[vansig]

or place the reactors in the tail section, then have just a single shield for the bunch

[vansig]

nemmart wrote:
Another aspect that particularly troubles to me: if FF was as close as it sometimes appears, I’d think funding would be pouring in. […] So why hasn’t someone or some organization with deep pockets decided to fund this?

Controlled fusion is very hard to accomplish. there is science remaining to do. and the skeptics and naysayers are very loud. Funding will not be so hard to obtain after the next set of feasibility questions is answered, but right now, those funders do not know which of several schemes to invest in.

Do you know how to make the slope of the yield curve steeper?
https://focusfusion.org/index.php/site/article/new_calibration_confirms_ff-1s_high_fusion_yields/

The scheme that’s in the lead by end of this year should be funded, yes. Can you educate the investors and give them confident numbers for probability of success?

[vansig]

Phil’s Dad wrote:
As for Green Peace – they are not well known supporters of the nuclear option. If you can get them on board you will have done well

They seem to indoctrinate their people to regard with distaste anything that has a nucleus. Many are even leery of microwaves. I predict a long education for this group.

[vansig]

msmith wrote:
Innovation often yields surprises,
but seldom are these innovations transformative.
Fire
The wheel
Electricity
and now,
the most important innovation in human history.
Harnessing a quasar in a bottle.
Aneutronic fusion.

Through the persistence, dedication and talents of a single man this vision is within reach.
Eric Lerner, ignoring the opinions of others in the field of plasma physics, has extended
that branch of science into new realms.

It is upon the shoulders of such giants that society may soon stand.

Bravo. Feels just like an infomercial. 😉

[vansig]

I hear a lot of worry, from energy analysts, about the risks of neglecting to install and scale up replacements for fossil fuels, in time for “The End”. As yet, they are skeptical of the ultimate feasibility of fusion.

Building the infrastructure while there is still time is a REALLY good idea. Our “oil lords” try to protect their future, but they don’t have to pick up the pieces. If there are 75yrs remaining for fossil fuels, then that’s beyond the life time of anyone currently in charge, so we cant count on them to install replacement infrastructure.

[vansig]

Patientman wrote:
The conversations by non-technical advocates of fusion need a guided understanding of how and when this technology may impact the world. One of the key aspects of Dr. Lerner’s book was to dispel misguided theoretical science. The fine line in science fiction writing on this subject should be in the area of providing possible futures without fantasy. The site already has a section on Space ships and their engines, which is good. Are the expressed concepts within the realms of solid science and how does it bring Focus Fusion into the spot light?

This will have an impact from the moment that above-unity power is announced, as it will trigger quite a lot of scientific research and engineering. first applications will be in x-ray lithography and heat generation, even before electrical unity is reached. there is also a socio-political angle. energy futures markets will adjust as knowledge gets out about its potential.

Electrical unity will depend on efficient electricity recovery from both x-rays and the alpha exit beam — i’m guessing two to five years later.

In the first decades of use, deployment will be limited by cost of components, which is a function of mass production processes and availability of raw materials. there will also be a ripple effect as derivative applications are realized: in recycling, desalination, transportation, manufacturing.

[vansig]

I’ve read claims from Japanese researchers that nano-particles of palladium (~5nm diameter? or was that 50nm?) will absorb up to 300% more deuterium than the bulk metal does. this creates condensed lumps of deuterons at points in the crystal lattice that are sensitive to mechanical shock, and low-T fusion probability increases many-fold.

[vansig]

technical discussions regarding the application of focus fusion are likely to pick up and branch out as the technology approaches unity, so yes it would make sense to promote these threads

[vansig]

jamesr wrote:
Only when the magnetic field collapses creating a large electric field along the axis of the plasmoid are the ions accelerated out in the narrow beam

what is the exit velocity?

[vansig]

Also, I’m looking at the chart of x-ray absorption cross-sections, and notice that Carbon might not be very bad as arterial structure, graphene tubes helping conduct waste heat very quickly away from the tip, with much less radial heat flow to the helium input.

Here’s the comparison…

Beryllium
keV µ (cm-1)
3.0 37.9
10 1.08
30 .324
100 .247

Carbon
3.0 203.9
10 4.951
30 .567
100 .339

Copper
3.0 7034
10 1960
30 96.6
100 4.06

And, if you arrange the tubes parallel to the high-energy electrons, you’ll also drastically reduce erosion. That’s what leads me to the conical shape, ~20 degree angle, to agree with the electron exit beam

[vansig]

Regarding the anode,
it can be hollow, and arranged coaxially; pump cool helium up the center “artery”, providing the majority of cooling to the part nearest the plasmoid; and vent it back along “veins” around the outside. if you can operate the helium output at 550-900°C, you can make use of IR-photovoltaics. and this can be done at fairly low pressure.

Can the anode be cone-shaped, overall?

For 2MW cooling, I’m getting a flow rate for helium coolant, with ΔT = 800°C, as .48 kg/s.
At atmospheric pressure,
that’s 3.68 m³/s at 100°C input, and 11.6 m³/s at 900°C output.

[vansig]

Seems to me that homeland security would be more interested to prevent plans and vulnerabilities of critical infrastructure from falling into the hands of terrorists, than to prevent improvement of its aesthetic appeal and robustness; but i guess there’s no accounting for taste. 😉

[vansig]

For the onion, use long, narrow, metallic/semi-conductive diode tape, and wind it like a ball of yarn. As x-rays scatter electrons to the next layer outward, it very quickly becomes a voltage multiplier.

Manufacture should be easy to scale up

[vansig]

trading power across long distances could work if transmission losses are minimized.

I learned today that, because Ontario’s nuclear generators need to run continuously, Quebec buys off-peak power from Ontario at a substantial discount, stores the energy by pumping water, and then sells power back to Ontario at 4x the rate to cover peak usage.

[vansig]

Aeronaut wrote:
all that hardware is laying all over the countryside for anybody who’s tuned in to observe. 🙂 Too bad it’s tacitly illegal to photograph things you want to improve…

what’s that about?

[Author]

Posts