DOCSLIB.ORG

1 Nuclear Fusion

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
1 Nuclear Fusion nuclear fusion: a different approach by Oscar S. De Rus author's preliminary note: I'm an independent researcher, whatever the word “independent” may mean. in relation to the nuclear fusion problem, my concern is with the creative process itself, mainly in its psychological dimension as a complementary factor to the commonly shared points of view on creativity applied to science, and this is why I try to follow other pathways. though I show this project in a more or less similar form to a scientific paper, I know it is a very unorthodox work, since it doesn't fulfill the usual prerequisites of scientific documents because it is not based on previous papers or researches, but in a different way of gathering and interconnecting very diverse information to give place to new and untested insights. it’s easy to notice that I’m not a scientist, and this is why I lack arguments reasonable enough to defend my hypotheses and proposals. but I'm afraid reason must be rather a good discriminating principle for our service than the ultimate goal to explain absolutely everything, though this is what it seems to be always pretending, since if this were the case everything could be easily and mechanically explained. in this sense, I think it would be necessary to remember the difference between the objective physical data we obtain and our subjective interpretation of them, since the latter may be excessively conditioning our decisions with too much frequency. I believe we as thinking human beings are fortunately far more complex and capable than what our own limited reason can explain, and this is why I try to be always open-minded to new and unexpected possibilites, though some of them may not coincide with our culturally established standards. !1 abstract this brief paper tries to outline some connections only that could probably lead from the current linear models to the single-pointed magnetic confinement model for a nuclear fusion reactor, because of the coherence of the latter with the stars working structure and constitution, due to the close similarity of this magnetic confinement model with the natural gravitational confinement produced inside of them. the ideas here proposed and the questions here raised are founded on some available data for a non-specialized understanding, and this is why its author cannot claim nor pretend to be authoritative when dealing with some general concepts on nuclear physics, but only suggestive to the open-minded research with no academic prejudices. the sections included in this document have no other intention than to offer a general insight and introduce some new questions about this subject, and this is why they are not so expanded here as it would be possible with a deeper exposition. introduction the analogical way of thinking, not concerned with particular ideas only but with the possible relations (analogies) between them, seems to provide a wider range of connections to understand how Nature works, just like Bionics proceeds "asking" Nature about her solutions to her biological problems, trying to find out then how we can apply them to our technical necessities. this kind of reverse engineering, turned towards Nature in its widest sense instead, seems to be the most secure way to face our technical challenges when trying to reproduce the internal conditions of a star on Earth. whether this is simply to proceed by observing similar natural structures as constructive metaphors or as "silent advices of the Book of Life for the waking reader" could be the subject for an additional approach. however, the question arising now in mind is the following one: are we wiser than Nature when trying to reproduce a nuclear fusion reaction by artificial means? the answer is clear and simple, and perhaps we should consider this initial condition before of trying to create something like this on our own means. 1 fractal vs. euclidean geometry this seems to be a superficial contradiction. from a deeper point of view, the euclidean mathematical interpretation of space founded upon the three basic dimensions (x, y, z) is a constructive metaphor of the human body, a mental representation of its basic physical structure, an intellective projection of itself just like, in a more material way, a pencil is a physical projection for the finger or a computer is for the brain. on the other hand, the fractal interpretation provides a wider perspective, though not so attached to the apparent structure of the human body, when trying to understand other possible manifestations of Nature attending to the careful observation of other ordered structures, some of them clearly represented by the complexity of multiple natural patterns that may present, for example, scalar self-similarity and other properties not easily described in traditional euclidean geometric language. however, there is only Space, and fractal or euclidean are simply different relative interpretations of the same undifferentiated reality which essential absoluteness is not altered by them, and we need to understand their relativity to be able of an even wider conception of this spatial aspect of the Universe. !2 2 the linear concept from the first experimental field reversed models and some magnetic mirror configurations to the current toroidal devices, with the only exception of inertial electrostatic confinement models (from Fusor to Polywell) and some inertial confinement attempts using high-energy beams of laser light, there seems to be a certain progression (Tokamak, JET, ITER, Stellarator) leading to consider the linear magnetic confinement concept as the only possible or best, though it doesn't seem to correspond to the apparent working structure of stars. to focus laser beams inwards, for example, is not coherent with the natural model they provide. they proceed by gravitational confinement, their natural way to achieve a higher internal density by means of a physical compression that then produces a fusion reaction at their core and, therefore, a huge outburst of energy, light and heat outwards. however, if we transcend the limitations determined by all these previous models, if we go beyond these preconceived ideas and have a look at how universal Nature works, the single- pointed magnetic confinement concept will arise sooner or later in our mind, not as another possibility only, but as a necessary object to study much more coherent with the natural working structure of stars. and, from this different perspective, other models can be designed according to this concept, just like, for example, the following ones. 3 the single-pointed concept these are three models (see the nine images below) for a same constructive system. they can be designed by means of euclidean geometry, the standard mode preloaded on every software for design purposes, but they cannot be conceived initially by simply thinking "on screen" or using any other bidimensional means, because of the impossibility to think at first in the usual views for doing it so. ground plans, elevations, sections, mostly one-sided views, are not possible to think before their design process, because it's necessary to conceive them directly on 3D terms for a better understanding. however, this is not the main feature of this constructive system, but just abandoning temporarily the cartesian standard and going beyond the basic concept of the "three coordinate axes" (x, y, z), predetermined in our minds too. according to this euclidean interpretation of space, a main vertical axis (commonly the main rotation axis too) coincides always with one of these three virtual lines, thus conditioning and restricting our constructive capabilities because of the limitations imposed by this preconceived idea. but instead of this, if we make to coincide this main verticality (rotation axis) with the alternative virtual line (red in the first model) described by the points where always x = y = z and -x = -y = -z, this becomes the basic concept that makes possible to conceive and design, for example, the A 3.0 model and it also enables us to conceive and design the other two models A 4.0 and A 5.0 as a consequential progression of the same constructive procedure. then, the coincidence of the main vertical axis with one of the three coordinate axes initially predetermined by the euclidean interpretation of space is already not so determinative to properly understand all the constructive possibilities of this system. but are these models simply anachronistic because of referring to the magnets formerly designed for a tandem mirror reactor now regarded as an outdated concept? not necessarily, because those magnets, though initially conceived as end stoppers to minimize leakage of positive particles from the ends of a center mirror cell, were also designed to provide an easier manner for achieving a higher concentration of their magnetic fluxes on a central area, a very necessary condition for a good single-pointed confinement device, though the way to arrange them is different now and the coils polarity too, as it is explained in the following sections. !3 Model A 3.0 Model A 4.0 Model A 5.0 it could be argued these configurations lack axisymmetry, but this term refers to an object having cylindrical symmetry only (no change when rotating about one axis). however, rotational symmetry of order n, also called n-fold rotational symmetry or discrete rotational symmetry of the nth order, with respect to an axis means that rotation by an angle of 360°/n (120°, 90° and 72° for the A models) does not change the object either (1). do we really know what would happen inside of these devices and which would be the effects produced with these new configurations? !4 at this point, it is imperative to remember we are not only constructing a physical object, a single- pointed magnetic confinement reactor, but shaping the magnetic fields produced inside of it, and to know the effects of their resulting magnetic field is probably the most difficult question this proposal tries to put forward.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Fork in the Road to Electric Power from Fusion US Navy Compact
    The Fork in the Road to Electric Power From Fusion US Navy compact fusion reactors Peter Lobner, 1 February 2021 1. Background For at least the past 40 years, the US Navy has been funding fusion power research and development in considerable secrecy. In this article, we’ll take a brief look at the following US Navy fusion programs, focusing on the two most recent programs. • LINUS - pulsed stabilized liquid liner compressor (SLC) • Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR, aka cold fusion) • Polywell fusion - inertial electrostatic confinement (IEC) • NIKE & Electra krypton fluoride direct-drive laser inertial confinement fusion (ICF) • Plasma compression fusion device (2019) • Argon fluoride direct-drive laser ICF (2020) 2. LINUS - pulsed stabilized liquid liner compressor (SLC) In the 1970s, this Naval Research Laboratory (NRL)-sponsored project developed and tested several pulsed stabilized liquid liner compressor (SLC) machines: LINUS-0, SUZY-II and HELIUS. A plasma is injected into a void space in a flowing molten lead-lithium liner. The liquid liner is then imploded mechanically, using high- pressure helium-driven pistons. The imploding liner compresses and adiabatically heats the plasma to fusion conditions. While the SLC concept was abandoned by the US Navy in the 1970s, it was revived in the 2000s as the basis for the small fusion reactor designs being developed by Compact Fusion Systems (US) and General Fusion (Canada). 3. Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR, aka cold fusion) From the mid 1990s to at least the mid-2000s the US Navy sponsored research into cold fusion. You’ll find a list of cold fusion papers by Navy researchers from NRL, China Lake Naval Weapons 1 The Fork in the Road to Electric Power From Fusion Laboratory, and Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center (SPAWAR) here: https://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/?page_id=952 4.
    [Show full text]
  • Inertial Electrostatic Confinement Fusor Cody Boyd Virginia Commonwealth University
    Virginia Commonwealth University VCU Scholars Compass Capstone Design Expo Posters College of Engineering 2015 Inertial Electrostatic Confinement Fusor Cody Boyd Virginia Commonwealth University Brian Hortelano Virginia Commonwealth University Yonathan Kassaye Virginia Commonwealth University See next page for additional authors Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/capstone Part of the Engineering Commons © The Author(s) Downloaded from https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/capstone/40 This Poster is brought to you for free and open access by the College of Engineering at VCU Scholars Compass. It has been accepted for inclusion in Capstone Design Expo Posters by an authorized administrator of VCU Scholars Compass. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Authors Cody Boyd, Brian Hortelano, Yonathan Kassaye, Dimitris Killinger, Adam Stanfield, Jordan Stark, Thomas Veilleux, and Nick Reuter This poster is available at VCU Scholars Compass: https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/capstone/40 Team Members: Cody Boyd, Brian Hortelano, Yonathan Kassaye, Dimitris Killinger, Adam Stanfield, Jordan Stark, Thomas Veilleux Inertial Electrostatic Faculty Advisor: Dr. Sama Bilbao Y Leon, Mr. James G. Miller Sponsor: Confinement Fusor Dominion Virginia Power What is Fusion? Shielding Computational Modeling Because the D-D fusion reaction One of the potential uses of the fusor will be to results in the production of neutrons irradiate materials and see how they behave after and X-rays, shielding is necessary to certain levels of both fast and thermal neutron protect users from the radiation exposure. To reduce the amount of time and produced by the fusor. A Monte Carlo resources spent testing, a computational model n-Particle (MCNP) model was using XOOPIC, a particle interaction software, developed to calculate the necessary was developed to model the fusor.
    [Show full text]
  • Simulation of a Device Providing Nuclear Fusion by Electrostatic Confinement, with Multiplasma
    1 Simulation of a device providing nuclear fusion by electrostatic confinement, with Multiplasma Copyright © 2018 Patrick Lindecker Maisons-Alfort (France) 22th of July 2018 Revision B Revision B: replacement of the term « efficiency » by « yield » to avoid an ambiguity and the aneutronic fusion H+ <-> B11+ taken into account. 1. Goal To design your own electrostatic confinement nuclear fusion reactor. It is addressed to people interested by nuclear fusion, having a good general culture in physics (and who are patient because simulations can be long). It is set aside the fact that your project is physically achievable or not. 2. Warning This design will be just for the « fun » or from curiosity, because even if the calculations done by Multiplasma are as serious as possible, in the limit of the knowledge of the author (who is not a nuclear physicist but a generalist engineer), of course, nobody is going to build your nuclear reactor… Otherwise, none checking has been made by another person and the program development does not follow any quality assurance process (so there are probably a lot of errors). It is just a personal program made available to those interested by this subject. 3. Brief explanations of a few of the terms used: Deuterium (D or D2) / Tritium (T or T2): these are hydrogen isotopes comprising, besides one proton, either one neutron (Deuterium) or 2 neutrons (Tritium). As other elements, they are susceptible to produce fusions by collisions. The Deuterium is relatively abundant, in sea water, for example. It constitutes 0.01 % of hydrogen. The tritium is naturally present at traces 2 amounts but it is produced (as a gaseous effluent) by fission nuclear centrals, in very small quantities.
    [Show full text]
  • Thermonuclear AB-Reactors for Aerospace
    1 Article Micro Thermonuclear Reactor after Ct 9 18 06 AIAA-2006-8104 Micro -Thermonuclear AB-Reactors for Aerospace* Alexander Bolonkin C&R, 1310 Avenue R, #F-6, Brooklyn, NY 11229, USA T/F 718-339-4563, [email protected], [email protected], http://Bolonkin.narod.ru Abstract About fifty years ago, scientists conducted R&D of a thermonuclear reactor that promises a true revolution in the energy industry and, especially, in aerospace. Using such a reactor, aircraft could undertake flights of very long distance and for extended periods and that, of course, decreases a significant cost of aerial transportation, allowing the saving of ever-more expensive imported oil-based fuels. (As of mid-2006, the USA’s DoD has a program to make aircraft fuel from domestic natural gas sources.) The temperature and pressure required for any particular fuel to fuse is known as the Lawson criterion L. Lawson criterion relates to plasma production temperature, plasma density and time. The thermonuclear reaction is realised when L > 1014. There are two main methods of nuclear fusion: inertial confinement fusion (ICF) and magnetic confinement fusion (MCF). Existing thermonuclear reactors are very complex, expensive, large, and heavy. They cannot achieve the Lawson criterion. The author offers several innovations that he first suggested publicly early in 1983 for the AB multi- reflex engine, space propulsion, getting energy from plasma, etc. (see: A. Bolonkin, Non-Rocket Space Launch and Flight, Elsevier, London, 2006, Chapters 12, 3A). It is the micro-thermonuclear AB- Reactors. That is new micro-thermonuclear reactor with very small fuel pellet that uses plasma confinement generated by multi-reflection of laser beam or its own magnetic field.
    [Show full text]
  • Experiments on DD Fusion Using Inertial Electrostatic Confinement
    Acta Physica Universitatis Comenianae Volume LIII (2016) 7181 Experiments on D-D Fusion Using Inertial Electrostatic Confinement (IEC) Device in the Laboratory Exercises on Plasma Physics at the Comenius University* Michal Stano, Michal Raèko Department of Experimental Physics, Faculty of Mathematics, Physics and Informatics, Comenius University, Mlynska dolina F2, 842 48 Bratislava, Slovak republic [email protected] Abstract: Experiments using a small scale nuclear fusion reactor, known as fusor or Inertial Electro- static Confinement (IEC) device, are presented. Fusion of deuterium is achieved by acceleration for deuterium nuclei in a high voltage low pressure electrical discharge. Rate of fusion reaction is studied for discharge voltage of up to 32 kV and discharge power of 80 W by detection of the generated neutrons. Detection rates of up to 1.9 s1 are achieved using a moderated 6LiI(Eu) scintillation detector. Maximum total neutron flux generated by the device is estimated to 23200 neutrons per second, corresponding to 2.7´108 W of power released by the fusion reactions. Experiments at reduced discharge voltage of 20 kV are included in laboratory excercises on plasma physics held at the Comenius University. 1. Introduction Controlled nuclear fusion has been a field of intense research for more than last 50 years. The motivation for this research is to create a clean and inexhaustible source of energy powered by fusion of heavy hydrogen isotopes, deuterium and tritium. Although deute- rium is relatively abundant element on Earth, representing 0.0156 % of all hydrogen at- oms, no current technology can exploit its potential [1]. In order to create conditions for nuclear fusion, the nuclei must overcome the electric repulsion and approach each other close enough to come within the range of the nuclear force.
    [Show full text]
  • 10 SABA, Sicut Dicit Glosa Isaie Xiiii B
    666 SABA - SABATH Siccaque, fertur in hiis gradus illi tertius esse. Utilis est sepe stomacho, si sepe bibatur 10 Expellit partum potu veneremque coercet, Tussim si bibitur compescit, menstrua purgat. Si coquis hanc in aqua, cui vinum iunxeris acre, Compescit talis decoctio tormina ventris, Pulmones iuvat et pectus, morboque medetur Costarum, quem pleuresim vocat Attica lingua; 275 Lumbricos oleo decocta et pota repellit. 282 Cruda comesta recens oculos caligine curat. 285 Naribus expressus si succus funditur eius 292 Sistet manantem bene desiccando cruorem. 293 20 Obstat pota nimis vel cruda comesta venenis, etc. 3°4 s SABA, sicut dicit glosa Isaie xiiii b (3), «civitas est in Anibus Ethiopie sita x. Secundum Papiam Saba est Arabie regio in qua nunc Sabei habitant, dicta a Alio Chus, qui nuncupatus est Saba. Alii dicunt quod Saba est Auvius a qua tota regio 5 nuncupatur. SABAOTH unum est de decem nominibus quibus deus nomi­ natur apud Hebreos, que ponuntur supra ubi exponitur alleluia. Et interpretatur Sabaoth exercituum sive virtutum. Unde in Psalmo (23,10), «Dominus virtutum ipse est rex 5 gloriex. SABATH dicitur Februarius, non Ianuarius, ut scribitur in 8 illi om. D 12 aquam ABD 14 pulmonem B 15 attrita AC; marg. ai? A7777c ueTwm aiM. C: grecismus atticus eolicus doricus ionicusque boetus / grecorum vere tibi sunt idiomata quinque (vm, 1-2) 16 et pota] potata B 17 recens] cecos B 20 pota] cocta B; etc om. B SABA 1 isaie xiiii b 0777. B ; xliiii b C ; in Anibus] insibus C 2 arabia A C D 3 sabei populus quidam B; dicta autem a D 4 Auvius] Aumims B SABAOTH 1 decem 0777.
    [Show full text]
  • Fusion – a Viable Energy Source – Questionable? 1.1 Plasma Physics and Associated Fusion Research
    Dr. David R. Thayer Talk given at the: Sigma Pi Sigma Induction Ceremony UW Dept. of Physics and Astronomy, 4/28/14 Fusion – A Viable Energy Source – Questionable? 1.1 Plasma Physics and Associated Fusion Research Began Around 1950 (in Russia) To Produce energy from Thermonuclear Fusion (Which Powers Stars). The Key Nuclear Reaction at the heart of fusion physics as the Fusion Of Deuterium (D) and Tritium (T) Ions, D+T 4 He 3.5MeV +n 14.1MeV , D-T - Liberates 17.6MeV Of Energy in Alpha Particle (Helium Nucleus, 4 He) and High Energy Neutron (n). D T n 1 1.2 Typical Conditions which produce fusion reaction Incorporate Plasma (High Temperature Gas of Electrons & Ions) Nuclear Ingredients at conditions: Density of n 1020 m 3, Temperature of T 10keV Objective: Overcome D-T Electrostatic Repulsion: D T Ignition (fusion sustained) Metric-Lawson Criteria: Density (ne )*Energy Confinement Time ( E ) = ne E Lawson Criteria 20 3 nme 10 E 1s 20 3 ne E 10 m s For D-T Fusion Te 10 keV or Approx. 100M degree C 2 1.3 Fusion Reactions Occur Naturally In Stars, due to tremendous Gravitation Forces, Fg m , which Radially Confine Plasma - Allow Sustained Fusion. However, Laboratory Fusion Plasmas must utilize Electromagnetic Forces, Fq E v B, typically Achieved Using: 1) Toroidal Magnetic Field Devices – Tokamak – Large Confining B Fields; or 2) Inertial Confinement Fusion – ICF – Devices numerous large Lasers Provide Implosion Pressure. 1) ITER – International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor 2) NIF – National Ignition Facility Lasers Hohlraum Contains
    [Show full text]
  • IEC Fusor Mobile Shielding Unit Dominic Balducci Virginia Commonwealth University
    Virginia Commonwealth University VCU Scholars Compass Capstone Design Expo Posters College of Engineering 2017 IEC Fusor Mobile Shielding Unit Dominic Balducci Virginia Commonwealth University John Lawson Virginia Commonwealth University Bryce McDaniels Virginia Commonwealth University Robert Rodi Virginia Commonwealth University William Simmons Virginia Commonwealth University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/capstone Part of the Mechanical Engineering Commons, and the Nuclear Engineering Commons © The Author(s) Downloaded from https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/capstone/185 This Poster is brought to you for free and open access by the College of Engineering at VCU Scholars Compass. It has been accepted for inclusion in Capstone Design Expo Posters by an authorized administrator of VCU Scholars Compass. For more information, please contact [email protected]. IEC Fusor Mobile Shielding Unit MNE505 | Team members: Dominic Balducci, John Lawson, Bryce McDaniels, Robert Rodi, William Simmons | Faculty advisers: Sama Bilbao Y Leon, James Miller | What is Fusion? Project Objectives Shielding Design Cart Design Nuclear fusion occurs when two lighter nuclei In order to reduce the radiation exposure for A cart was acquired for easy transportation of all fusor combine to form a new atomic nucleus. Upon this ● Adjust current IEC fusor design into a more compact operators of the fusor, a radiation shielding unit was components. This allows for the fusor to be operated in collision many bi-products may be created such and mobile form to allow for use by various faculty constructed. This shielding unit is composed of different labs, without complete disassembly for as neutrons, gamma rays, and X-Rays. This members and researchers as a neutron source for concentric layers of high density polyethylene transportation.
    [Show full text]
  • The Farnsworth/Hirsch Fusor
    The Farnsworth/Hirsch Fusor How a Small Vacuum System and a Bit of Basketweaving Will Get You a Working Inertial-Electrostatic Confinement Neutron Source Richard Hull Tesla Coil Builders of Richmond, 7103 Hermitage Rd., Richmond, VA 23228 I. SUMMARY as more ions impact at higher velocities. In this volume it is reasonable to assume that most impacts result in The device that is described in this article is a dual grid, additional multiple ionizations adding many pluses to the inertial-electrostatic confinement (IEC) accelerator which ions contained in the small volume of the plasmoid. can, with various levels of cash expenditures, different The excess electrons now find themselves in a included gases, different operating pressures, various negative potential well and are ejected violently back applied voltages and currents, etc. be used as a glow into the region between the grids. Ions also flow out with discharge mode “plasma sphere,” a gas diode, an ion the electrons in a mixed stream, many recombining and multipactor or even a device for producing nuclear colliding with gas atoms outside the inner grid forming fusion reactions. This article describes the history of the neutrals in a kinetic stream and ionizing anew. At lower device, the principles of its operation, uses and operating pressures, the ionized gas atoms are thinned construction of a working fusor. Possibilities for further out and some actually never interact. exploration by amateurs is also covered. The “fusor” can work in several modes based on the materials used, the gas included in the device, and the II. INTRODUCTION pressure of the gas.
    [Show full text]
  • Polywell – a Path to Electrostatic Fusion
    Polywell – A Path to Electrostatic Fusion Jaeyoung Park Energy Matter Conversion Corporation (EMC2) University of Wisconsin, October 1, 2014 1 Fusion vs. Solar Power For a 50 cm radius spherical IEC device - Area projection: πr2 = 7850 cm2 à 160 watt for same size solar panel Pfusion =17.6MeV × ∫ < συ >×(nDnT )dV For D-T: 160 Watt à 5.7x1013 n/s -16 3 <συ>max ~ 8x10 cm /s 11 -3 à <ne>~ 7x10 cm Debye length ~ 0.22 cm (at 60 keV) Radius/λD ~ 220 In comparison, 60 kV well over 50 cm 7 -3 (ne-ni) ~ 4x10 cm 2 200 W/m : available solar panel capacity 0D Analysis - No ion convergence case 2 Outline • Polywell Fusion: - Electrostatic Fusion + Magnetic Confinement • Lessons from WB-8 experiments • Recent Confinement Experiments at EMC2 • Future Work and Summary 3 Electrostatic Fusion Fusor polarity Contributions from Farnsworth, Hirsch, Elmore, Tuck, Watson and others Operating principles (virtual cathode type ) • e-beam (and/or grid) accelerates electrons into center • Injected electrons form a potential well • Potential well accelerates/confines ions Virtual cathode • Energetic ions generate fusion near the center polarity Attributes • No ion grid loss • Good ion confinement & ion acceleration • But loss of high energy electrons is too large 4 Polywell Fusion Combines two good ideas in fusion research: Bussard (1985) a) Electrostatic fusion: High energy electron beams form a potential well, which accelerates and confines ions b) High β magnetic cusp: High energy electron confinement in high β cusp: Bussard termed this as “wiffle-ball” (WB). + + + e- e- e- Potential Well: ion heating &confinement Polyhedral coil cusp: electron confinement 5 Wiffle-Ball (WB) vs.
    [Show full text]
  • Compact Fusion Reactors
    Compact fusion reactors Tomas Lind´en Helsinki Institute of Physics 26.03.2015 Fusion research is currently to a large extent focused on tokamak (ITER) and inertial confinement (NIF) research. In addition to these large international or national efforts there are private companies performing fusion research using much smaller devices than ITER or NIF. The attempt to achieve fusion energy production through relatively small and compact devices compared to tokamaks decreases the costs and building time of the reactors and this has allowed some private companies to enter the field, like EMC2, General Fusion, Helion Energy, Lockheed Martin and LPP Fusion. Some of these companies are trying to demonstrate net energy production within the next few years. If they are successful their next step is to attempt to commercialize their technology. In this presentation an overview of compact fusion reactor concepts is given. CERN Colloquium 26th of March 2015 Tomas Lind´en (HIP) Compact fusion reactors 26.03.2015 1 / 37 Contents Contents 1 Introduction 2 Funding of fusion research 3 Basics of fusion 4 The Polywell reactor 5 Lockheed Martin CFR 6 Dense plasma focus 7 MTF 8 Other fusion concepts or companies 9 Summary Tomas Lind´en (HIP) Compact fusion reactors 26.03.2015 2 / 37 Introduction Introduction Climate disruption ! ! Pollution ! ! ! Extinctions Ecosystem Transformation Population growth and consumption There is no silver bullet to solve these issues, but energy production is "#$%&'$($#!)*&+%&+,+!*&!! central to many of these issues. -.$&'.$&$&/!0,1.&$'23+! Economically practical fusion power 4$(%!",55*6'!"2+'%1+!$&! could contribute significantly to meet +' '7%!89 !)%&',62! the future increased energy :&(*61.'$*&!(*6!;*<$#2!-.=%6+! production demands in a sustainable way.
    [Show full text]
  • Energy Devices and Processes Generally Suppressed
    Energy Devices and Processes Generally Suppressed Strategic Overview of Energy Technology Suppression Introduction Research shows that over the past 75 years a number of significant breakthroughs in energy generation and propulsion have occurred that have been systematically suppressed. Since the time of Tesla, T. Townsend Brown and others in the early and mid-twentieth century we have had the technological ability to replace fossil fuel, internal combustion and nuclear power generating systems with advanced non-polluting electromagnetic and electro-gravitic systems. The open literature is replete with well-documented technologies that have surfaced, only to later be illegally seized or suppressed through systematic abuses of the national security state, large corporate and financial interests or other shadowy concerns. Technologically, the hurdles to achieve what is called over- unity energy generation by accessing the teeming energy in the space around us are not insurmountable. Numerous inventors have done so for decades. What has been insurmountable are the barriers created through the collusion of vast financial, industrial, oil and rogue governmental interests. In short, the strategic barriers to the widespread adoption of these new electromagnetic energy-generating systems far exceed the technological ones. The proof of this is that, after many decades of innovation and promising inventions, none have made it through the maze of regulatory, patenting, rogue national security, financial, scientific and media barriers that confront the inventor or small company. Categories of Suppression Our review of now-obscure technological breakthroughs show that these inventions have been suppressed or seized by the following broad categories of actions: Acquisition of the technology by 'front' companies whose intent have been to 'shelve' the invention and prevent the device from coming to market.
    [Show full text]