Reply To: Mind, Spirit, Science connection?

[redsnapper]

Henning,
Is there any info available on the size and composition of the X-ray converter? I saw that there was a patent issued, but my experience with patents is they’re unlikely to give you that kind of detail. (They’re supposed to be easily understood by someone “skilled in the art,” but that implies that they don’t tell you anything they absolutely don’t have to, presuming that you already know and/or are skilled enough to guess what they don’t say. That probably doesn’t cover me, in this context. :-)) I did actually take the link to the patent and I scanned the opening page – a couple of weeks ago – but really didn’t try to digest any of the content at the time.
Also, mjv1121 answered that the energy distribution between the two ion beams might only be determined after tests have gone to the next level – but I can hardy believe that there aren’t already some pretty concrete expectations – and there should be some fairly fundamental physics dictating the gross effects. (I took a plasma-physics course in grad school 33 years ago, and I hate to admit how much I’ve forgotten – though I’d feel worse if it was something I’d actually found a use for in the meantime!) In fact, I’d assume that if a Rogowski coil can be applied to the He nuclei, it could also be applied to the electron beam. If the electrons only emit 80% of their energy in X-rays, surely that remaining 20% is well-ordered kinetic energy worth going after with another Rogowski coil? The more energy you can get back directly as electricity, the better. Heck, because they’re moving electrons, they’re already electrcity (much more so than the He ions). Is there an even simpler and obvious way to funnel them into a conductor? Maybe that’s already part of the design – so self-evident that nobody’s mentioned it in one of these posts?