[Rezwan]

Henning wrote:
Warning: Don’t just add links and marketing-speech to a focus fusion entry. Same thing as on Wikipedia might happen. It got deleted.

Another reason why our “fusion in general” approach is the way to go, and not trying to sell an unproven technology, but to sell exploring an idea.

[Rezwan]

Post Partisan Power doc is brilliant. Thanks Brian!

The only shortfall of this think tank group is they have no mention of leveraging new media or “Gov 2.0” type approaches. Just reviving tried and true methods of gov-centric spending on research with military procurement as the main driver. Fair enough, but it’s time to get creative and crack open the pinata of the long tail. Don’t just tax people at the pump – give them the ability to pick and choose energy projects to invest in, and the legal right to do so, even if they aren’t “accredited investors”. Big oversight.

In any case, this doc helps the fusion policy effort, so thanks again!

[Rezwan]

Of course, now the shadows are in the wrong place. It’s lit from below 🙂

Attached files

[Rezwan]

OK, back to the peace sign. I just had a bit of an idea. How about flipping the peace sign over? I’ve put it up on the site, don’t know if many people will catch it.

It makes a symbolic difference.

Rezwan wrote: I didn’t know the history of the symbol.
Looking it up on this website, we read that:

Gerald Holtom, a conscientious objector who had worked on a farm in Norfolk during the Second World War, explained that the symbol incorporated the semaphore letters N(uclear) and D(isarmament). He later wrote to Hugh Brock, editor of Peace News, explaining the genesis of his idea in greater, more personal depth:

I was in despair. Deep despair. I drew myself: the representative of an individual in despair, with hands palm outstretched outwards and downwards in the manner of Goya’s peasant before the firing squad. I formalised the drawing into a line and put a circle round it.

Eric Austin added his own interpretation of the design: “the gesture of despair had long been associated with the death of Man and the circle with the unborn child.”

How depressing is that? But now, with aneutronic fusion, the hands are uplifted. It looks like a tree now, growing, expanding.

Also, some Christians are under the impression that the old peace sign is a broken cross and an insult to the Saviour. This flipped symbol obviously is not.

[Rezwan]

That’s no excuse for not doing a literature search.

[Rezwan]

Brian H wrote: Evolution is also fractal?

Cool, but I don’t see the puzzle here.

Puzzled by types of mollusc that abruptly disappeared from the British fossil record, apparently in response to a glaciation, only to reappear 2 million years later completely unchanged, he asked of Darwin: “Be so good as to explain all this in your next letter.” Darwin never did.

Um…perhaps the molluscs went on vacation to France, and returned (well, their great great ^n…grand molluscs) when the weather improved? Or when anti-immigrant sentiment got unbearable in France.

[Rezwan]

We’re also hoping to get through the balkanization of literature here – the specialization. Perhaps some of you will draw out some interesting thing from an unlikely journal set that relates to this research.

[Rezwan]

Breakable wrote: I am watching the video now. Just want to point out that Eric makes some claims that will be attacked by skeptics immediately, such as that the plasmoid-like process is occurring in quasars, solar flares, atmospheric sprites. He will probably have to defend this position with references to peer reviewed papers. If anyone can provide those, please go ahead.

Yes, the more peer-reviewed references we have, the better.

We can turn this into a table showing the claim on the one side, and the many external references to back it up on the other.

Notice this article is short of references:

Theoretical basis for anticipated yield

The first two variables in Figure 2 above (increasing current) are based on LPP’s theory, but they are backed up by extensive experiment [links needed]. So far, LPP has been achieving much faster scaling, almost I^7.

The third item (optimization of axial magnetic field) is also based on LPP’s theory, but requires experimental verification.

For changing the fuel to pB11, the first two variables LPP is certain of, and are based on well-established measurements by others. [links needed]

The third item (additional compression for pB11 with a DPF) is also based on LPP’s theory, which has to be experimentally verified.

We need to do better on this site at connecting to research. Help us fill in the blanks above. I’m sure some of you have access to dozens of quality, peer reviewed references for each theoretical basis point above. We don’t just want random references, but the quality ones that speak specifically to the issue. And a bit of expertise in pointing out the portion of the paper that speaks to it would also add immense value.

The more corroboration on various points, the better.

One issue, in particular (speaking of the video), Mike Brown from Swarthmore was visiting last week. He asked about references for the movement of the filaments around the electrode heads. Eric supplied a few, but we could always use more.

FYI, Eric has pledged to give me a stack of his references and explain how they link to each claim – but that could take a while, and there are more important things for them to be doing than revisit the literature. Hence the outsourcing here. Again, let’s go above and beyond the links already in Eric’s papers. We’re calling for a wider literature search here.

[Rezwan]

That was subtle! Subliminal “pinch” messages : )

Great animation.

Video is geared towards a narrow segment of the population, however, drawing inspiration from 60s counter culture. And it doesn’t seem to be proposing much in the way of policy. It’s describing things that are ongoing. Networking and open source efforts are well under way, and there are a lot of great projects taking place. And I don’t think they are a product of the 60s. They’re very much a natural phenomenon of networking, amped way up by technology.

No, I change my mind. There is a takeaway here – leveraging open source networking as a main solution to environmental problems.

Compare with this “Post Partisan Power” policy proposal: – a great proposal, but it dismisses subsidies and the green movement in favor of massive spending in technology R&D by government and private sector which will solve the problem.

These two proposals could be combined effectively. What seems missing from the “Post partisan” policy is application of emerging open source and collaborative initiatives. Add in more tools for open source collaboration (micro-financing of high tech projects, for example, and allowing people to rank projects on which they want to pay taxes, and so forth) and I think you’ll have something very cool.

[Rezwan]

Attached is the type of box that would be useful. This was found on the aei.org website.

In sum, I want to collapse the five parts of “What is Focus fusion” into a “box” so it doesn’t take up as much space. I think some jquery is required. You click on the icons and the frame changes. There must be some easy widget to help design such a thing. Some cut and paste code.

It needs to be modular so we could put it anywhere.

Attached files

[Rezwan]

I’m looking at all the charts posted in this thread so far. What’s up with the variations on the axes? No consistency.

Temperature:
(pardon lack of upper and lower case):

Temperature (K)
Temperature T(K)
Ion Temperature (K)
Electron Temperature (eV)
Electronic Temperature in Kelvin
log 10 T (eV)
Central Ion Temperature, Ti(0)(keV)
log 10 Te (degrees K)

Density:

log10ne(electrons cm^-3)
Particle density
Electron density in cm^-3
Lawson parameter, nitE(10^20 m^-3 s)
Electron Number Density (cm^-3)
log 10n(cm^-3)
Confinement Quality, nt(m^-3 s)

Another unsettling thing – in some cases, Temp is on the x axis. In most, it’s on the y axis. And one chart has additional parameters (“Electron Plasma Frequency in Hz”)

Conversion chart required?
Which of these parameters is the most meaningful to a broader audience? And how much of the variation should we also explain? I suppose a little cheat sheet/ conversion/”you say “Electronic Temperature in Kelvin” I say “log10T(eV)”, let’s call the whole thing off…” chart might be useful.

Human Perspective.
How do we add human comprehension here? Looking at the “characteristics of typical plasmas” poster, I see a neon sign and fluorescent lights are up there at 10^15 in density, and 10^4 in temperature. They don’t seem so hot to me. I’ve touched such lightbulbs before. Is that really what 10^4 feels like?

Also, the sun is up there, very dense and hot. Is it denser than a person (where is a person on the chart? In the lower solid corner? How far over? We’re pretty spongy. Some spongier than others.) Is the core of the sun fluffier than a person, or denser? It’s not really that clear.

Adding FAQs:
Since we’ll have hyperlinks on our poster, we can add all kinds of information. Like – does fusion take place in a lightning bolt? If lightning strikes me, will my brains fuse?

Building in Experimental accessibility:
This question has come up for me a few times when I define plasmas. First, definition of plasmas:

It is a collection of charged particles that respond strongly and collectively to electromagnetic fields, taking the form of gas-like clouds or ion beams. Since the particles in plasma are electrically charged (generally by being stripped of electrons), it is frequently described as an “ionized gas.”

The question is, if plasmas respond to magnetic fields, and are ionized gas, and Flames are plasmas, do they respond to magnets? I’ll have to test this. Need something to hold the magnet out with so I don’t get burned : ) The followup question is, couldn’t firefighters use magnetic fields to put out fires?

Kids.

And where is the plasma TV on this chart? What happens if I take a magnet next to my plasma TV? As you can tell, I don’t have a plasma TV, so I can’t test this.

A Game/toy idea:
You know how kids toys have a pin the tail on the donkey sort of thing, you could pin the phenomenon in its correct area of temp/density. To make it easier for young kids, you can have the board cut into the right shape so they are just fitting shapes. But subliminally, they are learning.

An animation (with exquisite production values : )) could bring this whole poster idea to life. We’d zoom around from plasma to plasma getting hotter or colder. Playing “hot and cold” until we get to fusion, I suppose.

This could be fun!

[Rezwan]

Thanks for pointing this out!

Moses makes a great case for fusion energy.

I would just add to this piece the need for diversification of fusion research approaches and funding (don’t put all the eggs in a laser basket), and a bit about aneutronic fusion, the ultimate fusion goal.

Actually, it might be there, I didn’t watch through to the end. Must work! Will come back to this.

As to the winning tone, perhaps he’s convinced, or perhaps it’s a strategy for ensuring funding consistency which is necessary to find out one way or another. Success of ignition itself could spark more fusion funding all around, even if ultimately LIFE doesn’t turn out to be as efficient as other fusion ideas which follow.

Bonus yield here: the “Long Now Foundation” sounds like people who can relate to our goals. Allies perhaps?

[Rezwan]

Looks like some random person put that together.

[Rezwan]

Here, by the way, is a list of fusion sites from which to cull good feeds.

http://fusionpower.org/OtherSites.html

A lot of them don’t have RSS feeds. The mission here is to set up a wish list that will extract the most useful news from these guys and dump it in one (or two or three logical) place(s).

Like, we’d aggregate the government/policy news one place, the Tokamak news in one place, ICC news in one place, education/fun initiatives in one place, and so forth.

[Rezwan]

And after those decisions are made – next step is to graduate to advanced HTML only, so I can style it w/ CSS. Kind of stuck with their framework for now.

[Author]

Posts