1995.04.08 /  timhulse@ibl.b /  Re:       Italian theory of everything
     
Originally-From: timhulse@ibl.bm
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re:       Italian theory of everything
Date: 8 Apr 1995 00:31:51 GMT
Organization: Galactic Patrol

>   rvanspaa@ozemail.com.au (Robin van Spaandonk) writes:
>  >* To whom it may concern, a brief exposition (     bytes) is located in:
>  >  linux.infosquare.it :pub\theory
>  >* Please mail your question to:
>  >  cassani@linux.infosquare.it
>  _____________________________________________________
>  The first address given above does not respond via the internet,
>  and mail to the second address "bounces" after trying to get a 
>  connection for 5 days.
>  I am very interested in this work, and would like to know more, 
>  however I can not get a connection.
Look at the message date. #%-)
 -----------------------------------------------------------
|Tim Hulse                                                 |
|timhulse@ibl.bm                                           |
|http://www.well.com/www/timh/                             |
|"How we have progressed, thanks to the machine..." -E.M.F.|
 -----------------------------------------------------------














cudkeys:
cuddy8 cudentimhulse cudmo4 cudqt2 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.04.07 / A Siegman /  Re: COLD FUSION - what happened (if anything?)
     
Originally-From: siegman@ee.stanford.edu (A. E. Siegman)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: COLD FUSION - what happened (if anything?)
Date: Fri, 07 Apr 1995 18:50:50 -0800
Organization: Stanford University

>    You mean the accident at the Stanford lab here in the Bay Area?
                                  ^^^^^^^^^^^^

   Just for the record, not Stanford: SRI.  It used to be the "Stanford
Research Institute" owned by and operated as an offshoot of Stanford
University; but it's been "SRI" (only) and totally independent of Stanford
University since around 1970 or so.
cudkeys:
cuddy07 cudensiegman cudfnA cudlnSiegman cudmo4 cudqt2 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.04.08 / Harry Conover /  Re: PM_Square ! Permanent Magnet Powered Motor !
     
Originally-From: conover@max.tiac.net (Harry H Conover)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: PM_Square ! Permanent Magnet Powered Motor !
Date: 8 Apr 1995 02:23:35 GMT
Organization: The Internet Access Company

Barry Merriman (barry@starfire.ucsd.edu) wrote:

: 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.

Also, consider the awesome consequences if this were not so.

                                       Harry C.

cudkeys:
cuddy8 cudenconover cudfnHarry cudlnConover cudmo4 cudqt2 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.04.08 / Alan M /  Re: Quenching the reaction...
     
Originally-From: Alan@moonrake.demon.co.uk ("Alan M. Dunsmuir")
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Quenching the reaction...
Date: Sat, 8 Apr 1995 04:51:43 +0000
Organization: Home

In article: <xAwfQul.jedrothwell@delphi.com>  jedrothwell@delphi.com writes:
> 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.

While Jed's away, would it be possible to get the name of this
NewsGroup changed, so he couldn't 
blunder in to it again on his return?
-- 
Alan M. Dunsmuir [@ his wits end]     (Can't even quote poetry right)

         I am his Highness' dog at Kew
         Pray tell me sir, whose dog are you?
			      [Alexander Pope]

PGP Public Key available on request.


cudkeys:
cuddy8 cudenAlan cudfnAlan cudlnM cudmo4 cudqt2 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.04.08 / James Crotinger /  Re: POLL: How long till power plants?
     
Originally-From: jac@gandalf.llnl.gov (James Crotinger)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: POLL: How long till power plants?
Date: 08 Apr 1995 06:31:22 GMT
Organization: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, NCD

In article <AWC.95Apr5134141@slcawc.aug.ipp-garching.mpg.de> awc@slcawc.
ug.ipp-garching.mpg.de (Arthur      Carlson        TOK  ) writes:

>   It's interesting how all these questions hang together. If John Cobb
>   is right that we can't live with copious 14 MeV neutrons, then we will
>   have to go to D-He3, which ignites at higher temperatures, which will
>   force us to go to high beta to avoid synchrotron radiation, which may
>   only be possible with a very low aspect ratio. If you burn D-T, there
>   is a lower limit on the aspect ratio due to the shielding needed, so
>   it may be possible to go to lower aspect ratios with D-He. Also, a
>   high-beta, low aspect ratio machine may need to be steady state, since
>   you don't have any room for a transformer in the core, but the high
>   beta may increase the diamagnetic currents and the low aspect ratio
>   may increase the bootstrap current so that steady state becomes
>   possible. It's important to think of each suggestion as a package
>   which is a local optimum, either or neither of which may be a global
>   optimum. My arguments against the possibility of high beta and the
>   need for steady state do not apply with the same force or in the same
>   way to John Cobb's D-He3 concept as to the standard D-T concept.

  I can see that D-He3 will help the first wall issue. But the blanket
thickness is determined by the need to shield the superconducting magnets
from the neutrons. Does this thickness go down linearly with the neutron
level, or logarithmically? I suspect it is more like the latter - you just
can't afford to tolerate neutrons getting to the magnets. Thus the blanket
thickness in a D-He3 reactor may have to be just as thick as in DT.  And
if this is true, then the advantage of D-He3 is not nearly so clear.

>   Two more small points. First, let's just agree that FRC's are better
>   than tokamaks. :)  (Actually, they are predicted to be MHD
>   unstable. The fact that they are experimentally stable could be
>   related to the small size of current experiments.) Second, the size of
>   a tokamak is determined ultimately be transport. 

  It is also limited by wall loading, assuming DT. So even if your
transport gets real good and you maneuver past the beta limits, you're
still constrained to a minimum size by the fact that the first wall
can only take something like 5 MW/m^2. This, combined with the need to
shield the toroidal field magnets from the neutrons, makes it pretty
easy to calculate the minimum volume of the blanket (and thus a
minimum cost), and the answer is uncomfortably large!

>   power, the divertor problem becomes 5 times harder since those
>   friendly neutrons are no longer carrying away 80% of your power.

  Right. Proponents of advanced fuels spout "direct conversion". But I
remember that Lidsky bagged on DC just as hard as he bagged on MFE
back when I was at MIT (I TA's his intro class and took his reactor
design class the year he wrote his Tech. Review article, which was the
last year he taught fusion courses). DC would require very big and
complex converters, all under very tight vacuum. This does not look
cheap.

  Jim
-- 
 -----------------------------------------------/\---------------------------
James A. Crotinger   Lawrence Livermore N'Lab  // \  The above views are mine
crotinger@llnl.gov   P.O. Box 808;  L-630  \\ //---\  and are not necessarily
(510) 422-0259       Livermore CA  94550    \\/Amiga\  those of LLNL.

cudkeys:
cuddy08 cudenjac cudfnJames cudlnCrotinger cudmo4 cudqt2 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.04.07 /  jonesse@vanlab /  Re: CF in Bologna
     
Originally-From: jonesse@vanlab.byu.edu
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: CF in Bologna
Date: 7 Apr 95 15:13:17 -0600
Organization: Brigham Young University

In article <3lsirc$gld@deadmin.ucsd.edu>, 
barry@starfire.ucsd.edu (Barry Merriman) writes:
> In article <3leeqk$7o4@mudraker.mtholyoke.edu> jbotz@mtholyoke.edu (Jurgen  
> Botz) writes:
>> Or is it Baloney?  It isn't April 1st yet.  I just read in
>> clari.tw.science, article <Ritaly-fusionUR45e_5MT@clarinet.com>, that
>> scientists at the University of Bologna claim to have produced 100 kW
>> hours of energy from 1 gram of hydrogen.  They also claim to have
>> detected neutrons and gamma radiation emmited by their
>> system. 
> 
> Sounds like a perfect candidate for Steve Jones' neutron detector. 

I have invited any serious researcher to come here; I would like to know
what reaction of hydrogen gives neutrons...

> 
> Personally, I a very^2 skeptical of any energy production using
> H, since the usual H + H fusion cross section is infinitesimally
> small. Also, note that since their experiment produces postive
> results with H, it makes it impossible to do blank runs (in
> most hydrogen fusion experiments, you can use H for the blank runs,
> and Dand/or T for real runs), and thus it makes it more difficult
> to debug the experiment.
> 
> 
> --
> Barry Merriman
> UCSD Fusion Energy Research Center
> UCLA Dept. of Math
> bmerriman@fusion.ucsd.edu (Internet; NeXTMail is welcome)

Good points.  I asked Douglas Morrison about this U. Bologna claim, and he
answered that indeed they claim to get fusion with hydrogen, not deuterium
or tritium.  Quite a trick.  As for blank runs:

"For a year I have asked them to put in helium gas as expect the 
difference is from heat transfer difference - but they avoid doing it."
(Douglas, 7 April 1995)   
Deja vu.
Also, he says:  "The radioactivity is just above background."

Nevertheless, one expects some kind of media blitz to fall out of the
ICCF-5 cf conference in Monaco, which takes place next week.  I hope that
Douglas will be there to report on reality vs. hype.

--Steven Jones
cudkeys:
cuddy7 cudenjonesse cudmo4 cudqt2 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
processed by cud.pl ver. 0.5 Sun Apr  9 04:37:06 EDT 1995
------------------------------
