Will This Work As Effective Shielding?

[Aeronaut]

http://www.albany.edu/x-ray-optics/polycapillary_optics.htm may be an effective lightweight (but not as cheap as water) way to focus X-rays and neutrons(?!) into much smaller and lighter processing systems- power conversion and shielding. I’m wondering how small and light weight this could make the FF, assuming this will work?

[Brian H]

Aeronaut wrote: http://www.albany.edu/x-ray-optics/polycapillary_optics.htm may be an effective lightweight (but not as cheap as water) way to focus X-rays and neutrons(?!) into much smaller and lighter processing systems- power conversion and shielding. I’m wondering how small and light weight this could make the FF, assuming this will work?

Since the X-ray emissions are in all (random) directions, I see no value in these optics, fascinating though they are. They specify very gentle curves in the tubes, as well, so would hardly be “small”.

I was also fascinated by the neutron reference; treating neutrons as wavicles is pretty brave stuff!

[Aeronaut]

Brian H wrote:

http://www.albany.edu/x-ray-optics/polycapillary_optics.htm may be an effective lightweight (but not as cheap as water) way to focus X-rays and neutrons(?!) into much smaller and lighter processing systems- power conversion and shielding. I’m wondering how small and light weight this could make the FF, assuming this will work?

Since the X-ray emissions are in all (random) directions, I see no value in these optics, fascinating though they are. They specify very gentle curves in the tubes, as well, so would hardly be “small”.

I was also fascinated by the neutron reference; treating neutrons as wavicles is pretty brave stuff!

Ideally we could change the flight path from radial to axial, magnetically separate the x-rays from neutrons in free space just before the converter, and use relatively small and lightweight converters and shields. Suppose we only needed 1mm (may be generous at these wavelengths) to change the flight path another degree. Now a 125 degree bend towards the collector needs only 125 mm per side, or 250mm of total side shield thickness.

The only obvious advantage would be flight weight. But it may be possible to pay for the light pipe jacket with labor savings from a smaller, easier to assemble x-ray converter and neutron shield.

[Brian H]

Aeronaut wrote:

http://www.albany.edu/x-ray-optics/polycapillary_optics.htm may be an effective lightweight (but not as cheap as water) way to focus X-rays and neutrons(?!) into much smaller and lighter processing systems- power conversion and shielding. I’m wondering how small and light weight this could make the FF, assuming this will work?

Since the X-ray emissions are in all (random) directions, I see no value in these optics, fascinating though they are. They specify very gentle curves in the tubes, as well, so would hardly be “small”.

I was also fascinated by the neutron reference; treating neutrons as wavicles is pretty brave stuff!

Ideally we could change the flight path from radial to axial, magnetically separate the x-rays from neutrons in free space just before the converter, and use relatively small and lightweight converters and shields. Suppose we only needed 1mm (may be generous at these wavelengths) to change the flight path another degree. Now a 125 degree bend towards the collector needs only 125 mm per side, or 250mm of total side shield thickness.

The only obvious advantage would be flight weight. But it may be possible to pay for the light pipe jacket with labor savings from a smaller, easier to assemble x-ray converter and neutron shield.
Since the X-ray emissions are essentially from random events one either side of the quantum gap prohibiting electron-nucleus interactions, they are going to be undirected, and undirectable. Recheck the site info and other docs re the patents etc.

And, AFAIK, neither X-rays nor neutrons will respond to magnetic fields.

[Aeronaut]

Hmmm….. so neither x-rays or neutrons are sure to leave the vacuum chamber at a 90 degree angle? That would shoot this shielding down in a hurry. Thanx for the insight, Brian.

[jowabea]

If the plasmoid is small enough, and perfectly located at the center of the chamber, wouldn’t all of the X-rays and neutrons have essentially the same point of origin, and a spherical chamber would guarantee pretty much a 90 degree exit angle?

What am I missing?

[Aeronaut]

jowabea wrote: If the plasmoid is small enough, and perfectly located at the center of the chamber, wouldn’t all of the X-rays and neutrons have essentially the same point of origin, and a spherical chamber would guarantee pretty much a 90 degree exit angle?

What am I missing?

That’s pretty much what I was thinking, Jowabea, but this machine’s fine print involves a touch of quantum physics that prevent the x-rays from excessively cooling the plasmoid. This alters the flight plan, of course, since at least the x-rays leave hyperspace wherever they want to….

Also, the electrodes are around 13 inches long, so the geometry is more cylindrical than spherical.

[Author]

Posts