Thought This was interesting!

[Dan619]

http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-04-overturned-scientific-explanation-good-news.html

Looks like you might get more electricity than thought! 🙂

[zapkitty]

Hmmm… recently Lerner-hakase was heard saying that the ion vs x-rays ratio was expected to be .66/.33 instead of .5/.5

[Rezwan]

Thanks Dan! Great catch. I’ve reposted on the website. Now to Facebook and tweet. Cool news!

[Matt M]

Seems like that makes breakeven and net energy production a lot closer than before.

[Tulse]

It also makes it much less crucial to squeeze efficiency out of the onion, which (as I understand it) is a less established way to recover energy than capturing the alphas.

[zapkitty]

It should be easier (and thus more efficient) to gain energy from higher energy particles.

Thus two higher energy particles and one low should make for better coil output than one high and two low.

[YordanGeorgiev]

How does this relate to the findings of LPP ?! To my humble understandings this seems to differentiate to the predictions of LPP’s models ?! As whole how does this correlate to the current findings of LPP ?

[zapkitty]

YordanGeorgiev wrote: How does this relate to the findings of LPP ?! To my humble understandings this seems to differentiate to the predictions of LPP’s models ?! As whole how does this correlate to the current findings of LPP ?

As far as I know they are not yet using boron in the LPPX so it’s a theoretical question at the moment.

Of course it would be a nice treat if one of the team were to drop by and comment on this 😉

[AaronB]

Well, the overall energy released will be the same, so it’s just a matter of extracting that energy efficiently. Whether that is easier to do with two fast and a slow or two slow and a fast will have to be seen. I suppose and hope this will be better.

[Tulse]

AaronB wrote: Well, the overall energy released will be the same

…which I suppose upon reflection should have been obvious, but which wasn’t made clear in the original article. Oh, well, so much for violating the laws of conservation!

[zapkitty]

Tulse wrote:

Well, the overall energy released will be the same

…which I suppose upon reflection should have been obvious, but which wasn’t made clear in the original article. Oh, well, so much for violating the laws of conservation!

It should be helpful and I’m glad Aaron stopped by… but the discovery is potentially helpful at best and not a real game changer… I’ve been fishing instead for confirmation on the 2/3 – 1/3 ratio for ions vs. x-rays that Lerner-hakase mentioned in that last video pep-talk 🙂

If not an error THAT would shift the parameters quite a bit in favor of success.

[AaronB]

zapkitty wrote: I’ve been fishing instead for confirmation on the 2/3 – 1/3 ratio for ions vs. x-rays that Lerner-hakase mentioned in that last video pep-talk 🙂 If not an error THAT would shift the parameters quite a bit in favor of success.

I’m just going to say it’s an expectation at this point, and hope it comes true. The proof will be in the plasma pudding this fall. It depends on whether the magnetic field effect works as advertised and if the ion beam behaves properly, and we won’t know that until we try it.

[DerekShannon]

@zapkitty, it sounds like you are looking for Table 3 of “Technical Paper I” listed under the LPPx category here on FFS, in which beam and x-ray output relative to input is calculated for various parameters. Direct link.

[zapkitty]

DerekShannon wrote: @zapkitty, it sounds like you are looking for Table 3 of “Technical Paper I” listed under the LPPx category here on FFS, in which beam and x-ray output relative to input is calculated for various parameters. Direct link.

So the 50/50 ratio was yet another Unofficial Forum Object? 🙂

[Milemaster]

How does the angle between the two fast Alpha particles correlate to the almost linear beam output FF expects to channel trough the coil to extract energy? It seems that this might be a problem or at least a efficiency drop of the reactor. I imagine two situations in which this angle would impair to reach a maximum efficiency.
First: If an axial alignment is reached by means of the magnetic action of the plasmoid, this would contribute to its instability, decreasing size and duration of the reaction, thus less atoms would fuse.
Second: If a non axial alignment is inevitable the alpha particles shooted to the wall of the chamber are lost, its energy transformed in heat and we will need other type of shielding and overcome erosion problems.

[Author]

Posts