Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #406
    AvatarJolly Roger
    Member

    I came across this article on the Electron Spiral Toroid (EST) Spheromak and thought it may interest you.

    http://pesn.com/2006/03/08/9600242_Spheromak_Plasma_Toroid/

    #2026
    AvatarTransmute
    Member

    Sounds dubious, even more so then DPFF, and did you check the references?

    #2027
    AvatarJolly Roger
    Member

    Transmute wrote: Sounds dubious, even more so then DPFF, and did you check the references?

    No, I did not check the references. I actually had not read the whole article before I posted it here.

    It is controversial, and that is what this forum is for, to discuss things, and that is controversy.

    What I like most about the article is its hopeful tone. Maybe EST won’t work, maybe FF won’t work, but we need to keep trying.

    #2028
    AvatarElling
    Member

    The EPS claims are plenty and bold. They don’t present a theory backed up by hard evidence to make their wonderful predictions believable.
    This is sad, because colliding and/or counterrotating thoroids might be the ultimate trick needed to get pB11 going.

    #2030
    AvatarTransmute
    Member

    Optimism is no indicator of success. The reference are awful, tertiary references in most cases, even web forums! I was surprised they did not cite wikipeida at least they had that much sense. Unfortunately there is so little information presented about how the EST Spheromak works that there is nothing to work with for discussing.

    #2032
    AvatarJolly Roger
    Member

    From
    http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtopic=359

    Eric Lerner:

    I glanced at the NASA analysis and the reply, neither of which address the fusion application. A few points:

    1) NASA is right that plasmoids, smoke rings of plasma can easily be created by many approaches. The photos don

    #2037
    AvatarJolly Roger
    Member

    From
    http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtopic=359

    Clint Seward:

    Your most important point was that others have suggested that I should be
    able to demonstrate a collision of EST’s and even a level of fusion with a few hundred thousand dollars and about a year. I agree. Here is what I need to do:

    1. Capture the EST in a way that I can measure them. I have designed a
    method in the last two months that will do this.
    2. Measure the density of the EST. This requirement is something everyone
    is asking for, and will enable me to get serious funding from sponsors.
    3. Collide two EST’s. I have found a simple way to do this based on the
    TRISOPS work by Wells.
    4. Consulting work by Chen to verify the physics I have outlined for the
    density.
    5. Make and measure an EST based on Deuterium.
    6. Collide two Deuterium EST’s.

    Each of these requires some cash outlays, so I am working them as I can get resources. Several people, including yourself, are considering helpful investments of $5k to $10k to 25K to 50K to 100k. Work will progress with any investment, no matter how small. Capturing an EST is a $5k investment..

    Your second most important point is that more people want to see more data and even a video. I have many of these, but have not published them yet. I have concentrated on the physics, which I feel I now know completely, and
    can get confirmed. This is a smaller effort, about $15k.

    ============================

    Clint Seward:

    It remains clear that we have made and patented a new discovery in physics: a plasma toroid the remains stable without external magnetic fields. This is so far beyond the experience and understanding of plasma scientists today that, to say the least, we are having trouble convincing reviewers. We have completed the design of an improved neutron tube. This is what we have to build to demonstrate a clean energy source, and I plan to do the first steps in 2006, with a first demo in 2007 if all goes well.

    In 2005 we completed a detailed design of the apparatus we need for the first demonstration. This is possible because of two things. First, we understand the EST is really just a special case of a spheromak, a plasma ring that is being studied by others, except that the EST is high density spheromak, which will overcome the limitations of spheromaks for the clean energy application. Secondly, we can adapt the EST Spheromak to the well known neutron tube, by applying all of the pieces we have developed over the years.

    We plan to do this by making a new, high energy neutron tube. There are several thousand neutron tubes in use in the US today that safely collide hydrogen ions to produce neutrons, which in turn are used for explosives detection, industrial process control, and medical testing. Figure 1 shows the neutron tube schematically. An ion source produces hydrogen ions (deuterium), which are accelerated to 110 kV, then directed to hit the target (also deuterium), a process which produces neutrons (see reference below).

    Neutron tubes today are limited by the low density of the hydrogen ions. We plan to overcome this limitation by adapting the EST Spheromak to increase the ion density to produce a high output neutron tube. The EST Spheromak is patented jointly by EPS Inc. and MIT scientists who also have published papers confirming the physics and data. Since each part of the development has been done by others or by EPS, we anticipate that this will be an engineering project to produce a proof of concept lab demo in two years, with modest funding.

    The major application is a high output neutron tube for clean energy applications. The high output neutron tube can be thought of as a heat generator to replace a furnace and/or generate electricity. Fuel costs for energy will 20:1 less than fossil fuel costs. Ultimately we plan to use the hydrogen/boron process to produce clean energy without neutrons.

    The development is a scale up of work completed to date. We make EST Spheromaks in the lab and accelerate them. Each step has been shown to work individually, and we plan to adapt them to produce a lab demo in two years.. Milestones:

    1. Defining Patent: (Note: co-inventors are MIT scientists). 2000

    2. Spheromak acceleration: 2001

    3. Spheromak capture in a magnetic trap: 2006

    4. Spheromak collision for a lab proof of concept demonstration: 2007

    5. First neutron tube commercial prototype: 2008

    6. First commercial product: 2009

    Our best estimate at this time (December 2005) is that we will need 24 months and approximately $500,000 to demonstrate a colliding EST fusion process.

    #2038
    AvatarElling
    Member

    Eric dismisses colliding plasmoids, but EPS type colliding plasmoids. I still wonder if a smooth union of plasmoids is possible if the parameters are set right. After all, the injected angular momentum in the ongoing Chile experiment would result in plasmoids merging. At least, the momentum should not be big enough for two plasmoids to desintegrate upon encounter from differential centrifugal forces in the toroid.

Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.