Lawaranceville E-Newsletter

[zapkitty]

...

Hmmm... no option for ignoring this user and replies thereto. Have to do it manually.

Funny that not even the right-wing stuff caused me to look for that function before this

[Giorgio]

Really?
Do you think that the stabilizing effect of stronger mag field was not known 30 years ago? This is not key improvement.

To be known does not mean that it has been applied before, so I do not really understand what your point is, unless you are just trying to be polemic as usual

Also we can see that as one of results they have got the anode erosion.

They are looking to validate a physic phenomena.
We will discuss engineering issues once the phenomena has been proven to be real.

So, I very doubt on bremsstrahlung's reducing. Actually, the declared by them plasma contamination "with hydrocarbons of grease" (with carbon ions as I understand) may be from Mylar insulator 100% contacting with hot and partially ionized gas. This would be the second source of bremsstrahlung's increasing.

We will know once they release some data in their next progress reports.
Until than these are just opinions and speculations.

[Joseph Chikva]

Really?
Do you think that the stabilizing effect of stronger mag field was not known 30 years ago? This is not key improvement.

To be known does not mean that it has been applied before, so I do not really understand what your point is, unless you are just trying to be polemic as usual

My point is in that you should seek another way to be in bliss.
Here: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... Ffig1_.jpg is the schematic of Plasma Focus Device invented in 40-50 years ago.
Mag field there is produced by discharge current.
By increasing of discharge voltage you will increase current and consequently mag field. And if needed there was not any problem in 60s to get even megavolts with the help of Marx generator (capacitor bank). 45kV was a kiddy voltage even in the beginning of last century.
Also in 60s in both USA and SU were big expectations that the solution of controlled fusion is closely and programs were financed by the governments. And were financed very well. Nevertheless in both very rich countries focus fusion programs were canceled.

[Joseph Chikva]

...

Hmmm... no option for ignoring this user and replies thereto. Have to do it manually.

Funny that not even the right-wing stuff caused me to look for that function before this

You need also the option to ignore nature's laws.
Would be excellent.

[Giorgio]

Here: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... Ffig1_.jpg is the schematic of Plasma Focus Device invented in 40-50 years ago.
Mag field there is produced by discharge current.

I can show you a diagram of a parachute drawed by Leonardo da Vinci around 1500 AC. Unfortunately it did not bring the expected results.
I guess that if it was for you any further attempt in improving the Leonardo design would have been considered a waste of time.
Thank goodness you are not in charge of any scientific program.

My point is in that you should seek another way to be in bliss.

I am quite happy with the way I choosed.

[Giorgio]

...

Hmmm... no option for ignoring this user and replies thereto. Have to do it manually.

Funny that not even the right-wing stuff caused me to look for that function before this

You need also the option to ignore nature's laws.
Would be excellent.

Luckily for the rest of us most of Joseph's nature laws are not the laws of nature.

[Joseph Chikva]

I can show you a diagram of a parachute drawed by Leonardo da Vinci around 1500 AC. Unfortunately it did not bring the expected results.
I guess that if it was for you any further attempt in improving the Leonardo design would have been considered a waste of time.

Parachute as well as helicopter as I know.
But you are wrong.
For example inventing helicopter's concept in 16-th century you should also have corresponding technology for its embodiment. Leonardo had not that technology.
And there was not any necessity in parachute as people did not fly. But after or during WW1 when people began to fly and fight in the air, the necessity on for saving assets has been appeared.

Unlike helicopter and Leonardo we have the contrary situation: already 100 years we have technology of creation of high voltage, in 50s, 60s and 70s we had much higher interest of Governments of two top countries in controlled fusion, much numerous plasma physics staff and many famous names.
And do you mean that nobody from those physicists thought that by simple increasing of voltage he can achieve the desired goal?

And I am happy when all around are happy.

[Skipjack]

Joseph, from what I understand, Lerner's approach to the DPF differs from past approaches in the sense that he is not trying to fight the plasma and getting it stable, but is trying to enhance the natural behaviour of the plasma which results in a pulsed system not a steady state system.
Anyway, the DPF does have a very small chance of success as a reactor(I give it a lower chance than Polywell), but it is certainly good science and they do already have a viable spin off technology as an X- ray source. So it is even good business as well (just not for power generation).

[Joseph Chikva]

Joseph, from what I understand, Lerner's approach to the DPF differs from past approaches in the sense that he is not trying to fight the plasma and getting it stable, but is trying to enhance the natural behaviour of the plasma which results in a pulsed system not a steady state system.
Anyway, the DPF does have a very small chance of success as a reactor(I give it a lower chance than Polywell), but it is certainly good science and they do already have a viable spin off technology as an X- ray source. So it is even good business as well (just not for power generation).

Lerner's or Philipov's and other people's approach is to create dense (as I know about 10^26 m^-3) for a very short time. As number density in plasmoid on million times exceeds Tokamak's density, we need thousand billions times less confinement time.
Lower chance than Polywell?
I think the contrary - higher.
But I have found as amusing the Georgio’s statement that he will be blissfully happy if they will make pB11 within 1 year. It was possible to think that they or someone have already made D-T.

[Giorgio]

I can show you a diagram of a parachute drawed by Leonardo da Vinci around 1500 AC. Unfortunately it did not bring the expected results.
I guess that if it was for you any further attempt in improving the Leonardo design would have been considered a waste of time.

Parachute as well as helicopter as I know.
But you are wrong.
For example inventing helicopter's concept in 16-th century you should also have corresponding technology for its embodiment. Leonardo had not that technology.

That is not true. Leonardo parachute was build and found to be logically correct and partially working even with 1500 AC technology.

You see, the issue is not only technology, but also to have a good understanding of the physics laws that govern the phenomena you want to replicate with your technology.
This is why Leonardo parachute, even if logically correct, would not have been commercially useful as a modern parachute.
Same goes for DPF research. Every time you improve your understanding you can increase the quality level of the experiments, even if they look the same experiments already done 30 years ago.
Isn't this is what research is all about Joseph?

And do you mean that nobody from those physicists thought that by simple increasing of voltage he can achieve the desired goal?

If all you see in FF1 experiment is a simple increase of voltage than you are showing once more that you do not know much about the theoretical background behind the FF1 device.

[Giorgio]

But I have found as amusing the Georgio’s statement that he will be blissfully happy if they will make pB11 within 1 year.

You find amusing that I will be happy if someone proves pB11 fusion?

Now I am wondering if you do know the meaning of blissful....

[Joseph Chikva]

But I have found as amusing the Georgio’s statement that he will be blissfully happy if they will make pB11 within 1 year.

You find amusing that I will be happy if someone proves pB11 fusion?

Now I am wondering if you do know the meaning of blissful....

I find amusing that you believe in unrealizable miracles like Rossi's black box, complicated in realization pB11 reaction in one year when now we (humanity) could not realize even much easier D-T reaction in 60 years, etc.

[Joseph Chikva]

That is not true. Leonardo parachute was build and found to be logically correct and partially working even with 1500 AC technology.

You see, the issue is not only technology, but also to have a good understanding of the physics laws that govern the phenomena you want to replicate with your technology.
This is why Leonardo parachute, even if logically correct, would not have been commercially useful as a modern parachute.
Same goes for DPF research. Every time you improve your understanding you can increase the quality level of the experiments, even if they look the same experiments already done 30 years ago.
Isn't this is what research is all about Joseph?

If all you see in FF1 experiment is a simple increase of voltage than you are showing once more that you do not know much about the theoretical background behind the FF1 device.

Parachute was useless that time. And, so, surely less interesting for Leonardo’s contemporaries.
But I told about helicopter which drafts as I know he has also made.
And for building of helicopter the technology level of 16-th century was not enough.

Theoretical background of FF device is very simple.
Discharge between cathode and anode creates current, self-mag field of which focuses particles in plasmoid.
You quoted as key difference of FF1 device from its predecessors: "Gigagauss field" or in the other words much stronger field. And stronger field may be produced by the single way: namely by increasing of current that is achievable by increasing of voltage.

[Giorgio]

But I have found as amusing the Georgio’s statement that he will be blissfully happy if they will make pB11 within 1 year.

You find amusing that I will be happy if someone proves pB11 fusion?

Now I am wondering if you do know the meaning of blissful....

I find amusing that you believe in unrealizable miracles like Rossi's black box, complicated in realization pB11 reaction in one year when now we (humanity) could not realize even much easier D-T reaction in 60 years, etc.

ROTFL, I believe in Rossi black box?
You really have HUGE understanding issues if you did not understand my position on Rossi black box till now.

The rest of your post makes even less sense than the first part of it.

Let me try to help you once more:

If they succeed in pB11 fusion I will be in bliss because they have reached their research goal.

IF ....... BECAUSE

IF = in case
BECAUSE = for the reason that
BLISS = very happy

Now, let's write it again:
In case FF people will succeed in pB11 fusion I will be very happy for the reason that they have reached their research goal.

Even a 6 year old should understand the meaning of this phrase now.

[Giorgio]

Theoretical background of FF device is very simple.
Discharge between cathode and anode creates current, self-mag field of which focuses particles in plasmoid.
You quoted as key difference of FF1 device from its predecessors: "Gigagauss field" or in the other words much stronger field. And stronger field may be produced by the single way: namely by increasing of current that is achievable by increasing of voltage.

There is much more than that, but I really have no time to coach you.
You have two choices here:
1) Go to FF board and express to them your doubts.
2) Take the time and the humility to sit down and read the papers the documents and the data.
Unless you do this you will never be able to understand what we are talking about.