1995.04.07 / Robin Spaandonk /        Re: Fusion timetable
     
Originally-From: rvanspaa@ozemail.com.au (Robin van Spaandonk)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject:       Re: Fusion timetable
Date: Fri, 7 Apr 1995 08:23:51 GMT
Organization: Sci.physics.fusion/Mail Gateway

>Originally-From: barry@starfire.ucsd.edu (Barry Merriman)
>Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
>Subject: Re:       Re: Fusion timetable
>Date: 6 Apr 1995 00:07:14 GMT
>Organization: UCSD SOE
>[snip]
>Well, that would be tough, though, since the existing programs hardly
>live high on the hog. Also, you should take a lesson from history:
>the _tokamak_ was an exciting alternative concept circa 1960---that
>is what originally diverted attention from other things towards it.
>So, just beacuse something looks good at the initial investigation
>level does not mean it'll be smooth sailing all the way to a commercial
>plant, as the tok demonstrates. The grass is always greener... Or, perhaps
>in this case, one should say the plasma is always hotter ...

Looking at this from the point of view of an outsider, it seems to
me that if half a dozen of the ACs have as much chance of working as
a Tokamak, then 1 years funds out of 66 is a pretty good insurance
policy. In other words for less than 2% of the funds, your chances
of success are improved 6 fold. Besides which ACs which now look
good, already benefit from the lessons learned from the past 30
years of Tokamak work. To continue to place all ones eggs in one
basket, so to speak, seems to me to be a rather risky approach.

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa@ozemail.com.au>

cudkeys:
cuddy7 cudenrvanspaa cudfnRobin cudlnSpaandonk cudmo4 cudqt2 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.04.07 / Dieter Britz /  Re: Now what to do with $700
     
Originally-From: Dieter Britz <britz@kemi.aau.dk>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Now what to do with $700
Date: Fri, 7 Apr 1995 15:21:37 +0200
Organization: DAIMI, Computer Science Dept. at Aarhus University

On 5 Apr 1995, Tom Droege wrote:
[...]
> 
> OK,  I will add one.  Give to Dieter Britz and/or Bruce Lewenstein for
> file cabinets to keep the archive.  
> 
> Tom Droege
> 
> 

Thanks, Tom, but no thanks. I already have a filing cabinet for all those
papers.

But if noone objects, I will handle this vote. I already have the list of
contributors, and I now ask y'all to email me, by the end of April, with
suggestions for what to do with that $700. So far, we have 5:

> >>   (1) Fund a prize for detection of [neutrons, X rays, excess heat, mutated
> >>       children of CNF researchers]?
> >> 
> >>   (2) Fund another trip.
> >> 
> >>   (3) Give the money to a deserving participant of s.p.f.  [e.g. Tom]
> >> 
> >>   (4) Return pro-rata shares to the contributors.
> >> 
> >    (5) give to some charity of Tom's choice.

So come on, let's have your ideas on this. But only contributors need apply,
others will simply be ignored. In early May, I'll post the list, and ask for
a vote. The suggestion with the most votes wins.

Try to be fairly specific. E.g. (2) above: what trip? By whom?

Objections (from contributors) ?

-- Dieter Britz  alias  britz@kemi.aau.dk

cudkeys:
cuddy7 cudenbritz cudfnDieter cudlnBritz cudmo4 cudqt2 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.04.07 / Dieter Britz /  Biblio Update (repeat??) 7-Apr-95
     
Originally-From: Dieter Britz <britz@kemi.aau.dk>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Biblio Update (repeat??) 7-Apr-95
Date: Fri, 7 Apr 1995 15:34:31 +0200
Organization: DAIMI, Computer Science Dept. at Aarhus University

[I thought I posted this a week ago but have not seen it, so I post it
again; sorry if this appears twice]

Starry droogs,
before I go off for the weekend, here the latest crop. I am nearing the
bottom of the FTT stack, I am glad to say. We have two attempts at carbon
arc transmutation, both optimistic in their conclusions, without good reason
as I see it. They do not seem to understand that the driving force for the
extremely unlikely fusion reaction proposed, 2*(12C + 18O) --> 56Fe + 4He, is
only the applied voltage, i.e. about 10-20 V... And the fact that the Fe found
has the natural isotope distribution would seem to have clinched the matter.
And on top of all this, it's a four-body fusion reaction. Audacious, you might
say. Takahashi also proposes multibody fusion. And Taniguchi looked for cp's;
I wasn't all that compelled that he found any beyond noise, but he seemed to
be. Hm. Then we have our very own Mitch Swartz, being a little inscrutable. Now
he'll have to write another paper telling us where this all leads. Reminded me
of those equations the SETI people come up with, expressing the number of
advanced civilisations in the universe; all very well, but what values do you
give all those parameters?
And there are three more patents. Have a nice one, droogs.

Journal Papers:
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
#
Singh M, Saksena MD, Dixit VS, Kartha VB;  Fusion Technol. 26T (1994) 266.
"Verification of the George Oshawa [sic] experiment for anomalous production
of iron from carbon arc in water".
** Experimental, transmutation, res0, no FPH/Jones refs
This is an attempt to verify the strange claim by GO (et al) of having
produced Fe by arcing between pur carbon rods in pure water containing oxygen.
The present team analysed both the initial water and the carbon and found only
<5, and <2 ppm, resp. In the first run, an arc was kept up intermittently for
about 1 hour at <35 V, 15-18 A, and in the 5 mg of residue collected from the
bottom, 2000 ppm Fe was found. This procedure was repeated, at different
currents and lengths of time of arcing, and every time, less and less Fe was
found in the residue, being respectively for the runs, 2000, 1000, 2000, 450,
100, 50, 50, 20, 20, 100 ppm. Mass spec was used to determine the isotopic
distribution, and this was found to be the same as natural Fe in every case.
The authors however conclude that these numbers even at their lowest values,
lie far above the initial values, and thus this is a verification of Ohsawa et
al's results, i.e. that transmutation to Fe has occurred here.
#...................................................................... Mar-95
Sundaresan R; Bockris JO'M;  Fusion Technol. 26T (1994) 261.
"Anomalous reactions during arcing between carbon rods in water".
** Experimental, transmutation, res+
The authors attempt to verify the strange claim of Ohsawa to have caused
transmutation of C with oxygen-18 by arcing between carbon rods in pure water.
Arcing currents up to 25 A were applied, with voltages around 10 V, for up to
3 hours. Initial Fe content in the rods was, as stated by the makers, 2 ppm
and the water contained next to none (< 20 ppb ions total, by the measured
conductivity). In 14 separate experiments, the carbon residue found at the
cell bottom after arcing contained an average of around 100 ppm Fe. Since
oxygen-18 is thought to be a requirement for this transmutation, some trials
were run with nitrogen to flush oxygen out of the water. In three such runs,
the carbon residue contained even less than the original (max 18 ppm). Fe
production (with oxygen) correlates roughly with length of time of arcing. No
isotope distribution was measured but will be in future. There is even a rough
indication of excess heat from the transmutation (fusion) reaction.
#...................................................................... Mar-95
Swartz M;  Fusion Technol. 26T (1994) 74.
"Isotopic fuel loading coupled to reactions at an electrode".
** Theory, fusion rate as a transport problem; res0
Mitch Swartz further develops his "quasi-one-dimensional (Q1D) model" of what
happens in a cold fusion electrolysis cell. Many equations are presented, to
do with deuteron flux in the various parts of the cell. The partition between
deuterium evolution and its ingress into the Pd is invoked, and finally an
equation for the rate of fusion given, including such parameters as
diffusivity of deuterons, electric field strength and the fraction of
deuterons in the Pd that will fuse (an unknown parameter).
#...................................................................... Mar-95
Takahashi A;  Fusion Technol. 26T (1994) 451.
"Some considerations of multibody fusion in metal-deuterides".
** Theory/speculation, multibody fusion, res+
T has a theory of multibody fusion, involving among some possible scenarios
the fusion of 3 or 4 deuterons, yielding 6Li or 8Be. He has described this
previously; here he speculates on how the excited product might decay to the
ground state without emitting high energy gamma- and x-rays. He believes this
to be possible with the Schwinger or Preparata theories, in which the energy
is absorbed by the metal lattice. For the excited 8Be species this seems to be
fairly firm, while it is less firm for excited 6Li.
#...................................................................... Mar-95
Taniguchi R;  Fusion Technol. 26T (1994) 186.
"Characteristic peak structures on charged particle spectra during
electrolysis experiment".
** Experimental, cp's, electrolysis, res+, no FPH/Jones refs
In previous work by others, using deuteron beams, charged particles (cp's)
were detected. T here tries it with an electrolysis cell with a Pd foil
cathode and a SSB cp detector on the back side of the foil (one Fig. shows two
detectors, the others do not and there is no mention of coincidence
electronics). Many different runs were made, some with 30 mA applied, some
without, some with the detectors shielded by Ni plates, background with no
cell. To the untrained eye all the measured spectra look much the same, but
the author notes some differences, notably some peaks in the Pd/D2O
electrolysis run, not seen (by the untrained eye) in the others. This cannot
be background, concludes Taniguchi, neither can it be dd fusion; it must be an
unknown nuclear reaction.
#...................................................................... Mar-95

Patents: 
^^^^^^^
#
Ishii, R (Ishii Sangyo Kk);  Jpn. Kokai Tokkyo Koho JP 06,337,294, 27-May-93.
Cited in Chem. Abstr. 122:117207 (1995).
"Low-temperature nuclear fusion apparatus".
** "The app. uses a microwave irradn. of a vessel contg. H-absorbing
substance of powd. Pd, etc and D2O" (direct quote from CA).
# .................................................................... Mar-95
Notoya R; Jpn. Kokai Tokkyo Koho JP 06,317,686, 13-Oct-92.
Cited in Chem. Abstr. 122:117483 (1995).
"Cold fusion from light water by electrolysis".
** "The method involves electrolyzing an aq. electrolyte soln. (H2O) with a
porous anode (porosity 0.3-35 vol%) of a transition metal, Al, Sn, or a
stainless steel". (Direct quote from CA).
# .................................................................... Mar-95
Furuya C (Tanaka Precious Metal Ind.);
Jpn. Kokai Tokkyo Koho JP 06,171,905, 11-Dec-92.
Cited in Chem. Abstr. 122:145163 (1995).
"Method for generating deuterium for cold nuclear fusion and for obtaining
electric power".
** "A cell is formed by using a D2O soln. contg. D2SO4 as the electrolyte, a
metal with a potential less noble than H as the cathode, and a gas-diffusion
anode comprising (1) a gas diffusion layer with only hydrophobic pores and
(2) a catalyst-deposited reactive layer with hydrophilic and hydrophobic
pores. For the cathodic reaction, the metal is dissolved and for the anodic
reaction D is generated from the diffusion layer side of the gas-diffusion
electrode. A high-purity D2 can be manufd. efficiently and elec. power can be
generated also". (Direct quote from CA).
# .................................................................... Mar-95


How to retrieve the archived biblio files:
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
1. By ftp from vm1.nodak.edu; log in as anonymous, giving your email
   address as password. Then cd to fusion. There are many files here, so
   do not use dir; if you are after the biblio files only, try
   dir fusion.cnf-*
   and then get or mget what you want.
2. Send an email to listserv@vm1.nodak.edu, blank subject and the message
   get fusion.<whatever you want>. To find out what there is, send
   index fusion
   This gets you an email with the directory of all files there, with which
   you can also match Fusion Digest numbers with file names, before getting
   those files. The index, or files you ask for, will be emailed to you.

-- Dieter Britz  alias  britz@kemi.aau.dk

cudkeys:
cuddy7 cudenbritz cudfnDieter cudlnBritz cudmo4 cudqt2 cudszL cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.04.07 / James Stolin /  Re: PM_Square ! Permanent Magnet Powered Motor !
     
Originally-From: FKNF40A@prodigy.com (James Stolin)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: PM_Square ! Permanent Magnet Powered Motor !
Date: 7 Apr 1995 13:45:33 GMT
Organization: Prodigy Services Company  1-800-PRODIGY

harti@shb.contrib.de (Stefan Hartmann) wrote:

>This Linear Motion Permanent Magnet Motor design should really work.

Stefan,

   SHOULD work???  How's about you build the damn thing first then post 
here only if it DOES work?  Even though it's not "fusion", if you get it 
working, it will diminish out need for fusion.  But, until you get it 
working, please post this drivel in alt.crackpot.  Thanks.
-
James B. Stolin  -  Illinois Computer Service  -  fknf40a@prodigy.com

cudkeys:
cuddy7 cudenFKNF40A cudfnJames cudlnStolin cudmo4 cudqt2 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.04.07 / James Stolin /  Re: POLL: How long till power plants?
     
Originally-From: FKNF40A@prodigy.com (James Stolin)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: POLL: How long till power plants?
Date: 7 Apr 1995 14:04:41 GMT
Organization: Prodigy Services Company  1-800-PRODIGY

barry@starfire.ucsd.edu (Barry Merriman) wrote:
>
>In article <3lv5tk$h3u@usenetp1.news.prodigy.com> FKNF40A@prodigy.com 
(James  
>Stolin) writes:
>> pmk@prometheus.UUCP (Paul M. Koloc) wrote:
>> > <duty cycle post snipped>
>> 
>> Paul,
>> 
>>    All you need is more than one fusion reactor if you have less than 

>> 100% duty cycle.  If the duty cycle is 50%, you build two reactors.  
If 
>> duty cycle is 33%, you use three reactors.  Better yet, have a "spare" 
so 
>> you can provide downtime for maintenance.  Use a "cookie cutter" 
approach 
>> to keep design costs the same for one or one thousand reactors.  Size 

>> and/or cost will be the limiting factor with this approach.  However, 
the 
>> redundancy of multiple reactors should be readily apparent. 
>
>Yes---but with projected tokamak, cost limits you to N reactors
>to comprise the 100% duty cycle, where N is _at most_ 1 :-).
>
>Basically, a single projected tokamak reactor has to run at 80% or 
better.
>Talking about 50% duty cycles will get you laughed at (or worse :-)

Barry,

   Whatever the duty cycle is, if you have less than 100% you will need 
either a storage mechanism or multiple reactors.  Storage implies two 
conversions, one to store power and one to extract it.  There will be 
loss both ways.

  I mentioned the size/cost factor in my reply to Paul.  If you have an 
80% duty cycle, the optimum number of reactors might be more like 5 
reactors with just one "off" at any given time.  This will provide a 
continuous power output with no storage necessary.  Size/cost will be a 
main factor in deciding on how many reactors to build.

-
James B. Stolin  -  Illinois Computer Service  -  fknf40a@prodigy.com

cudkeys:
cuddy7 cudenFKNF40A cudfnJames cudlnStolin cudmo4 cudqt2 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.04.07 /   /  Images wanted for Physics calender
     
Originally-From: wayne@pinet.aip.org (wayne_manos)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Images wanted for Physics calender
Date: Fri, 7 Apr 1995 14:51:32 GMT
Organization: AIP


Images wanted for physics calendar

The American Institute of Physics is seeking visually striking
images from the world of physics.  If your work has generated
some beautiful photos or computer pictures and you'd like them to
be considered for our 1996 calendar, please contact mktg@aip.org
for instructions on submitting your images.  We'd need to see
them by April 20, 1995, and you must have the rights to
distribute the image.  There is no financial compensation if
selected, but you will be credited on the calendar page and
you'll also be able to write an 8 line description of your image.
        Please pass this message along....

Again, the e-mail contact is: mktg@aip.org
cudkeys:
cuddy7 cudenwayne cudln cudmo4 cudqt2 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.04.07 / Barry Merriman /  Re:       Re: Fusion timetable
     
Originally-From: barry@starfire.ucsd.edu (Barry Merriman)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re:       Re: Fusion timetable
Date: 7 Apr 1995 18:46:52 GMT
Organization: UCSD SOE

In article <199504070815.SAA20592@oznet02.ozemail.com.au>  
rvanspaa@ozemail.com.au (Robin van Spaandonk) writes:

> To continue to place all ones eggs in one
> basket, so to speak, seems to me to be a rather risky approach.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa@ozemail.com.au>

This is not news---I don't think there is any fusion researcher that wouldn't
like to see more work done on alternatives. But whether one should do so 
at the expensie of the tokamak program at this point is dubious. Even tho
we recognize the tokamaks shortcomings, that is partly because we know
so much about them. 

--
Barry Merriman
UCSD Fusion Energy Research Center
UCLA Dept. of Math
bmerriman@fusion.ucsd.edu (Internet; NeXTMail is welcome)


cudkeys:
cuddy7 cudenbarry cudfnBarry cudlnMerriman cudmo4 cudqt2 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.04.07 / Tom Droege /  Re: Now what to do with $700
     
Originally-From: Droege@fnal.fnal.gov (Tom Droege)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Now what to do with $700
Date: 7 Apr 1995 19:02:51 GMT
Organization: fermilab

In article <Pine.OSF.3.91.950407151343.1534B-100000@kemi.aau.dk>,
Dieter Britz <britz@kemi.aau.dk> says:

>But if noone objects, I will handle this vote. I already have the list of
>contributors, and I now ask y'all to email me, by the end of April, with
>suggestions for what to do with that $700. So far, we have 5:
>
>> >>   (1) Fund a prize for detection of [neutrons, X rays, excess heat, mutated
>> >>       children of CNF researchers]?
>> >> 
>> >>   (2) Fund another trip.
>> >> 
>> >>   (3) Give the money to a deserving participant of s.p.f.  [e.g. Tom]
>> >> 
>> >>   (4) Return pro-rata shares to the contributors.
>> >> 
>> >    (5) give to some charity of Tom's choice.
>
>So come on, let's have your ideas on this. But only contributors need apply,
>others will simply be ignored. In early May, I'll post the list, and ask for
>a vote. The suggestion with the most votes wins.

People keep sending me mail saying that they would contribute to a 
prize.  So it may be worth setting up even if this vote comes out
otherwise.

Tom Droege
cudkeys:
cuddy7 cudenDroege cudfnTom cudlnDroege cudmo4 cudqt2 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.04.07 / Barry Merriman /  Re: PM_Square ! Permanent Magnet Powered Motor !
     
Originally-From: barry@starfire.ucsd.edu (Barry Merriman)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: PM_Square ! Permanent Magnet Powered Motor !
Date: 7 Apr 1995 22:01:03 GMT
Organization: UCSD SOE

In article <3m3flt$1k6c@usenetp1.news.prodigy.com> FKNF40A@prodigy.com (James  
Stolin) writes:
> harti@shb.contrib.de (Stefan Hartmann) wrote:
> 
> >This Linear Motion Permanent Magnet Motor design should really work.
> 

Sorry, but if you believe Ampere's law relating magnetic field
produced to currents generated, then you can show theoretically
that it conserves total energy. So, in essence, unless you belive
your magnets will somehow deviate from their normal dipole behavior,
you are not going to extract energy this way. If your intuition that
it should work is based on the idea that you have an assembly of
permanent magnetic dipoles, then it is simply wrong---all such 
configurations are energy conserving.

--
Barry Merriman
UCSD Fusion Energy Research Center
UCLA Dept. of Math
bmerriman@fusion.ucsd.edu (Internet; NeXTMail is welcome)


cudkeys:
cuddy7 cudenbarry cudfnBarry cudlnMerriman cudmo4 cudqt2 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.04.07 /  jedrothwell@de /  Re: Quenching the reaction...
     
Originally-From: jedrothwell@delphi.com
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Quenching the reaction...
Date: Fri, 7 Apr 95 18:15:57 -0500
Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice)

Doug Shade <rxjf20@email.sps.mot.com> writes:
 
>Tom's report, for better or worse, has had at least one significant
>effect....   It seems like the Grigg's 'reaction' has been halted...
>there doesn't seem to be much to argue about.
 
That is nonsense. Nothing has changed. Jim has not retracted anything he
wrote in ICCF4 or anything he said at MIT in January. I have not retracted
any of my claims. You are confusing Internet Gossip with Reality. There have
been no further comments about Droege's report because that rport had no
scientific content beyond a few wild and utterly incorrect statements about
how the thermocouples might have been wrong. Droege could have corrected
these absurd notions of his if he had bothered to glance at the computer
screen while the machine was running and then again right after it was turned
off, but he never even bothered to make that kind of elementary observation.
 
You can't expect any response from Jim Griggsat the moment because he is
driving through Europe with his family on his way to ICCF5. That is where
I am going to as well, tomorrow. You people who get all of your information
from Internet will learn a little bit about this over the coming months.
People who actually read the Abstracts, Proceedings, papers or see the
upcoming video will soon learn a hundred times more than you!
 
- Jed
cudkeys:
cuddy7 cudenjedrothwell cudmo4 cudqt2 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.04.08 / Robert Heeter /  Conventional Fusion FAQ Section 0/11 (Intro) Part 1/3 (Overview)
     
Originally-From: Robert F. Heeter <rfheeter@princeton.edu>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion,sci.energy,sci.physics,sci.environment,sc
.answers,news.answers
Subject: Conventional Fusion FAQ Section 0/11 (Intro) Part 1/3 (Overview)
Date: 8 Apr 1995 00:13:05 GMT
Organization: Princeton University

Archive-name: fusion-faq/section0-intro/part1-overview
Last-modified: 26-Feb-1995
Posting-frequency: More-or-less-biweekly
Disclaimer:  While this section is still evolving, it should 
     be useful to many people, and I encourage you to distribute 
     it to anyone who might be interested (and willing to help!!!).

 ----------------------------------------------------------------
### Answers to Frequently Asked Questions about Fusion Research
 ----------------------------------------------------------------

# Written/Edited by:

     Robert F. Heeter
     <rfheeter@pppl.gov>
     Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory

# Last Revised February 26, 1995


 ----------------------------------------------------------------
*** A.  Welcome to the Conventional Fusion FAQ!  
 ----------------------------------------------------------------

* 1) Contents

  This file is intended to indicate 
     (A) that the Conventional Fusion FAQ exists, 
     (B) what it discusses, 
     (C) how to find it on the Internet, and
     (D) the status of the Fusion FAQ project


* 2) What is the Conventional Fusion FAQ?

  The Conventional Fusion FAQ is a comprehensive, relatively
  nontechnical set of answers to many of the frequently asked
  questions about fusion science, fusion energy, and fusion
  research.  Additionally, there is a Glossary of Frequently
  Used Terms In Plasma Physics and Fusion Energy Research, which 
  explains much of the jargon of the field.  The Conventional 
  Fusion FAQ originated as an attempt to provide 
  answers to many of the typical, basic, or introductory questions 
  about fusion research, and to provide a listing of references and 
  other resources for those interested in learning more.  The
  Glossary section containing Frequently Used Terms (FUT) also
  seeks to facilitate communication regarding fusion by providing
  brief explanations of the language of the field.


* 3) Scope of the Conventional Fusion FAQ:

  Note that this FAQ discusses only the conventional forms of fusion
  (primarily magnetic confinement, but also inertial and 
  muon-catalyzed), and not new/unconventional forms ("cold fusion",
  sonoluminescence-induced fusion, or ball-lightning fusion).  I 
  have tried to make this FAQ as uncontroversial and comprehensive
  as possible, while still covering everything I felt was 
  important / standard fare on the sci.physics.fusion newsgroup.


* 4) How to Use the FAQ:

  This is a rather large FAQ, and to make it easier to find what
  you want, I have outlined each section (including which questions
  are answered) in Section 0, Part 2 (posted separately).  Hopefully it 
  will not be too hard to use.  Part (C) below describes how to find
  the other parts of the FAQ via FTP or the World-Wide Web.


* 5) Claims and Disclaimers:  

  This is an evolving document, not a completed work.  As such, 
  it may not be correct or up-to-date in all respects.  
  This document should not be distributed for profit, especially 
  without my permission.  Individual sections may have additional 
  restrictions.  In no case should my name, the revision date, 
  or this paragraph be removed.  
                                             - Robert F. Heeter


 -------------------------------------------------------------------
*** B. Contents (Section Listing) of the Conventional Fusion FAQ
 -------------------------------------------------------------------

*****************************************************************
                What This FAQ Discusses
*****************************************************************

(Each of these sections is posted periodically on sci.physics.fusion.
 Section 0.1 is posted biweekly, the other parts are posted quarterly.
 Each listed part is posted as a separate file.)

Section 0 - Introduction
     Part 1/3 - Title Page
                Table of Contents
                How to Find the FAQ
                Current Status of the FAQ project
     Part 2/3 - Detailed Outline with List of Questions
     Part 3/3 - Revision History

Section 1 - Fusion as a Physical Phenomenon

Section 2 - Fusion as an Energy Source
     Part 1/5 - Technical Characteristics
     Part 2/5 - Environmental Characteristics
     Part 3/5 - Safety Characteristics
     Part 4/5 - Economic Characteristics
     Part 5/5 - Fusion for Space-Based Power

Section 3 - Fusion as a Scientific Research Program
     Part 1/3 - Chronology of Events and Ideas
     Part 2/3 - Major Institutes and Policy Actors
     Part 3/3 - History of Achievements and Funding

Section 4 - Methods of Containment / Approaches to Fusion
     Part 1/2 - Toroidal Magnetic Confinement Approaches
     Part 2/2 - Other Approaches (ICF, muon-catalyzed, etc.)

Section 5 - Status of and Plans for Present Devices

Section 6 - Recent Results

Section 7 - Educational Opportunities

Section 8 - Internet Resources

Section 9 - Future Plans

Section 10 - Annotated Bibliography / Reading List

Section 11 - Citations and Acknowledgements

Glossary of Frequently Used Terms (FUT) in Plasma Physics & Fusion:
  Part 0/26 - Intro
  Part 1/26 - A
  Part 2/26 - B
  [ ... ]
  Part 26/26 - Z


 --------------------------------------------------------------
*** C.  How to find the Conventional Fusion FAQ on the 'Net:
 --------------------------------------------------------------

*****************************************************************
###  The FAQ about the FAQ:
###          How can I obtain a copy of a part of the Fusion FAQ?
*****************************************************************

* 0) Quick Methods (for Experienced Net Users)

   (A) World-Wide Web:  http://lyman.pppl.gov/~rfheeter/fusion-faq.html

   (B) FTP:  rtfm.mit.edu in /pub/usenet-by-group/sci.answers/fusion-faq


* 1) Obtaining the Fusion FAQ from Newsgroups

  Those of you reading this on news.answers, sci.answers, 
  sci.energy, sci.physics, or sci.environment will be able to 
  find the numerous sections of the full FAQ by reading 
  sci.physics.fusion periodically.  (Please note that not 
  all sections are completed yet.)  Because the FAQ is quite
  large, most sections are posted only every three months, to avoid
  unnecessary consumption of bandwidth.

  All sections of the FAQ which are ready for "official" 
  distribution are posted to sci.physics.fusion, sci.answers, 
  and news.answers, so you can get them from these groups by 
  waiting long enough. 


* 2) World-Wide-Web (Mosaic, Netscape, Lynx, etc.):

   Several Web versions now exist.

   The "official" one is currently at

     <URL:http://lyman.pppl.gov/~rfheeter/fusion-faq.html>

   We hope to have a version on the actual PPPL Web server 
      (<URL:http://www.pppl.gov/>) soon.

   There are other sites which have made "unofficial" Web versions 
   from the newsgroup postings.  I haven't hunted all of these down 
   yet, but I know a major one is at this address:

 <URL:http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu:80/hypertext/faq/usenet/fusion-faq/top.html>

 Note that the "official" one will include a number of features
 which cannot be found on the "unofficial" ones created by
 automated software from the newsgroup postings.  In particular
 we hope to have links through the outline directly to questions,
 and between vocabulary words and their entries in the Glossary, 
 so that readers unfamiliar with the terminology can get help fast.

 (Special acknowledgements to John Wright at PPPL, who is handling
  much of the WWW development.)


* 3) FAQ Archives at FTP Sites (Anonymous FTP) - Intro

  All completed sections can also be obtained by anonymous FTP 
  from various FAQ archive sites, such as rtfm.mit.edu.  The
  address for this archive is:

    <ftp://rtfm.mit.edu/pub/usenet-by-group/sci.answers/fusion-faq>

  Please note that sections which are listed above as having
  multiple parts (such as the glossary, and section 2) are 
  stored in subdirectories, where each part has its own
  filename; e.g., /fusion-faq/glossary/part0-intro. 

  Please note also that there are other locations in the rtfm
  filespace where fusion FAQ files are stored, but the reference
  given above is the easiest to use.

  There are a large number of additional FAQ archive sites,
  many of which carry the fusion FAQ.  These are listed below.


* 4) Additional FAQ archives worldwide (partial list)

  There are other FAQ archive sites around the world
  which one can try if rtfm is busy; a list is appended
  at the bottom of this file.


* 5) Mail Server

   If you do not have direct access by WWW or FTP, the 
   rtfm.mit.edu site supports "ftp by mail": send a message 
   to mail-server@rtfm.mit.edu with the following 3 lines
   in it (cut-and-paste if you like): 

send usenet-by-group/sci.answers/fusion-faq/section0-intro/part1-overview
send usenet-by-group/sci.answers/fusion-faq/section0-intro/part2-outline
quit

   The mail server will send these two introductory 
   files to you.  You can then use the outline (part2)
   to determine which files you want.  You can receive
   any or all of the remaining files by sending another
   message with the same general format, if you substitute
   the file archive names you wish to receive, in place of the 
   part "fusion-faq/section0-intro/part1-overview", etc. used above.


* 6) Additional Note / Disclaimer: 

  Not all sections of the FAQ have been written
  yet, nor have they all been "officially" posted.

  Thus, you may not find what you're looking for right away.

  Sections which are still being drafted are only
  posted to sci.physics.fusion.  If there's a section 
  you can't find, send me email and I'll let you know 
  what's up with it. 


 ----------------------------------------------------------------------
*** D. Status of the Conventional Fusion FAQ Project
 ----------------------------------------------------------------------

* 1) Written FAQ Sections:

  Most sections have been at least drafted, but many sections are still
  being written.  Sections 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 4.1, 4.2, and 9
  remain to be completed.

  Those sections which have been written could use revising and improving.
  I am trying to obtain more information, especially on devices and 
  confinement approaches; I'm also looking for more information on 
  international fusion research, especially in Japan & Russia.

   *** I'd love any help you might be able to provide!! ***


* 2) Building a Web Version
                
  A "primitive" version (which has all the posted data, but isn't
  especially aesthetic) exists now.  Would like to add graphics and 
  cross-references to the Glossary, between FAQ sections, and 
  to other internet resources (like laboratory Web pages).  
 

* 3) Nuts & Bolts - 

  I'm looking for ways to enhance the distribution of the FAQ, and
  to get additional volunteer help for maintenance and updates.
  We are in the process of switching to automated posting via the 
  rtfm.mit.edu faq posting daemon.


* 4) Status of the Glossary:

 # Contains roughly 1000 entries, including acronyms, math terms, jargon, etc.

 # Just finished incorporating terms from the "Glossary of Fusion Energy"
   published in 1985 by the Dept. of Energy's Office of Scientific and
   Technical Information.

 # Also working to improve technical quality of entries (more formal.)

 # World Wide Web version exists, hope to cross-reference to FAQ.

 # Hope to have the Glossary "officially" added to PPPL Web pages.

 # Hope to distribute to students, policymakers, journalists, 
   scientists, i.e., to anyone who needs a quick reference to figure out 
   what we're really trying to say, or to decipher all the "alphabet 
   soup."  Scientists need to remember that not everyone knows those 
   "trivial" words we use every day.  The glossary and FAQ should be 
   useful in preparing for talks to lay audiences.  Students will 
   also find it useful to be able to look up unfamiliar technical jargon.


 ---------------------------------------------------------------------
*** E. Appendix: List of Additional FAQ Archive Sites Worldwide 
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------

(The following information was excerpted from the "Introduction to 
the *.answers newsgroups" posting on news.answers, from Sept. 9, 1994.)

Other news.answers/FAQ archives (which carry some or all of the FAQs
in the rtfm.mit.edu archive), sorted by country, are:

[ Note that the connection type is on the left.  I can't vouch
for the fusion FAQ being on all of these, but it should be
on some. - Bob Heeter ]


Belgium
-------

  gopher                cc1.kuleuven.ac.be port 70
  anonymous FTP         cc1.kuleuven.ac.be:/anonymous.202
  mail-server           listserv@cc1.kuleuven.ac.be  get avail faqs

Canada
------

  gopher                jupiter.sun.csd.unb.ca port 70

Finland
-------

  anonymous ftp         ftp.funet.fi/pub/doc/rtfm

France
------

  anonymous FTP         grasp1.insa-lyon.fr:/pub/faq
                        grasp1.insa-lyon.fr:/pub/faq-by-newsgroup
  gopher                gopher.insa-lyon.fr, port 70
  mail server           listserver@grasp1.univ-lyon1.fr
  
Germany
-------

  anonymous ftp         ftp.Germany.EU.net:/pub/newsarchive/news.answers
                        ftp.informatik.uni-muenchen.de:/pub/comp/usenet/news.answers
                        ftp.uni-paderborn.de:/doc/FAQ
                        ftp.saar.de:/pub/usenet/news.answers (local access only)
  gopher                gopher.Germany.EU.net, port 70.
                        gopher.uni-paderborn.de
  mail server           archive-server@Germany.EU.net
                        ftp-mailer@informatik.tu-muenchen.de
                        ftp-mail@uni-paderborn.de
  World Wide Web        http://www.Germany.EU.net:80/
  FSP                   ftp.Germany.EU.net, port 2001
  gopher index          gopher://gopher.Germany.EU.net:70/1.archive
                        gopher://gopher.uni-paderborn.de:70/0/Service/FTP

Korea
-----

  anonymous ftp         hwarang.postech.ac.kr:/pub/usenet/news.answers

Mexico
------
  anonymous ftp         mtecv2.mty.itesm.mx:/pub/usenet/news.answers

The Netherlands
---------------

  anonymous ftp         ftp.cs.ruu.nl:/pub/NEWS.ANSWERS
  gopher                gopher.win.tue.nl, port 70
  mail server           mail-server@cs.ruu.nl

Sweden
------

  anonymous ftp         ftp.sunet.se:/pub/usenet

Switzerland
-----------

  anonymous ftp         ftp.switch.ch:/info_service/usenet/periodic-postings
  anonymous UUCP        chx400:ftp/info_service/Usenet/periodic-postings
  mail server           archiver-server@nic.switch.ch
  telnet                nic.switch.ch, log in as "info"

Taiwan
------

  anonymous ftp         ftp.edu.tw:/USENET/FAQ
  mail server           ftpmail@ftp.edu.tw

United Kingdon
--------------

  anonymous ftp         src.doc.ic.ac.uk:/usenet/news-faqs/
  FSP                   src.doc.ic.ac.uk port 21
  gopher                src.doc.ic.ac.uk port 70.
  mail server           ftpmail@doc.ic.ac.uk
  telnet                src.doc.ic.ac.uk login as sources
  World Wide Web        http://src.doc.ic.ac.uk/usenet/news-faqs/

United States
-------------

  anonymous ftp         ftp.uu.net:/usenet
  World Wide Web        http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu:80/hypertext/faq/usenet/top.html



cudkeys:
cuddy8 cudenrfheeter cudfnRobert cudlnHeeter cudmo4 cudqt2 cudszL cudyr1995 
------------------------------
processed by cud.pl ver. 0.5 Sat Apr  8 04:37:03 EDT 1995
------------------------------
