Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 106 through 120 (of 234 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: President Obama commends high school fusioneers #10366
    Ivy Matt
    Participant

    Not much new, but I just came across an article from May 21. Among the highlights are that the project has achieved sustained fusion for 10 minutes at a time and that it has generated 25 kilovolts of power. The students are now shooting for 100 kilovolts.

    Question: if it receives its energy from a wall socket (120 volts in the US) and produces 25,000 volts of power, does that mean it already has a fusion energy gain of about 200? Or am I misunderstanding something? Of course, that doesn’t include the inefficiencies involved in converting the neutrons to heat, the heat to steam, the steam to kinetic energy, and the kinetic energy to electricity, but still….

    in reply to: Rossi’s Cold Fusion #10269
    Ivy Matt
    Participant

    I don’t think it makes much sense to assume, just because Rossi said something a while back about funding E-Cat research on his own dime, that he isn’t expecting to make a profit out of this. If Defkalion makes any sort of a profit, Rossi is going to get his cut. AmpEnergo has already paid him for a license. Defkalion has received hundreds of millions of dollars worth of investments and is now soliciting licenses for tens of millions per licensee. I see no concrete evidence of a scam, but you can no longer say that it’s not a scam because money isn’t changing hands. That’s already happening and will probably continue to happen for several months at least.

    in reply to: CNN coverage of General Fusion #10268
    Ivy Matt
    Participant

    Oh, I just assumed somebody moved my thread and, in the process, became its owner. I’ve noticed recently that a number of older threads have been “updated” and appear as new forum posts on the front page.

    Ivy Matt
    Participant

    Wow, George Miley sure gets around.

    in reply to: Fusion Tartan #10261
    Ivy Matt
    Participant

    Dr_Barnowl wrote: As soon as I saw the title, my thoughts were about the spectral wavelengths of elements involved. I suppose with tartan, you might also be able to work the actual gaps between the spectral lines into the design 🙂

    Well, I hadn’t thought that deeply about it, but in fact I have had similar ideas about working binary codes into a tartan design. I do realize that the colors I used here (which are based on actual weavers’ colors) are only a rough approximation of hydrogen/deuterium/lithium/helium and boron plasmas/flames, but see my thoughts above about aesthetics. Also, the thing about tartan is that colors don’t need to be specified exactly, so this tartan could be blood red and forest green or bubblegum pink and lime green (which would probably be closer to the real plasma colors), and it would still be regarded as the same tartan.

    vansig wrote: i thought the whole concept was patently absurd.

    but, it is actually a nice looking tartan

    Thank you. I’m not entirely sold on the idea of fusion-related consumer products (with the possible exception of plasma nightlights :cheese:) in general at this stage. Nor am I quite certain how to make this tartan a “consumer product”, as I have few connections with the tartan industry and wouldn’t know how to go about setting up a profit-sharing arrangement with one of the tartan mills. In fact, I’m not sure if making this tartan exclusive is what I want to do. Then again, introducing aneutronic fusion to a group of men (and a few women) whose numbers may be very small, but who collectively hold a fair amount of purchasing power (as evidenced by their ability to spend large sums of money on fine-quality, but nevertheless expensive clothing), would be a form of marketing, would it not? (Of course, tartan—or plaid here in the US—is not limited to expensive worsted wool kilts, but I have even fewer connections with cotton mills than I do woolen mills.)

    in reply to: Rossi’s Cold Fusion #10259
    Ivy Matt
    Participant

    Yes, a lot has happened in the last month or so, including Defkalion Green Technologies’ press conference on June 23. To give a very brief summary:

    DGT says it will start selling “Hyperion” units to the Balkan countries in Q4 2011. Other companies will be sold licenses to market the technology in other countries in the eastern hemisphere. A US company called AmpEnergo holds the license (directly from Andrea Rossi, not from DGT) to market the technology in the western hemisphere. AmpEnergo will not be selling household units, at least initially. Apart from that, little is known about AmpEnergo’s plans. DGT plans to market household units ranging from 5 kW to 30 kW in 5-kW increments. They will all cost €4000-5000 apiece, the only difference between them being the internal pressure. They will also market 20-foot container-sized units ranging from 1.15 MW to 3.45 MW. All units will be checked and refueled by technicians every six months. The refueling costs will be a few hundred euros a year. The units will be used for heating, but some kW-range units will be made compatible with third-party electrical generation technologies. Those are not included in the cost of the unit. All DGT units will be monitored via a GSM link. Because the usefulness of the device depends partly on a secret catalyst, according to Andrea Rossi, each unit will contain some sort of self-destruct mechanism that will be initiated if the unit is tampered with.

    Even if I weren’t still on the fence about whether the technology actually works, there are many things about DGT’s plans that would dampen my enthusiasm. If it [em]does[/em] work, I want to see some competitive alternatives soon.

    in reply to: CNN coverage of General Fusion #10257
    Ivy Matt
    Participant

    Wow, how did I get promoted to admin? %-P

    in reply to: Are female scientists welcome here? #10246
    Ivy Matt
    Participant

    So, how was EPS?

    in reply to: Popular Mechanics June 2011 #10245
    Ivy Matt
    Participant

    The article is now online:

    http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/energy/next-generation/is-fusion-power-finally-for-real

    In fact, it’s been online since June 21. I notice someone mentioned Focus Fusion in the comments below.

    in reply to: Fusion Tartan #10244
    Ivy Matt
    Participant

    I haven’t forgotten this topic, nor have I been idle. After a few false starts I eventually ended up with a design I like. I used the Crawford tartan as a starting point for the colors (I have Crawford ancestors, among others), but I also looked at online images of woven tartan cloth for reference. Despite my philosophy of tartan design, I quickly came up with meanings for the colors. I haven’t decided exactly what the crimson stands for. My first thought was that it’s for the deuterium plasma being used in the FF-1 so far. I later thought maybe it could represent the hydrogen part of the p+B11 reaction, or even elements in other aneutronic fusion reactions, such as helium or lithium. The green represents the boron plasma (I’m guessing a boron plasma will look like a boron flame), and the white represents the energy released in a fusion reaction. I’ve decided to call it the Aneutronic Fusion tartan. I have also worked on a blue/green variation of this tartan, to represent the Focus Fusion Society, but so far I haven’t been satisfied with the results.

    Attached files

    Ivy Matt
    Participant

    Conference is over. Will we be getting any reports on “X-Ray Diagnostics in a Mega-Amp Dense Plasma Focus Device – Focus Fusion-1” or “X-Ray Spectrum from a Mega-Amp Dense Plasma Focus Device – Focus Fusion-1 and Its Correlation to the Plasmoid Formation”? Or wait for the proceedings?

    Did you hear any novel ideas apart from Chapman’s laser-beam-target thruster?

    in reply to: Are female scientists welcome here? #10202
    Ivy Matt
    Participant

    Actually, I believe my definition is misleading because I actually defined “aneutronic fusion reaction” rather than “aneutronic fusion”. Perhaps this is a better definition:

    aneutronic fusion – Fusion in which no neutrons are produced [em]in the primary reaction[/em].

    That is, there are aneutronic fusion reactions in which no neutrons are produced, but there are also side reactions (which comprise less than 1% of the total fusion reactions) in which neutrons are produced.

    in reply to: Are female scientists welcome here? #10198
    Ivy Matt
    Participant

    sunny wrote: Welcome to Korea. You will like here. There are so many cute girls. This is why I am seriously considering leaving. LOL

    🙄

    Well, that’s not among my official reasons for going to Korea, but if it happens…. :red:

    I’m not sure how much you’ve read so far, but I’ll give you a list of acronyms and other terms that will be handy to know on this site:

    DPF – [em]Dense plasma focus[/em]. A sort of pinch device in which the anode is nested inside the cathode. An electric current causes a plasma sheath to form between the anode and the cathode. The plasma sheath runs between them till they end, at which point its momentum carries it into the hollow mouth of the anode, forming a vortex, like water running down a drain. A plasmoid forms in the vortex, and it is in this plasmoid that the densities and temperatures necessary for nuclear fusion occur. Then, like a pulsar, the plasmoid fires two beams in opposite directions: an electron beam into the mouth of the anode and an ion beam out of the mouth of the anode. See here for an illustration of how the DPF works.

    LPP – [em]Lawrenceville Plasma Physics[/em]. A corporation founded by Eric Lerner in 1974, based in New Jersey. Its current purpose is to test a DPF device to determine its feasibility as a net energy fusion reactor, as well as for other applications.

    FFS – [em]Focus Fusion Society[/em]. A non-profit organization founded to support nuclear fusion, in particular aneutronic fusion, and in particular LPP’s current experiment. Rezwan Razani is currently the FFS Executive Director.

    FF-1 – [em]Focus Fusion-1[/em], also “FoFu-1”. LPP’s current dense plasma focus experiment, which is hoped to demonstrate the feasibility of obtaining net energy from fusion.

    aneutronic fusion – A fusion reaction that produces no neutrons. LPP hopes to demonstrate net energy from fusion using the proton + boron-11 reaction, the product of which is three alpha particles with a combined total of 8.7 MeV of energy. Because these products have a positive charge, they can be used to generate electricity more directly than neutrons, which generate electricity by heating a lithium blanket, which boils water into steam, which turns the turbine of an electric generator. In a fusion reactor based on the DPF, the ion beam would induce an electric current in a series of coils.

    the onion – A device, consisting of numerous layers of metal foil, which produces electricity from X-rays in the same manner as a photovoltaic cell. It takes its name from a spherical concept depicted by Torulf Greek (who did the animation for the YouTube video I linked to), although the actual design would probably be more cylindrical. This is a secondary method of electrical generation in a DPF device.

    Note: I wrote the above almost as much for my own benefit as for anyone else’s, to make sure I understand the concepts. There are probably mistakes or bad analogies. If so, any corrections would be appreciated.

    in reply to: Fusion Tartan #10197
    Ivy Matt
    Participant

    Rezwan wrote: I’d love to see what a fusion tartan looks like.

    You know, so would I. I haven’t seriously thought about it yet, though. Some of the more recent tartans are highly symbolic, e.g. “The red line symbolizes the blood spilt by our MacGuffin ancestors in defense of their country”, or “The seven white lines signify the stars of the Pleiades”, but my own personal philosophy of tartan design is that the aesthetics (admittedly highly subjective) are much more important than the meaning…and the meaning can often be shoehorned on post hoc.

    There are some “cause” tartans that contribute a certain percentage of funds to a cause, but I’m not sure exactly how that would work, other than that a single supplier, or at least a limited number of suppliers, would be required. I’m still a bit sketchy on the economics of designing (and possibly registering) a new tartan, especially if it is to be woven in heavyweight worsted wool (i.e. kilt fabric). On the other hand, a simple web graphic of a tartan may at least qualify for copyright, and possibly also trademark protection.

    Just thinking out loud, mostly. %-P

    in reply to: Jewelry for Philanthropy #10189
    Ivy Matt
    Participant

    Hm, it’s been a month or so since Steven logged in, but I know he’s active on the fusor.net forums, and I believe I’ve seen him on Talk-Polywell as well.

Viewing 15 posts - 106 through 120 (of 234 total)