Talk-Polywell.org

krenshala wrote:A polywell could be made quadrapole by having only four magnet coils ... in a tetrahedron (the minimum number of "sides" for a working polywell).

Number 4 isn't end in itself.
And we told about strong focusing quadrupoles using in particles accelerators technology.
Quadrupole: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Aust. ... 6.2007.jpg
Sextupole: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... 6.2007.jpg

And how they are used: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... 6.2007.jpg

Joseph, the point of the quadrupole field is to stabilize m=2 MHD instabilities that plague the FRC. If you recall the basic Polywell theory, the whole point of using a cusp field is that since it *IS* a multipole field, it is inherent stability to all MHD activity.

Solo wrote:Joseph, the point of the quadrupole field is to stabilize m=2 MHD instabilities that plague the FRC. If you recall the basic Polywell theory, the whole point of using a cusp field is that since it *IS* a multipole field, it is inherent stability to all MHD activity.

It is terminology issue and usually by conventional terminology quadrupole magnets are axially symmetric magnets providing to charged particles beams the so called "strong focusing" capability.
For example betatrons and synchrotrons provide so called "weak focusing fields" and can produce mili-amperes orders currents due to space charge limitations. But adding strong focusing assets e.g. quadrupoles we will get so called "modified betatrons" (FFAG betatron in quadrupole case) expanding space charge limitation and might producing thousands amperes order currents.

And magnets (magnetic mirrors) in Polywell have not axial symmetricity. As Polywell is a spheric device cinfining the certain space from any direction.
Yes, being flexible in terminology certainly we can call tetragonal shaped Polywell's mag system "quadrupole", more known cube shaped - "sextupole", etc.
But confinement concept in mirror machines and strong focusing in particles accelerators are very different things by their sense.

Joseph Chikva wrote:And magnets (magnetic mirrors) in Polywell have not axial symmetricity. As Polywell is a spheric device cinfining the certain space from any direction.
Yes, being flexible in terminology certainly we can call tetragonal shaped Polywell's mag system "quadrupole", more known cube shaped - "sextupole", etc.
But confinement concept in mirror machines and strong focusing in particles accelerators are very different things by their sense.

Then why did you bring up the Polywell when discussing this?

krenshala wrote:Then why did you bring up the Polywell when discussing this?

Because he makes a terrible amount of confusion in terminology and most of the times this brings him to misunderstand the concepts that are being discussed.

krenshala wrote:

Joseph Chikva wrote:And magnets (magnetic mirrors) in Polywell have not axial symmetricity. As Polywell is a spheric device cinfining the certain space from any direction.
Yes, being flexible in terminology certainly we can call tetragonal shaped Polywell's mag system "quadrupole", more known cube shaped - "sextupole", etc.
But confinement concept in mirror machines and strong focusing in particles accelerators are very different things by their sense.

Then why did you bring up the Polywell when discussing this?

In response of Georgio's proposal to use quadrupole magnets in Polywell I only said that it is impossible conceptually and constructively.

Giorgio wrote:Because he makes a terrible amount of confusion in terminology and most of the times this brings him to misunderstand the concepts that are being discussed.

Unlike you, Georgio, when I am saying to someone that he is wrong in something I also bringing arguments.
Who has bigger misunderstanding of Polywell's concept if you are proposing the usage of quadrupoles?
Also I saw your and some others level of discussion of "well understood" Polywell for example here: viewtopic.php?t=3202

And about which "confusion in terminology" can speak the person for whom (together with the second "big theoretic") I was needed in a lot of pages for explanation for example how pinch works?

[]

Joseph Chikva wrote:In response of Georgio's proposal to use quadrupole magnets in Polywell I only said that it is impossible conceptually and constructively.

I never said that.
I said that the results of the instability control with the applied quadrupole fields could be of interest also for the Polywell concept.
You didn't understand my posts as always and you imagined that I wanted to apply the same system to the Polywell while I was talking about something different.

You have just demonstrated my point that most of the time you simply do not understand the argument of the discussion.
Thank you Joseph.

Giorgio wrote:I never said that.
I said that the results of the instability control with the applied quadrupole fields could be of interest also for the Polywell concept.
You didn't understand my posts as always and you imagined that I wanted to apply the same system to the Polywell while I was talking about something different.

Ok Georgio thank you too. To be honest I see that my English is even worse than I thought as I do not understand how could be of interest also for the Polywell corresponds to not wanted to apply the same system to the Polywell.
Thanks.

Here you go again.........

Giorgio wrote:Here you go again.........

Yes, because you try to cover your useless proposal with not argued claims.

ROTFL, how (and why) should I argue on something that only you think that I claimed?

I am wondering if you really don't get the point or if you are deliberately doing this to try to stir up a diatribe.

Giorgio wrote:ROTFL, how (and why) should I argue on something that only you think that I claimed?

For example does your claim that I can not apply correctly Newton laws correspond to true?
I have about 25 years of working experience in various engineering branches. And till now nobody except you and the second "big expert" crismb said similar.
Please argue where I applied Newton law incorrectly. Here I even do not speak on more specific and complicated things.

The discussion was much more complex than what you are trying to describe with your post. Anyhow, this really is not important as I am not anymore willing to feed these discussions until you will show that you are ready to put some effort in understanding one's position.