Reply To: Some about a fusion dispute in Sweden.

[Joseph Chikva]

So, the idea is to have one beam of tritium ions, and to shoot another beam of faster-moving deuterium ions at it from the back, and then shoot both beams with an electron beam from the front. Is that right?

Yes, but not obligatory deuterium beam + tritium beam (D+T reaction) but any other reactions where different kinds ions are used e.g. D+He3.

If that’s the case, I think it would be very difficult to make the second beam intersect with the first beam without hitting whatever produced the first beam. However, if that problem was resolved and the two beams were able to interact, because they are going in the same direction, there would be less energy difference between them to take advantage of to make them collide and fuse. Most people try to collide the beams from opposite directions.

You are right about more efficiency of colliding from the opposite directions because in this case collision energies in laboratory frame and center-of-mass frame are the same or close each other. In the case of proposed Method required collision energy is higher in laboratory frame. But colliding the beams from opposite directions would defocus beams magnetically and consequently will not give us enough fusion intensity.

The electron beam is meant to make the two combined beams pinch.

Yes, but at the same time relativistic electron beam thanks to radiation dissipating radial motion’s energy gives some immunity against instabilities.

Is this a pulsed device, or are the beams constant? It would probably have to be pulsed, because after you send in the ions, assuming they fused along the way, they would reach the electron source and be attracted to it, which would erode it very quickly, and the eroded material would interfere with the ion beams. Depending on the energies involved, there would be quite an X-ray show!

It is constant and I have two ideas (designs) for realization the Method.
•Linear design
•Cyclic design
Both these designs are patentable and should work.
And in linear design the reaction length should be big enough for near 100% burning-off of fuel.
Longitudinal electric field will compensate the alignment of ions relative speeds because we use different kinds of ions in different beams. For example if we use deuterium and tritium beams with faster deuterium particles the alignment will be compensated by the higher rate of acceleration of lighter particles.
But certainly I like an idea to use aneutronic reactions: e.g. De+He3

If the fusion reaction produced neutrons, you’d still have to use the steam cycle to capture the energy.

Sure