Another thing:
This tread is not about Wikipedia. This is about fusion literature sources that we suggest to eachother. If you want to discuss Wikipedia, then start a new tread in the "General" forum, please.
I just discovered the Polywell Project Wiki at http://wiki.polywell.org . Set up about a month ago, requires approval to edit, and no significant content yet. No copyright notice so I suppose it is copyright by default. A good place to put links, technical stuff, etc.
Fusion is easy, but break even is horrendous.
Free thermodynamics textbook:
http://web.mit.edu/lienhard/www/ahtt.html
http://web.mit.edu/lienhard/www/ahtt.html
WB-6 experiments paper from EMC2
I was surprised to see that the University of Wisconsin has posted what appears to be EMC2's 26 page "confidential" paper on the results of the WB-6 experiments, as required reading material for one of their plasma physics courses. Does anyone know if they have permission to do this? Or is this old news?
-
jlumartinez
- Posts: 143
- Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2007 7:29 pm
- Location: Spain
jlumartinez, windmill,
Got links?
Or send me a copy.
Simon
Got links?
Or send me a copy.
Simon
Last edited by MSimon on Mon Nov 05, 2007 7:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
yowza. google knows all.
http://ecow.engr.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/getbi ... nl0107.pdf
http://ecow.engr.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/getbi ... nl0107.pdf
John P.,
Thanks!
I cross posted it here:
http://iecfusiontech.blogspot.com/2007/ ... added.html
On the sidebar for easy reference.
Also linked back to here and gave you a HT.
Simon
Thanks!
I cross posted it here:
http://iecfusiontech.blogspot.com/2007/ ... added.html
On the sidebar for easy reference.
Also linked back to here and gave you a HT.
Simon
Woo-hoo! 
That is a great peice of information. I am much more convinced of the credibility of Bussard's results after reading that. That explains the significance of the "three neutrons" that everyone keeps arguing about. So the probability of counting three neutrons from a much weaker reaction than he quotes is very very low; or in other words, there must have been a significant amount of fusion going on.
Also, the PMT results indicate that the electron trapping is going on, and a potential well is being produced. And then there's the part that shows how well the B-shielding prevents electron transport. I'm glad to see that.
That is a great peice of information. I am much more convinced of the credibility of Bussard's results after reading that. That explains the significance of the "three neutrons" that everyone keeps arguing about. So the probability of counting three neutrons from a much weaker reaction than he quotes is very very low; or in other words, there must have been a significant amount of fusion going on. Also, the PMT results indicate that the electron trapping is going on, and a potential well is being produced. And then there's the part that shows how well the B-shielding prevents electron transport. I'm glad to see that.
Ive been waiting a while for that info and some facts i found interesting were.
I thought the entire machine was driven with a single pulsed Megawatt cap bank giving 12.5kv@800A. It turns out that there was simply a big lead acid battery bank driving the 800amps for the b field and a separate bank of 12x 225uf capacitors providing the positive electric potential to attract the electrons. Everything was synchronized by human coordination.
The e guns were simply tungsten headlight filaments used commonly by fusor builders.
I could never understand what the "PMT" graph meant in the 2006-9 IAC Paper.pdf. It stands for photo multiplier tube. They had been using one for some time to quantitatively measure the brightness of the core. They swept the b fields and electron injection to determine exact values for the B=1 condition. Just like you EQ a hifi
I thought it was just theory but they fully utilised the two colour electron system to kick start wb6 to usefull fusion conditions. The way Dr Bussard talked about the microsecond timescales involved in the gas ionisation cascade was evidence of a true master at work.
Very Inspiring work !
I thought the entire machine was driven with a single pulsed Megawatt cap bank giving 12.5kv@800A. It turns out that there was simply a big lead acid battery bank driving the 800amps for the b field and a separate bank of 12x 225uf capacitors providing the positive electric potential to attract the electrons. Everything was synchronized by human coordination.
The e guns were simply tungsten headlight filaments used commonly by fusor builders.
I could never understand what the "PMT" graph meant in the 2006-9 IAC Paper.pdf. It stands for photo multiplier tube. They had been using one for some time to quantitatively measure the brightness of the core. They swept the b fields and electron injection to determine exact values for the B=1 condition. Just like you EQ a hifi
I thought it was just theory but they fully utilised the two colour electron system to kick start wb6 to usefull fusion conditions. The way Dr Bussard talked about the microsecond timescales involved in the gas ionisation cascade was evidence of a true master at work.
Very Inspiring work !
Purity is Power
-
jlumartinez
- Posts: 143
- Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2007 7:29 pm
- Location: Spain
For lazy people which don´t want to read the whole report I will extract the most important idea:
With WB6 they had FOUR SUCESSFUL EXPERIMENTS in the four times they tried before the machine failure (4 over 4). They shielded the neutron detectors to avoid background noise to interfere in the measurement.
I copy below the experimental results in these four tests where EMC2 researchers increased step by step the voltage and intensity conditions: the neutron counter is the definitive data which confirms that a powerful fusion reaction was happening in the center of the device. Even at 5 kV some fusion took place !!!
1) 5.0kV , 800A B-field, 1 count
2) 9.8kV , 750A B-field, 2 counts
3) 12.5kV , 700A B-field, 2 counts
4) 12.5kV , 800A B-field (1 kG), 3 counts
Before to these latest experiments they did many more tests at lower voltages just to calibrate the machine (Beta = 1 tests). According to the lab notes, those tests were entirely consistent finally with the numerical simulations of Polywell about electron lifetime. A clear symthom that if these previous test were fitting with the model is a point to assure that finally the machine was behaving as expected for many years.
I recommend to read at least the last 3 pages of the report because is full of great details. Due to its relevance, it would be also great to copy this file and put into Joe´s webpage or in Askmar.
With WB6 they had FOUR SUCESSFUL EXPERIMENTS in the four times they tried before the machine failure (4 over 4). They shielded the neutron detectors to avoid background noise to interfere in the measurement.
I copy below the experimental results in these four tests where EMC2 researchers increased step by step the voltage and intensity conditions: the neutron counter is the definitive data which confirms that a powerful fusion reaction was happening in the center of the device. Even at 5 kV some fusion took place !!!
1) 5.0kV , 800A B-field, 1 count
2) 9.8kV , 750A B-field, 2 counts
3) 12.5kV , 700A B-field, 2 counts
4) 12.5kV , 800A B-field (1 kG), 3 counts
Before to these latest experiments they did many more tests at lower voltages just to calibrate the machine (Beta = 1 tests). According to the lab notes, those tests were entirely consistent finally with the numerical simulations of Polywell about electron lifetime. A clear symthom that if these previous test were fitting with the model is a point to assure that finally the machine was behaving as expected for many years.
I recommend to read at least the last 3 pages of the report because is full of great details. Due to its relevance, it would be also great to copy this file and put into Joe´s webpage or in Askmar.
-
JoeStrout
- Site Admin
- Posts: 284
- Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 7:40 pm
- Location: Fort Collins, CO, USA
- Contact:
Wow!
Yes, I agree this paper is important; I'll certainly put a link to it on my Polywell resources page (probably this evening).
I'm also quite encouraged to see it on the required-reading list at UW. They probably have one of the most respected IEC fusion labs in the country; we already knew they were aware of the polywell approach, but this on their reading lists suggests to me that they're taking it seriously, and consider it important. And that's certainly good news.
I'm also quite encouraged to see it on the required-reading list at UW. They probably have one of the most respected IEC fusion labs in the country; we already knew they were aware of the polywell approach, but this on their reading lists suggests to me that they're taking it seriously, and consider it important. And that's certainly good news.
Joe Strout
Talk-Polywell.org site administrator
Talk-Polywell.org site administrator