Talk-Polywell.org

True. I'd say the good news for 2011 is that LPP has managed to increase the voltage and the repeatability of their shots and, so far, their predicted power scaling is holding up. The questions about fusion yield with heavier gases and shorter electrodes, and the suppression of Bremsstrahlung with gigagauss magnetic fields, however, remain to be answered—hopefully this year.

_________________
“Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo.” —attr. to Andy Finkel, among others

Meanwhile, some encouraging news from LPP



http://www.lawrencevilleplasmaphysics.c ... &Itemid=90

That is really good news.

I wish this had happened when toks first started getting funding back in the earlier days, but I am so happy that now pB11 fusion competition is happening and seems bright and possible!

I will be making jumps of joy, if it really works out in the end. Right now, I am just "not unhappy" about it

There were a lot of question marks over Lerner's pet idea. But it is great that some of them have now been removed. I don't think, reading between the lines all the data, that they have any bad news except that maintaining exact symmetry in the electrodes is important.

So as a viable fusion method for power I find it now even more difficult to see how they can acheive feasible electrode lifetime - but not absolutely impossible. For example, you can imagine a system with n pins each adjustable a few mils and a control system that optimises position with each shot to maintain symmetry. Could you not, at least in principle?

As for whether scaling holds, and whether the get-out for Bremmsstrahlung will work, at least we do not I think have a theoretical negative result (if magnetic fields are high enough).

This should definately be doable with existing technology, at least in relatively cool environments. You would probably need a laser to sense if the position tolerance had been breached. I gather the shot interval will be pretty fast but if the adjustments are not needed too often it should be viable.

And slowly rotate the pins to keep a "sharper" edge toward the central electrode.

_________________
So...it has come to this.

R. Peters

May 1st LPP is holding an online seminar hosted by Agrion, a global business community for energy and sustainability. It's at 11:30 AM EDT (UTC-4). You need to register with Agrion to view the seminar live. In order to register, you need some type of corporate e-mail account. They don't accept Yahoo! or Gmail e-mail addresses. The seminar will be broadcast live from the FF-1 facility, and will feature the latest news from the lab as reassembly of FF-1 is completed and new shots are ready to begin.

http://focusfusion.org/index.php/site/a ... may_1_2012

_________________
“Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo.” —attr. to Andy Finkel, among others

The video of the seminar is now available, but you still have to register with Agrion to view it. However, Agrion has published a PDF of the seminar here. It appears to me to be mostly an investor pitch. Most of the information I've seen before. However, they do give a rather optimistic timeline for proof of scientific feasibility (2012-13) and commercialization (2015-16). I assume the commercialization would depend on proof of scientific feasibility.

_________________
“Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo.” —attr. to Andy Finkel, among others

I'm not entirely certain what happened last month, but it seems Next Big Future was the first to mention the June update publicly. Perhaps you now have to be subscribed to LPP's newsletter to receive them directly. I thought I was on their mailing list, but as I wasn't sent the June newsletter at the time it was released, I just subscribed at the LPP site, just to make sure.

The main update is on theoretical work possibly explaining results (i.e. higher than expected ion energies) obtained by LPP on FF-1. It contains a link to a paper by an Iranian team, on "ion viscous heating". Lerner believes that this process, combined with the electron beam heating the plasma by induced currents, explains why the ion energies were higher than expected.

The second section is on investigations into resistance leading to a reduction in current in the FF-1 device. As a result of the investigations, it is believed that arcing is accountable for most of the resistance. LPP is taking steps to reduce arcing which, together with the shorter electrodes used for advanced fuels and new switches designed by Raytheon, should help LPP achieve their goal of a current of 2.8 MA.

There is also a section on the serrated-edge tungsten cathode plate that was designed to improve symmetry in the plasma sheath. Unfortunately the cathode plate was chipped at or in transit from the brazing shop, requiring LPP to wait for another turn at their machine shop. According to the June update, LPP expected to begin testing again in early July.

_________________
“Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo.” —attr. to Andy Finkel, among others

A couple of new posts from LPP:

New theoretical insights explain super-hot plasmoids

http://lawrencevilleplasmaphysics.com/index.php?option=com_lyftenbloggie&view=entry&year=2012&month=07&day=24&id=70:new-theoretical-insights-explain-super-hot-plasmoids&Itemid=90

Resistance measurements show way to higher currents

http://lawrencevilleplasmaphysics.com/index.php?option=com_lyftenbloggie&view=entry&year=2012&month=07&day=24&id=72:resistance-measurements-show-way-to-higher-currents&Itemid=90

They now have a theory to explan higher than predicted experimental temps than they had predicted heretofor. They say it gives them more confidence that they will achieve temps required to eventually burn PB11.

Why you are so naive?
Much easier to achieve temps required to burn DT with Q>1. They can? Answer is "no".

Why don't you learn to read english before you polute this blog with more of your ignorant comments. Do even you know what the phrase: "They say" means? If you want to call the LPP team naive, feel free (although I dare say they are much more accomplished than you), but don't confuse reporting with opinion.

Of course they can't do it. They are trying to achieve pB11 in the future.

Thanks, at least I understand what "they say" means. That means that many their words are unbelievable.
What would you say if I'd note you that can beat Mike Tyson, can run 100m faster than 10 sec, can swim 100 m faster than 45 sec, etc?
Not will say that I am liar? As in reality I can beat only much weaker man than Mike, can run 100 m not faster than 12 sec, and swam 100 m at 1 min 1 sec 30 years ago.