chrismb wrote:
There are many ways in which neutrons could have been produced in short discharges in previous Polywell designs (and that's not even counting how the near-statistically-insignificant neutron detection rates could have been jeopardised). Whatever the neutron detection rates of past, or present, Polywells, this in itself cannot show that ions trap electrons.
Ambipolarity reigns supreme. Where ions go, the electrons follow.
The idea that a teeny, slow, electron could somehow trap a fast moving ion is like trying to imagine a dog grabbing a 40 ton truck off the highway as it drives by. The Brillouin limit puts limits on how many 'dogs' you'd be allowed to set to that task, all at once. Without clear evidence of, even, the possibility it just seems a bit ridiculous, really.
A fusor doesn't remotely work by trapping electron charge. All free electrons are immediately shot into the outer shell by the electric fields between the grid and the shell. The original designs that tried to do this, Farnsworth's first design and later the ETW design, failed to produce any evidence of ion trapping, let alone actually produce any neutrons. They were complete failures.
I guess we will agree to disagree then.